Assign Annual Demand for a Purpose

1
Single Purpose AnalysisIterative Process for
Single Purposes WQ and RF
Decrease Annual Demand
Decreased
Assign Annual Demand for a Purpose
CALSIM Simulation
Compare the Long-termAverage Annual Friant
Unit Delivery to Benchmark Study
CALSIM Simulation Completed
Same
Increased
IncreaseAnnual Demand
2
Single Purpose Analysis Millerton Lake Water
Budget Components
NOT TO SCALE
Forecasted Inflow
Rain Flood Release
Dynamic allocated based on hydrologic conditions
and reservoir storage
Available Waterfor Canal Delivery Allocation
RF Demand
Prescribed based on constant or year-type varying
demand patterns
WQ Demand
Available Storage
D/S Water Rights
Evaporation
Canal Loss
River Loss
Available Water
Annual Reservoir
3
Multi-Purpose Analysis Millerton Lake Water
Budget Components
NOT TO SCALE
Forecasted Inflow
Rain Flood Release
Rain Flood Release
Available Waterfor Canal Delivery Allocation
Available Waterfor Canal Delivery Allocation
Dynamic allocated based on hydrologic conditions
and reservoir storage
Carryover Requirement
RF Demand
RF Demand
WQ Demand
Available Storage
WQ Demand
D/S Water Rights
D/S Water Rights
Evaporation
Evaporation
Canal Loss
Canal Loss
River Loss
River Loss
Annual Reservoir
Available Water
Reservoir with Carryover Storage
4
Initial Evaluation Approach for USJRBSI, Phase 1

• Friant Enlargement Concept
• Evaluation scenario only not an alternative
• Increase Millerton Lake by 700 TAF
• Simulate operations with additional storage
• Identify how problems and opportunities could be
  addressed.
• Use results to guide definition of Functional
  Equivalence
• Initial Modeling Assumptions
• Based on existing conditions and honoring current
  laws, rules, and regulations.

5
Initial Evaluation Approach for USJRBSI, Phase 1
Single Purpose Analysis Approach

• Initial analysis
• Identify the potential water that could be
  available from a Friant enlargement to address a
  single problem area
• Water quality, supply reliability, or restoration
• Identify how other problems and opportunities
  could be affected
• Water quality
• River restoration
• Water supply reliability
• Flood control
• Hydropower
• Delta inflow

6
Initial Evaluation ApproachSingle Purpose
Analysis

• Single Purpose Analysis Operate to address one
  goal only
• Single Purpose - Water Supply (WS)
• Single Purpose - Water Quality (WQ)
• Single Purpose - Restoration Flow (RF)
• Same water supply allocation logic
• Maximize the annual water supply to each purpose
  while maintaining long-term annual total
  delivery.

7
Single Purpose Analysis (Preliminary Assumptions)
Scenarios
Scenario Friant Unit Delivery Water Quality Demand Restoration Flow Demand
Benchmark Allocations based on a 520 TAF storage No No
Single Purpose WS Allocations based on a 1,220 TAF storage No No
Single Purpose WQ Constrained by Average annual total delivery from Benchmark Study Maximized Annual Demand by an Iterative Process No
Single Purpose RF Constrained by Average annual total delivery from Benchmark Study No Maximized Annual Demand by an Iterative Process
8
Single Purpose Analysis (Preliminary
Assumptions)Demand Development
Demand Development for Single Purposes WQ and RF

CALSIM Impact Evaluation
Initial (preliminary) Yes Constant Complete Ongoing Yes
Needed for Single Purpose Analysis ?
Operating Friant as an Annual Reservoir?
Phase of Demand Pattern Development
Status
Annual Demand
Refined Yes Variable by year type Ongoing Yes
Future Undecided Dynamic Not in Phase 1 Not in Phase 1 No
9
Single Purpose Analysis (Preliminary Results)
Summary of CALSIM Results

Water Supply Water Quality Restoration Flow
Benchmark 1,242 0 0
Single Purpose WS 1,376 i.e., 134 at Friant Dam 0 0
Single Purpose WQ 1,249 102 at Mendota Pool distributed uniformly in July through September. i.e., 138 at Friant Dam 0
Single Purpose RF 1,245 0 80 at Mendota Pool distributed in unimpaired flow monthly pattern i.e., 152 at Friant Dam
Average Annual Water Allocations for Each Purpose
(TAF)
Scenario
10
Single Purpose Analysis (Preliminary Results)
Annual Average Friant Unit Delivery
Scenario
Class 1 Class 2 215 Water Total
Benchmark 745( 0 ) 352( 0 ) 145( 0 ) 1,242( 0 )
Single Purpose WS 758 ( 13 ) 570 ( 218 ) 48 ( - 97 ) 1,376 ( 134 )
Single Purpose WQ 728 ( - 17 ) 476 ( 124 ) 44 ( - 101 ) 1,249 ( 7 )
Single Purpose RF 725 ( - 20 ) 477 ( 125 ) 44 ( - 101 ) 1,245 ( 3 )
Delivery in TAF (Difference from Benchmark)
11
Single Purpose AnalysisNext Steps

• Introduce year-type dependent demands for water
  quality and restoration flow Options include
• Annual quantity based on predetermined proportion
• Benchmark Study water delivery amounts by year
  type
• Unimpaired flow amounts by year type
• Option to include reductions in a multi-year
  drought
• Refine approach to preserve long-term average
  delivery
• Annual average deliveries by year type
• Water supply reliability similar to that of the
  Benchmark Study
• Develop guidelines for evaluating impacts
• Ecosystem, water quality, water delivery,
  economics, etc.