WSP05088 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. :.-" C') Co GOVERNOR'S CENTRAL ARIZONA PROJECT ADVISORY COMMITTEE C'') ': -.:.. their input on the issues and proposed solutions as the studies progressed. This effort was also folded into the Working Group effort after those groups were organized. . INVESTIGATION PROCESS . The CAP issues investigation process involved a series of steps which built upward from baseline conditions analysis through the recommendation of a series of preferred actions. Figure 2 is a diagram depicting the sequence of steps. Step 1 - Describe the CAP as of 1993. . This step involved the collection and organization of relevant information which defines the Central Arizona Project. The baseline conditions evaluation describes CAP features and capacities, projected water supplies, demand patterns, current subcontractors and allocations, project operational constraints, power sources and supplies, costs of facilities, costs of operation and maintenance, current sources of revenue, and legal and institutional constraints. . . Most of this information was available but had not been assembled into a single document. The report issued during this step provided a valuable information base for the remainder of the study. . Step 2 -Describe the likely future conditions without alternative action. . This step is often called the no-action alternative and was used for comparison with any action alternatives. Investigations projected the likely chain of events if the current contract and subcontracts were to remain in place and the projected underutilization of CAP would continue. . Determining the most likely future requires subjective judgement since most experts involved in the CAP are very uncertain about what could happen, especially if bankruptcy were to be declared by some of the subcontractors. Also of major concern to the State FINAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDA TIONS . 8