Objectives

• Southside Bank total of 15,000 af at a deposit rate of 1,000 af/yr
• Find water sources for Southside replenishment in excess of initial bank (if necessary)
• Firming of NIA to M&I equivalent
• 15,000 af for GRIC
• 8,724 af for other settlements

Update

• The objectives for the study remain the same. 
• Information presented by the Pinal AMA would indicate that Southside replenishment beyond the initial Bank volumes may have a low probability of being required. 
• Firming for Indian settlement purposes remains unchanged.  It would be helpful to identify which future Indian settlements may benefit from the uses of a portion or all of the remaining 8,724 af state obligation.  GRIC has indicated informally that they would consider assisting in the firming of the water for the other settlements if it can be done at no risk or cost to them.

CAP-Excess Water

Update

• A new study regarding the availability and the likely demand for excess water has been prepared by CAP staff for use in development of the CAGRD Plan of Operation.  The results of the study are highly dependent on the assumptions on the rate of buildup in the demand for water for direct use by subcontactors and Indian contractors.
• Results of the study will be presented at the February 23rd meeting.

CAP- NIA subcontract

Update

• NIA water subcontracts will not be available for initial re-allocation until after the settlement and then may not be partially allocated until 2010.
• It is likely that there will a much greater demand for this allocation pool than there is available supply.  Use of these new subcontracts for Indian firming purposes would probably rank low on a list of beneficial uses used by ADWR in establishing eligibility for allocations.
• These subcontracts will be fairly expensive in that they will require full energy and fixed OM&R plus a capital repayment component to offset the 9(d) debt charge for NIA distribution systems.

CAP-Indian lease

Update

• AWBA staff has discussed the idea of a lease of up to 15,000 af of NIA priority water with GRIC staff.  For discussion purposes it was assumed that the leasing would be under terms as if the water were actually M&I priority.
• GRIC staff indicated that they did not know what position the Tribal Council would take on agreeing to a lease, but that if the State were interested in pursuing such a lease it should place its request in writing.
• If the lease were such that the State would partner with GRIC so that the State would only call for its share when there was a shortage, GRIC could continue to use the water for farming in any year when water was available.  This approach would not accelerate the use of the water and thus would not affect the availability of excess water.
• If the lease were such that the state would partner with another party such as CAGRD or a municipal provider, that partner would likely use the NIA water for recharge or direct use when it was available and the State would pay the lease costs related to times of shortage.  This option may have the affect of decreasing the availability of excess water, but if the partner was the CAGRD there may be no net effect since they may have been the user of the excess water anyway.

CAP – ASLD sublease

Update

• AWBA staff met with the State Land Commissioner and ASLD staff to discuss CAP sublease options.  Two approaches were discussed.
• M&I subcontract – ASLD holds an M&I subcontract that will be used to serve future developments on state lands.  Ultimately, this water will be assigned to the appropriate municipal provider.  Until then, the ASLD must pay take-or-pay capital charges.  This water could be made available for Indian firming if the AWBA would pay all costs.
• NIA subcontract retention – ASLD has decided to retain a portion of the NIA subcontract in MSIDD.  If allowed by the new subcontract, ASLD would consider allowing the State to use this water temporarily for Indian firming.  However, this may have a negative affect of resulting in increased groundwater pumping within MSIDD.

Non-CAP Colorado River Water

Update

• AWBA staff has not held any discussions directly with Colorado River contractors.  However, the Bureau of Reclamation is beginning a process of requesting proposals for forbearance options to be used to meet the national obligation to reclaim water instead of operating the Yuma Desalting Plant.  The results of their process should provide information regarding the availability of this supply source as well as the cost of obtaining the water. 

Other Surface Water – Salt/Verde floodwaters

Update

• AWBA staff discussed this concept with Dave Roberts of SRP.  It is his belief that this water supply will be used by various municipal providers since they now have or will have the ability to treat the spill water and deliver it to off-Project lands.  It is unlikely that this supply source could be reliably counted on in order to help satisfy the State’s Indian firming obligations.

Other Surface Water – Little Colorado River floodwater

Update

• Use of unappropriated Little Colorado River water has been included in discussions with the Navajo and Hopi Tribes in settlement discussions.  Capture and use of this water is difficult and potentially very expensive.   It is unlikely that this supply source could be reliably counted on in order to help satisfy the State’s Indian firming obligations.

Effluent – excess effluent not under contract or pledged for Assured Water Supply

Update

• AWBA staff has not yet obtained information regarding the availability or location of any excess effluent. 

Effluent – East Valley Cities effluent committed to GRIC exchange.

Update

• AWBA staff has discussed this concept with representatives of Mesa and GRIC.  GRIC representatives thought that the Community may choose to give the exchange partners priority to CAP water in times of shortage since the effluent exchange provides extra water due to the favorable exchange ratio. 

Groundwater –Grandfathered Rights

Update

• Use of Grandfathered Rights are being investigated primarily in association with the Southside Bank and any south side replenishment obligations.  A presentation of availability of rights in the Pinal AMA will be made on February 23.

Groundwater – Poor quality water

Update

• No progress has been made on investigating this potential water source.

Groundwater – Water logged area

Update

• This concept was discussed with GRIC staff.  It appears that GRIC will have a water demand for irrigation use in the general area where the water logging is found.  However, the water from this source is too high is salinity to be used directly and would require treatment in order for it to be acceptable as a substitute supply either for direct use in times of shortage, or for pre-delivery banking for in-lieu type credits.

Groundwater – Imported from outside the AMS

Update

• AWBA staff met with representatives of Vidler Water Company who have access to water  rights in the Harquahala Basin.  It appears that this source is actively being marketed and is available either as a recharge source or as a substitute supply that would be pumped and delivered through the CAP canal only in shortage years.
• A similar concept of using groundwater from the Butler Valley basin was briefly discussed in the meeting with ASLD staff.

Groundwater – Yuma Mesa groundwater mound

Update

• No progress has been made on investigating this potential water source.

Existing Long Term Storage Credits

Update

• The only discussions that have occurred concerning this supply source were related to the Vidler Water Company.  Vilder holds long term storage credits that have been stored in their facility in the Harquahala Basin.  These credits may be marketable in connection with other groundwater transfers.

Conserved Water

Update

• AWBA staff met with representatives of RWCD to discuss the viability of the water conservation proposal that had been made earlier during settlement negotiations.  It appears that this proposal cannot currently be considered, since there is no plan for RWCD to wheel GRIC CAP water through its system.  If this were to change, then it may be possible to reconsider having the state invest in extraordinary conservation measures which would reduce delivery losses and result in water salvage.