Laserfiche WebLink
<br />22 <br /> <br />Flaming Gorge Spring Bypass Results <br /> <br />Figure 18, like Figure 13, shows the frequency of bypass releases that occurred during the <br />spring for all three model runs, Figure 18 shows this information in terms of the annual volume <br />of water that was bypassed under the control of the three rulesets, The difference between each <br />of these curves can be related to the power generation that was lost as a result of achieving the <br />objectives of the each of the proposed alternatives, <br /> <br />FIGURE 18 Exceedance Percenta e B asses durin <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Flaming Gorge Spill <br />May - July <br /> <br />800k <br /> <br />-B- No Action <br />+ All-I <br />All <br /> <br />600k <br /> <br />~ <br />i:: <br />~ <br />S 400k <br />c. <br />en <br />." <br />= <br />'C <br />C. <br />en <br /> <br />200k <br /> <br /> <br />20% <br /> <br />40% 60% <br />Percentage Exceedance <br /> <br />80% <br /> <br />!OO% <br /> <br />Reach One August through February Base Flow Release Results <br /> <br />Figure 19 shows the distributions of Reach One flows that occurred during the base flow <br />period (August though February), when Reach One flows are typically at their lowest This <br />analysis shows the frequency and magnitude of the Reach One flows that occurred during the <br />base flow period under the Action(ALL and ALL-I) and No Action model runs, The most <br />notable difference between the Action and No Action flows during the base flow period was for <br />the 0-20% exceedance flow, The No Action ruleset was more flexible during the base flow <br />period and allowed releases to increase when conditions became wetter in the Upper Green River <br />Basin, To give some perspective to the results of the three model runs, historic Reach One base <br />flows from 1971 to 1991 and historic Reach One unregulated base flows from 1971 to 1991 are <br />