WSP06001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e e e 001523 Aspinall- ? Dallas Creek-17,000 AF; Dolores-either 131,000 AF or 81,000 AF; 300 cfs bypass (protected by TNC donation); 300,000 AF for development in Colorado (see Curecanti Economic Justification Report); Uncompahgre Valley Water Users Association from credits in Blue Mesa; Project 7 exchange account with Ridgway; Downstream seniors; NPS contract; Reservoir evaporation and other water right administration releases; Administration of the 60,000 AF subordination if required (Selective call issues iflimited to west slope, value of Aspinall rights if administered as most junior to avoid selective call issues); Non-storable inflows (Releases from Taylor Park directly to Gunnison Tunnel); Strictly for Power generation; A storage target and which mayor may not generate power; No specific purpose (are not or can not be directly tied to any specific purpose) (unallocated). The major question with the releases identified above is whether or not to keep tract of them separately. Ifnot, which account should they be charged against? 4. Operational Considerations and Coordination Needs How do we deal with constraints imposed by the following: potential out-of-priority storage to accommodate CDOW trout studies; potential out-of-priority storage for flood control, and other emergencies; the 1975 exchange agreement (size ofUVWUA pool in Blue Mesa, maximum rate of transfer of 1st fill water into Blue Mesa, timing of transfers); Ideal flows for rafting in the Black Canyon; Ramping rates and the potential to forgo storage or store out-of-priority; Contract releases and the potential to forgo storage or store out-of-priority; Western Area Power Administration operations; Changing inflow forecasts; CRSP requires all releases to be made through the power plants if possible. The operations matrix developed should be consulted for the specific range of values which different agencies have indicated as preferred.