WSP06609 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~r~ . ~~VJ months of replacement water would be required for the Dow Pumping Plant and Pipeline in the average year in comparison to the 1.3 months in the Wright Water Engineers' analysis. This comparison is considered to be a reasonable check of the Fleming work, and it further demonstrates the additional conservatism used in the CORSIM II studies over and above the assumption used in the 1965 Wright Water Engineers' work. RESERVOIR RELEASES It was assumed that Ruedi Reservoir would be operated for the secondary purpose of flood control until: (1) demand develops for Ruedi Reservoir stored water due to completion of Fryingpan-Arkansas diversion facilities and (2) increased water demand results from western slope development. Under these assumptions operational releases in excess of those required for fish and minimum flow would be made to provide space for flood control storage. Table 1 presents actual operation of Ruedi Reservoir in water years 1976 to 1978 and details these operational releases. It was then assumed that: (1) full diversions would be made to the Arkansas River, (2) there would be full demand for Ruedi Reservoir stored water, (3) there would be no excess water in the reservoir, and (4) releases would be limited to those required for minimum flow requirements and downstream sales. These assumptions would result in the elimination of operational releases in the future as illustrated in Table 5. The flows in Table 5 represent a worst case theoretical situation because future releases would almost always be made for sales and replacement purposes during low flow periods. This worst case theoretical situation is developed for analysis of the effects of the proposed sale on future flow downstream of Ruedi Reservoir. (11)