Laserfiche WebLink
<br />MWSl Project <br />Interruptible Supply Framework Report - DRAFT <br /> <br />August 21, 1995 <br /> <br />3. PAST EXPERIENCES WITH INTERRUPTIBLE SUPPLY <br />CONTRACTS <br /> <br />Although there has been significant interest in interruptible supply arrangements, <br />there are only a few actual implementations, The arrangements and studies uncovered <br />in this study come from Pinnes (1994) and MacDonnell and Rice (1994) and are <br />described below. A summary of these examples can be found in Table I. <br /> <br />3.1 True Interruptible Supply Arrangements and Studies <br /> <br />MWD / Dudley Ridge: The Metropolitan Water District (MWD) in California <br />had an agreement with the Dudley Ridge Water District (District) for a portion of the <br />District's 1993 allocation of State Water Project (SWP) water. MWD agreed to buy (at <br />$125/AF) all of the District's SWP water above the amount requested by the District's <br />water users. if MWD's allocation of SWP water was 50% or less of its entitlement. <br />The agreement gave MWD a conditional obligation to buy the water, but even if the <br />trigger condition occurred, if the District fanners requested their full allocation, no <br />water would be transferred. Since only 17% of the land within the,district's service <br />area was irrigated in 1992 (recent water shortages had already caused much land to be <br />fallowed), this contract could be viewed by the irrigators as a mechanism for drought <br />survival. The trigger condition did not occur in 1993, thus no water was transferred, <br /> <br />MWD / Santa Clara: MWD entered into a contract with the Santa Clara Valley <br />Water District for a portion of its 1993 SWP entitlement, similar to the MWDlDudley <br />Ridge agreement. Again, the trigger condition did not occur and no water was <br />transferred. <br /> <br />City in Utah: Around 1960, a city in Utah paid $25,000 for the right to take a <br />fanner's entitlement of 5 cfs, whenever it wanted, During each year the option was <br />exercised, the city paid $1,000 and provided 300 tons of hay to the fanner. During the <br />first 25 years of the contract, the option was exercised 3 times, This example was <br />documented by Clyde, 1986, where the name of the city was not disclosed, The author <br />has since passed away and an investigation to uncover the parties involved in this <br />agreement has not been successful (pinnes, 1995), <br /> <br />Fort Lyon Canal Company Study: Interruptible supply arrangements were <br />considered, but not recommended, as part of a study commissioned by the Colorado <br />Water Conservation Board to transport water from the Fort Lyon Canal Company in <br />the Arkansas River basin to the Denver metro area, Issues in this situation included I) <br />fanners were unsure as to whether or not pennanent damage would result due to land <br />fallowing, 2) future uncertainties and the intent by some fanners to leave agriculture <br />without linlitations made this type of agreement unanractive. and 3) conveyance <br />facilities were not in place to transport the water to a new use, <br /> <br />Hydrosphere Resource Consultants <br /> <br />9 <br />