ADD Water Stakeholder Participation Program

1. ADD WaterStakeholder Participation Program May 9, 2008

2. Focus Question Assuming CAP is to be the primary entity that acquires, develops and delivers new water supplies for its three county service area, how should the water be shared and paid for?

3. Origins Potential use of CAP to transport non-Project water • CAP position statement (1983) • CAP discussion document (1988) • Project Wheel (2002) • Informal discussions (2005) • CAP Strategic Plan (2006)

4. Project Wheel Continuum: CAP as “delivery agent” vs. “water provider” Adoption of hybrid approach and “interim set asides” Explore concept of developing new water supply for CAP service area, with public process addressing how to allocate new supply

5. Informal Discussions Water providers have historically worked independently to acquire their own water supplies AMWUA cities, Tucson and others met with CAP Board members to discuss a broad framework and public process for developing a wholesale water supply program

6. CAP Strategic Plan • Developed by CAP Board in 2006 • Input and support from a broad spectrum of stakeholders • Elements of Plan: • Strategic Issue • Strategic Objective • Action Plan • Desired State

7. Strategic Issue “Developing New Water Supplies for the CAP Three County Area” [CAP Strategic Plan, 2006]

8. Strategic Objective “Establish a collaborative process to determine when new supplies need to be acquired and what entities get those supplies. Encourage fair competition and eliminate perceptions of unfair advantage.” [CAP Strategic Plan, 2006]

9. Action Plan “CAP takes the lead role developing a process that includes water user entities, CAGRD and ADWR to decide the who, when, what, and how much questions. CAP, as owner/operator of the CAP system, is lead agency.” [CAP Strategic Plan, 2006]

10. Desired State “CAP is the lead agency in a collaborative process to determine when to acquire [new water supplies], who gets it, how much, and the cost of new supplies. … As CAP is the single point of acquisition, CAP can shop for the most cost effective new supply without competition from other three-county entities. One buyer considering a variety of sources that results in lowest reasonable cost. Established rules exist that are acknowledged as fair. ” [CAP Strategic Plan, 2006]

11. Project Team • CAP staff and Board • Representatives from: • Pinal County • Tucson • Phoenix • SAWUA • AMWUA • Landowners/developers • Non-AMWUA west-side cities • Private utilities • ADWR

12. Problem Statement Long term water demands in CAP’s three-county service area are projected to exceed currently available supplies. A comprehensive strategy may be desirable for the acquisition and delivery of water to meet these future demands.

13. Water Demands • Cities, private utilities and other water providers/users need water to: • Replace existing non-renewable supplies • Meet future demands • Provide back-up supplies • Meet Assured Water Supply requirements • Uses include direct delivery, recharge and replenishment

14. Water Availability • CAGRD plan of operation identified more than 900,000 acre-feet of potentially available supplies • Other sources could also be developed • Ocean water desalination • Brackish groundwater desalination

15. CAP System Capacity • Long-term contract entitlements total 1.415 million acre-feet (MAF) • CAP system, as it exists today, can deliver 1.8 MAF annually • With reasonable improvements, CAP could deliver 2.2 MAF

16. Focus Question Assuming CAP is to be the primary entity that acquires, develops and delivers new water supplies for its three county service area, how should the water be shared and paid for?

17. 5-Step Process • Identify information needs • Define and prioritize criteria • Develop alternatives • Evaluate alternatives against criteria • Develop recommendations