joint recovery plan update adwr, awba & cap awba quarterly meeting september 4 th, 2013
Post on 24-Dec-2015
219 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Joint Recovery Plan UpdateADWR, AWBA & CAP
AWBA Quarterly MeetingSeptember 4th, 2013
2
“Effective planning and coordination among AWBA, ADWR, CAP, CAP customers, recovery partners and others is essential to successful recovery…”
--Recovery of Water Stored by the Arizona Water Banking Authority: A Joint Plan by AWBA, ADWR and CAP. August 2013 Draft, page 3.
3
Progress to Date Drafted Sections 1-4 Shared with the Ad Hoc group Received initial feedback Waiting for written edits/comments Developing Sections 5-7 Broader distribution will occur when the
remaining sections of the draft document are complete
4
Today’s Focus Review first 4 Sections of Plan - set the
stage for the who, what, where, when and why
Emphasis on Section 4 “Likelihood, Timing & Magnitude”
Before the end of the year, we will present the remaining Sections that address how recovery will occur (implementation)
5
Section 1: Background, Scope and Purpose
Section provides broad context Scope includes recovery of the AWBA’s credits
in support of its goals and obligations: To firm CAP M&I priority subcontractors and P-4
on-River M&I users during shortage To meet the State’s obligations to firm up to
23,724 AF of NIA priority CAP pursuant to Indian water rights settlements
To meet interstate water banking obligations with Nevada
6
Section 1: Background, Scope and Purpose (continued)
Clarify roles of the primary institutions Establish planning-level certainty Analyze and project the timing &
magnitude of potential recovery (through 2045)
Identify potential recovery partnerships and opportunities
Identify key recovery decision points and actions within the planning horizon
7
Section 2: Roles and Responsibilities
AWBA CAP ADWR Reclamation CAP’s Recovery Partners Beneficiaries Other Interested Parties
8
Section 3: Funding, Purpose, and Location of Credits
AWBA has accrued 3.8 million AF of credits through 2012 (3.2 MAF for intrastate and 600,000 MAF interstate needs)
Several factors determine where recovery of these credits will occur Funding Sources Statutory Purposes Location of Storage
9
Credits By AMA & Funding Source
Funding Source Phoenix AMA
Pinal AMA
Tucson AMA
4-Cent Tax1 1,329,925 187,465 390,334
Withdrawal Fees 293,632 394,896 98,788
General Fund 42,316 306,968 54,546
Other Intrastate:
Indian Firming Appropriation - - 28,481
Shortage Reparation 20,642 60,507 1,227
GSF Operator Full Cost Share2 - 14,125 -
Intrastate TOTAL 1,686,514 963,961 573,376
Interstate - Nevada 51,009 439,851 109,791
TOTAL 1,737,523 1,403,812 683,167
10
Location of Credits
11
Section 4: Likelihood, Timing & Magnitude of Recovery
Factors Affecting Recovery Modeling Approach Synthesizing Results
12
Section 4: Likelihood, Timing & Magnitude of Recovery
Factors affecting Recovery Shortage Non-shortage
13
Shortage Factors Recovery of AWBA credits will be
required when the reduction in Arizona’s supply intersects demand of users (pools) for which the AWBA has firming goals or obligations
14
Shortage: Supply Factors To Arizona
Basin Hydrology Upper Basin Demands Initial Reservoir Condition Reservoir Operations
Within Arizona Colorado River Uses and Priorities CAP Uses and Priorities
15
Shortage: Demand Factors On-River
Agricultural Use Rate of municipal growth
CAP Use of long-term entitlements
Rate of municipal growth Use of Indian contracts
16
Non-Shortage Factors Outage on the CAP system (outside
scope of this Plan)
Interstate ICUA Requests Rate of Nevada’s municipal growth
17
Modeling Analysis of recovery factors requires use
of models The Joint Plan relies on two models
Reclamation’s Colorado River Simulation System (CRSS)
Custom recovery model that calculates the probability of specific recovery volumes through time based on range of supply and demand conditions
18
CRSS Modeling Assumptions
“Arizona Baseline”Modeling Parameters Modeling Assumptions
Basin Hydrology Observed Record (1906-2010)
Upper Basin Demands ADWR Upper Basin Demand Assumption - 4.8 MAF by 2031, then flat
Operation of Yuma Desalting Plant No
Mexico Shortage Sharing Yes, Minute 319, extended
Reservoir Operations 2007 Interim Guidelines, extended
Initial Reservoir Condition 2014 Lake Mead elevation
19
Basin Hydrology
-
5,000,000
10,000,000
15,000,000
20,000,000
25,000,000
30,000,000
1906 to 2010
20
Upper Basin DemandsArizona Baseline
Historical Use
Trendline
21
Reservoir Operations
Interim Guidelines (2007) and Minute 319
22
Shortages to Arizona
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Probability of Shortages to Arizona
“Arizona Baseline”
23
Recovery Model The recovery model incorporates the
105 different water supply traces from the CRSS model and matches those against a range of projected on-River and CAP demands.
24
On-River Demand
25
On-River P-4 Demand
-
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
90,000
100,00020
1220
1420
1620
1820
2020
2220
2420
2620
2820
3020
3220
3420
3620
3820
4020
4220
44
P-4 On River Scenario B
Muni
Ag
-
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
90,000
100,000
2012
2014
2016
2018
2020
2022
2024
2026
2028
2030
2032
2034
2036
2038
2040
2042
2044
P-4 On River Scenario A
Muni
Ag
Muni
Ag
Ag
Muni
26
-
200,000
400,000
600,000
800,000
1,000,000
1,200,000
1,400,000
1,600,000
1,800,000
Full Long-Term Contract Use by 2045
P3 M&I & Indian NIA Ag Pool Other Excess
CAP Demand
Long-Term Contracts
Excess
Historic Projected
1.415 MAF
Full Use
27
-
200,000
400,000
600,000
800,000
1,000,000
1,200,000
1,400,000
1,600,000
1,800,000
Full Long-Term Contract Use by 2035
P3 M&I & Indian NIA Ag Pool Other Excess
CAP Demand
Long-Term Contracts
Excess
1.415 MAF
Full Use
Historic Projected
28
Nevada Demand
-
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000Nevada Consumptive Use (1970-Present)
Entitlement
29
Scenarios
Scenarios On-River Demand
CAP Demand
Nevada Request
Scenario A Increase to 1.22 MAF by 2045; Ag steady, Muni growth per 2006 Census, no conversion of P-4 agricultural use
(ADWR's Scenario A for NIA reallocation)
Full long-term contract use by 2045
A1: Start in 2025; steady to 2063 (~15 kAF/yr); no shortage requestA2: Start in 2035; steady to 2063 (~21 kAF/yr); no shortage request
Scenario B Increase to 1.22 MAF by 2045; Ag steady, Muni growth per 2006 Census, full conversion of P-4 agricultural use to M&I by 2035
Full long-term contract use by 2035
B1: Start in 2025; max request; additional shortage requestB2: Start in 2035; max request; additional shortage request
30
5%
25%
50%
75%
100%
13%
13%
14% 13%
14% 13%
14% 13%
14% 13%
14% 13%
14% 13%
14% 13%
14% 13%
14% 13%
14% 13%
12% 11% 11% 14% 28%
15% 15% 12% 12% 11% 11% 30% 28%
16% 16% 14% 14% 15% 15% 12% 32% 30% 29% 30% 45%
17% 15% 17% 17% 18% 16% 16% 14% 14% 30% 29% 31% 32% 30% 29% 46% 45%
16% 15% 16% 15% 17% 15% 17% 17% 38% 35% 30% 33% 33% 30% 29% 31% 45% 48% 48% 46% 45%
17% 17% 15% 16% 15% 16% 37% 40% 37% 40% 39% 38% 35% 30% 33% 47% 46% 45% 44% 45% 48% 48% 46% 45%
16% 12% 17% 17% 15% 35% 36% 36% 37% 40% 37% 40% 39% 47% 48% 47% 47% 47% 46% 45% 44% 45% 48% 48% 46% 45%
6% 13% 16% 12% 17% 35% 32% 35% 36% 36% 52% 51% 52% 52% 51% 47% 48% 47% 47% 47% 46% 45% 44% 45% 48% 48% 46% 45%
1% 6% 13% 32% 36% 36% 35% 55% 53% 51% 55% 52% 51% 52% 52% 51% 47% 48% 47% 47% 47% 46% 45% 44% 45% 48% 48% 46% 45%
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
MedianAverage
Maximum
7,000 -
14,000 -
21,000 -
28,000 -
35,000 -
42,000 -
49,000 -
56,000 -
63,000 -
70,000 -
77,000 - DRAF
T
5%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Prob
abili
ty a
t Sp
ecifi
ed V
olum
e
Model Results
Near-Term Mid-Term Long-Term
31
DRAF
T 16%
17% 15% 17% 17% 18% 16%
16% 15% 16% 15% 17% 15% 17% 17% 38% 35%
17% 17% 15% 16% 15% 16% 37% 40% 37% 40% 39% 38% 35%
16% 12% 17% 17% 15% 35% 36% 36% 37% 40% 37% 40% 39% 47% 48%
6% 13% 16% 12% 17% 35% 32% 35% 36% 36% 52% 51% 52% 52% 51% 47% 48%
1% 6% 13% 32% 36% 36% 35% 55% 53% 51% 55% 52% 51% 52% 52% 51% 47% 48%
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
Median
AverageMaximum
0 22
7,000 -
14,000 -
21,000 -
28,000 -
35,000 - In 2023, there is a 35% probability of
needing 7,000 AF of recovery, and a 17%
probability of needing 14,000 AF
Model Results
32
DRAF
T5%
25%
50%
75%
100%
13%
13%
14% 13%
14% 13%
14% 13%
14% 13%
14% 13%
14% 13%
14% 13%
14% 13%
14% 13%
14% 13%
12% 11% 11% 14% 28%
15% 15% 12% 12% 11% 11% 30% 28%
16% 16% 14% 14% 15% 15% 12% 32% 30% 29% 30% 45%
17% 15% 17% 17% 18% 16% 16% 14% 14% 30% 29% 31% 32% 30% 29% 46% 45%
16% 15% 16% 15% 17% 15% 17% 17% 38% 35% 30% 33% 33% 30% 29% 31% 45% 48% 48% 46% 45%
17% 17% 15% 16% 15% 16% 37% 40% 37% 40% 39% 38% 35% 30% 33% 47% 46% 45% 44% 45% 48% 48% 46% 45%
16% 12% 17% 17% 15% 35% 36% 36% 37% 40% 37% 40% 39% 47% 48% 47% 47% 47% 46% 45% 44% 45% 48% 48% 46% 45%
6% 13% 16% 12% 17% 35% 32% 35% 36% 36% 52% 51% 52% 52% 51% 47% 48% 47% 47% 47% 46% 45% 44% 45% 48% 48% 46% 45%
1% 6% 13% 32% 36% 36% 35% 55% 53% 51% 55% 52% 51% 52% 52% 51% 47% 48% 47% 47% 47% 46% 45% 44% 45% 48% 48% 46% 45%
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
MedianAverage
Maximum
7,000 -
14,000 -
21,000 -
28,000 -
35,000 -
42,000 -
49,000 -
56,000 -
63,000 -
70,000 -
77,000 -
>25% Probability
There is a 75% probability that
recovery needs will be less than this line.
33
5%
25%
50%
75%
100%
15% 12% 12% 11% 11% 14% 13%
15% 16% 15% 17% 15% 17% 17% 18% 16% 30% 33% 33% 30% 29% 31% 32% 30% 29% 30% 28%
16% 12% 17% 17% 15% 35% 36% 36% 37% 40% 37% 40% 39% 47% 48% 47% 47% 47% 46% 45% 44% 45% 48% 48% 46% 45%
1% 6% 13% 32% 36% 36% 35% 55% 53% 51% 55% 52% 51% 52% 52% 51% 47% 48% 47% 47% 47% 46% 45% 44% 45% 48% 48% 46% 45%
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
MedianAverage
Maximum 4,099 6,745 8,417
0 22 0327 1,941 2,638
Recovery for On-River P4CRSS: 9/13 Run, AZ Assumptions; On-River: ADWR NIA "A", No Ag Convert
65,000 -
60,000 -
55,000 -
15,000 -
10,000 -
5,000 -
25,000 -
20,000 -
Prob
abili
ty a
t Sp
ecifi
ed V
olum
e
40,000 -
35,000 -
30,000 -
50,000 -
45,000 -
DRAFT
Scenario A
34
5%
25%
50%
75%
100%
12% 11% 11% 30% 28%
15% 12% 12% 11% 11% 30% 28%
14% 14% 15% 15% 12% 32% 30% 29% 46% 45%
17% 17% 18% 16% 16% 14% 14% 30% 29% 31% 32% 30% 29% 46% 45%
15% 16% 15% 17% 15% 17% 17% 18% 16% 30% 33% 33% 30% 29% 31% 45% 48% 48% 46% 45%
17% 15% 16% 15% 16% 15% 17% 37% 40% 39% 38% 35% 30% 33% 33% 46% 45% 44% 45% 48% 48% 46% 45%
16% 12% 17% 17% 15% 16% 36% 36% 37% 40% 37% 40% 39% 38% 48% 47% 47% 47% 46% 45% 44% 45% 48% 48% 46% 45%
6% 13% 16% 12% 17% 35% 32% 35% 36% 36% 37% 51% 52% 52% 51% 47% 48% 47% 47% 47% 46% 45% 44% 45% 48% 48% 46% 45%
1% 6% 13% 32% 36% 36% 35% 32% 35% 51% 55% 52% 51% 52% 52% 51% 47% 48% 47% 47% 47% 46% 45% 44% 45% 48% 48% 46% 45%
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
MedianAverage
Maximum568 3,731 6,718
7,889 14,267 22,269
0 0 0
5,000 -
10,000 -
15,000 -
25,000 -
30,000 -
Prob
abili
ty a
t Sp
ecifi
ed V
olum
e
Recovery for Indian NIACRSS: 9/13 Run, AZ Assumptions; On-River: ADWR NIA "A"; Long-Term
Contracts: Full by 2045
20,000 -
35,000 -
40,000 -
45,000 -
50,000 -
55,000 -
60,000 -
65,000 -
DRAFT
Scenario A
35
5%
25%
50%
75%
100% 13%
13%
14% 13%
14% 13%
14% 13%
14% 13%
14% 13%
14% 13%
14% 13%
14% 13%
14% 13%
14% 13%
14% 13%
14% 13%
14% 13%
14% 13%
14% 13%
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
MedianAverage
Maximum 0 0 42,086
0 0 00 0 977
Recovery for M&ICRSS: 9/13 Run, AZ Assumptions; On-River: ADWR NIA "A"; Long-Term
Contracts: Full by 2045
65,000 -
60,000 -
55,000 -
15,000 -
10,000 -
5,000 -
25,000 -
20,000 -
Prob
abili
ty a
t Sp
ecifi
ed V
olum
e
40,000 -
35,000 -
30,000 -
50,000 -
45,000 -
DRAFT
Scenario A
36
DRAFT
Scenario A
37
DRAFT
Scenario A1
38
DRAFT
Scenario A2
39
DRAFT
Scenario B
40
DRAFT
Scenario B1
41
DRAFT
Scenario B2
42
Summary Table
Water User
Earliest Maximum Probabilit
y
Maximum Near-
Term (AF)
Maximum
Mid-Term (AF)
Maximum
Long-Term (AF)
Indian NIA
2017 55% 10,300 22,700 23,700
On-River 2017 55% 6,800 15,500 19,900M&I 2035 16% 0 0 42,000Total Intrastate
2017 55% 17,000 38,200 84,200
Interstate
2025 100% 0 60,000 60,000
Total with Interstate
17,000 98,200 144,200
DRAF
T
43
100% 34%
100% 47%
100% 59% <--AVERAGE (300,123)<--MEDIAN (239,664)
100% 71%
100% 84%
100% 90%
100% 100% <--MAX (796,906)
100% 100%
100% 100%
100% 100%
100% 100%
100% 100%
100% 100%
100% 100%
100% 100%
100% 100%
100% 100%
100% 100%
100% 100%
100% 100%
100% 100%
100% 100%
100% 100%
100% 100%
100% 100%
- 100% 100%
2,500,000 -
250,000 -
Total Intrastate Credit BalanceCRSS: 9/13 Run, AZ Assumptions; On-River: ADWR NIA "A", Full
Ag Convert by 2035; Long-Term Contracts: Full by 2035
3,250,000 -
3,000,000 -
2,750,000 -
750,000 -
500,000 -
2,250,000 -
2,000,000 -
1,750,000 -
1,500,000 -
1,250,000 -
1,000,000 -
Remaining CreditsScenario B2
3,223,851 Ending Balance
Min 3,223,851 (100%)Max 2,426,945 (75%)Average 2,923,728 (91%)Median 2,984,187 (93%)
Initial Balance =
44
Summary of Results
Earliest projected intrastate recovery is 2017 (1% probability; Indian NIA and On-River)
Less than 35% probability of needing any recovery before the Mid-Term planning period (2024-2034)
No M&I recovery projected until Long-Term planning period (2035-2045)
Bulk of intrastate credits remain past 2045 Timing and magnitude of Nevada’s request
plays significant role in Mid-Term and Long-Term planning periods
45
Next Steps Develop Sections 5-7 which deal with
how the recovery will occur Recovery Methods Opportunities by AMA General Costs Implementation Future Activities & Commitments
top related