1 / 63

Firming For Indian Settlements

Firming For Indian Settlements. OVERVIEW OF WATER SETTLEMENT ELEMENTS. Firming For Indian Settlements What Is “Firming?”. Background Section 105 of Arizona Water Settlements Act (S.437)

alaqua
Download Presentation

Firming For Indian Settlements

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Firming For Indian Settlements OVERVIEW OF WATER SETTLEMENT ELEMENTS

  2. Firming For Indian Settlements What Is “Firming?” • Background • Section 105 of Arizona Water Settlements Act (S.437) • Un-contracted 65,647 of M&I priority water was relinquished for use in settlements in early versions of settlement • State parties proposed compromise using firming of NIA concept • Agreement reached on split responsibility between Fed and State.

  3. Firming For Indian Settlements“In the same manner” • State perspective – firm only if NIA supply falls below target level • Federal perspective – firm based on assumption that target amount should have been M&I priority.

  4. Firming For Indian Settlements Examples • #1 – Full supply – no difference • #2 – 33% shortfall • State – no obligation • Fed – 4,600 af obligation • #3 – 50% shortfall • State – no obligation • Fed – 7,500 af obligation

  5. Firming For Indian Settlements Examples • #4 – 90% shortfall • State – 3,000 af obligation • Fed – 13.600 af obligation • #5 – 100% shortfall • Both State and Fed – 15,000af obligation • #6 – 20% M&I shortfall • Both Fed and State – 11,250 af obligation

  6. SOUTHSIDE REPLENISHMENT PROGRAM

  7. Southside Replenishment Program STATE LEGISLATION REQUIRED • Southside Protection Program must be enacted by Arizona Legislature in order for GRIC Settlement to take effect--minimum requirements: • Establish the Protection Zones • Establish Southside Replenishment Bank • Provide export prohibitions • Provide replenishment obligations of State • Provide for enforcement of Program by ADWR

  8. Southside Replenishment Program PROTECTION ZONES • Western Protection Zones • M&I Zone • Industrial Zone • Eastern Protection Zones • North • South • Central Protection Zone

  9. Southside Replenishment Program PROHIBITION ON UNDERGROUND WATER EXPORTATIONS • No Exportation From A Protection Zone For A New Use • No Exportation From A Protection Zone For Use In Excess Of The Highest Historic Non-irrigation Use In 1999, 2000 Or 2001

  10. Southside Replenishment Program SOUTHSIDE REPLENISHMENT BANK • State To Deliver 1,000 af each year to Reservation for 15 Years create a 15,000 af Bank • When Balance In Bank Falls Below 5,000 af, State Obligated To Replace The Balance To 5,000 af

  11. Southside Replenishment Program STATE REPLENISHMENT OBLIGATION WESTERN ZONE • The amount by which non-irrigation pumping in M&I Zone exceeds 2.0 af per acre • The amount by which pumping for municipal purposes in Municipal Zone exceeds 2.0 af per acre

  12. Southside Replenishment Program STATE REPLENISHMENT OBLIGATION EASTERN ZONE • The amount by which non-irrigation pumping in the Eastern Zone North Zone exceeds 2.33 af per acre • The amount by which non-irrigation pumping in the Eastern Zone South exceeds 2.33 af per acre

  13. Southside Replenishment Program STATE REPLENISHMENT OBLIGATION ARIZONA WATER COMPANY • In years before 2024, pumping in excess of 1,275 af/yr from Eastern Zone South transported to outside Eastern Zones • After 2023, AWC shall replenish any such excess pumping • AWC to assign to State unused CAP for AWC Coolidge system

  14. Southside Replenishment Program STATE REPLENISHMENT OBLIGATION IRRIGATION PUMPING • Pumping in excess of cumulative IGFR allotments under TMP Base Ag Conservation Program • Western zones treated as a single zone • Eastern zones treated as a single zone • Imported water used for irrigation excluded

  15. Southside Replenishment Program OPTIONS FOR REPLENISHMENT • Debiting the Southside Replenishment Bank • Direct Delivery • Extinguishment of Long Term Credits • In Western Zones, must be earned under state law within 5 years prior to extinguishment • In Eastern Zones, must be earned under state law within 7 years prior to extinguishment

  16. Firming For Indian Settlements SHORTAGE SHARING AGREEMENT

  17. Firming For Indian Settlements Shortage Sharing Agreement • Background • Shortage potential recognized • Differences in methodology emerged as contracts were written • New agreement in paragraph 8.16 of GRIC Settlement • Non-Indian Ag priority • Change from % basis to fixed volume • Shortages shared on pro-rata basis

  18. Firming For Indian Settlements Shortage Sharing Agreement • M&I/Indian Priorities • Fixed maximum pools • Change in M&I pool after2044 to reflect Cliff Dam replacement contract • New agreement • Neither side must reduce first – steps eliminated • Formula will establish split for any value of CAP available supply • Separate formulas to split shortage among like pool contractors

  19. Firming For Indian Settlements WATER AVAILABILITY

  20. Firming For Indian SettlementsWATER AVAILABILITY • Colorado River Operations • Water Operation Model & Model Assumptions • Calculation of Firming Requirements • Estimated Firming Obligation • Current Commitments

  21. Firming For Indian SettlementsColorado River Operations “Law of the River” • 1922 Colorado River Compact • 1929 Boulder Canyon Project Act • 1944 Treaty with Mexico • 1964 AZ v. CA Supreme Court Decree • 1968 Colorado River Basin Project Act • 1974 Minute 242 & Salinity Control Act • 2000 Interim Surplus Guidelines

  22. 1922 Colorado River Compact Allocations Upper Basin – 7.5 MAF Lower Basin - 7.5 MAF CA – 4.4 MAF AZ – 2.8 MAF NV – 0.3 MAF Lee Ferry AZ 50 KAF Upper Basin MX – 1.5 MAF

  23. Hoover Dam Parker Dam Imperial Dam

  24. Firming For Indian SettlementsColorado River Operations 1964 AZ v. CA Supreme Court Decree • Charged the Secretary with determining “surplus”, “shortage”, “normal” flows • Secretary enjoined from delivering more than 7.5MAF to Lower Basin during “normal water supply conditions” • Provided for use of unused apportionment between Lower Basin states

  25. Firming For Indian SettlementsColorado River Operations 1968 Colorado River Basin Project Act • Requires the Secretary to develop coordinated long-range operating criteria for the operation of storage reservoirs in the Upper Basin and the Lower Basin. • Requires the Secretary to develop criteria for determining normal, surplus and shortage conditions. • Annual Operating Plan – annual declaration of supply conditions.

  26. Firming For Indian SettlementsWater Operation Model • Computer Model developed by US Bureau of Reclamation • ADWR uses model output to identify the potential future water supply conditions and availability. • ADWR quantifies the potential shortages - - representing the amount of water that will need to “firmed”

  27. PROJECTING WATER SUPPIES UPPER BASIN USES EVAPORATION INFLOW LOWER BASIN STATES 7.5MAF MEXICO 1.5MAF NORMAL SUPPLY

  28. PROJECTING WATER SUPPIES UPPER BASIN USES EVAPORATION INFLOW LOWER BASIN STATES 8+ MAF MEXICO 1.7MAF SURPLUS SUPPLY

  29. Firming For Indian SettlementsModel Assumptions • Upper Basin Water Demand Build-Up • Lake Mead Protect Levels (Shortage Strategy) • Surplus Strategy (Interim Surplus Guidelines) • AZ Water Demand – Shortage Strategy • Operation of the Yuma Desalter • Other (Hydrology, LB Water Demand, Mexican Surplus)

  30. Firming For Indian SettlementsModel Assumptions Upper Basin Water Demand Build-Up • AWBA Study Commission Projections • USBR Projections

  31. Firming For Indian SettlementsLake Mead Protect Levels Surplus or Flood Control Releases Normal (2.8 MAF) 1000’ Begin Shortages (2.3 MAF) Shortage (2.3 MAF or less) 895’ Minimum Pool

  32. Firming For Indian SettlementsInterim Surplus Guidelines Surplus or Flood Control Releases 1145’ (62% full) / Full Domestic Surplus (2.8+ maf) 1125’ (54% full) / Partial Domestic Surplus (2.8+ maf) Normal (2.8 maf) 1000’ (17%) Begin Shortages MWD of CA takes first 1 MAF of shortages to AZ 895’ Minimum Pool

  33. Firming For Indian SettlementsArizona Water Rights • When the Sec. of DOI determines that insufficient water is available to deliver 7.5 MAF, then water will be delivered to: • First priority – pre-1929 rights in order of priority (Pre-Hoover Dam/Boulder Canyon Project Act) • Then, delivery to other pre-1968 contractors in CA up to 4.4 MAF, and similar contracts in other states. In Arizona, most of the contracts on the river are either pre-1929 or pre-1968. • Then, post 1968 contracts, or the CAP and 165,000 acre-feet of use on the mainstream

  34. Firming For Indian SettlementsModel Assumptions Water Demand – Priority 4 Users Shortage Strategy • Mainstream & CAP • CAP M&I Subcontractors & CAP Indian Contractors

  35. Firming For Indian SettlementsModel Assumptions Operation of the Yuma Desalter • Early Start Date (2004) • Delayed Start (2030)

  36. Firming For Indian SettlementsModel Assumptions Projections of CAP and Mainstream Water Use GRD AWBA SHORT AG M&I & Indian Tribes Increasing LOW Mainstream Losses

  37. Firming For Indian SettlementsCalculation of Firming Requirement

  38. Firming For Indian SettlementsEstimated Firming Requirement

  39. Firming For Indian Settlements CURRENT COMMITMENTS FOR CAP WATER

  40. Firming For Indian SettlementsCurrent Commitments for CAP • M&I Subcontractors • Indian Contractors • Agricultural • Incentive Recharge • CAGRD Obligation • Others • CAGRD Reserve • AWBA Intrastate • AWBA Interstate

  41. Firming For Indian SettlementsCurrent Commitments for CAP

  42. Firming For Indian SettlementsCurrent Commitments for CAP

  43. Firming For Indian Settlements POTENTIAL OPTIONS

  44. Firming For Indian SettlementsOPTIONS FOR NON- AWBA PARTICIPATION • Payment In-Lieu of Damages • Demand Reduction • - Water conservation • - Minimizing waste of all water supplies • - Maximizing efficiency in indoor and outdoor watering • - Encouraging reuse of water supplies • - Forbearance/Land Fallowing

  45. Firming For Indian SettlementsOPTIONS FOR AWBA PARTICIPATION • On-Reservation Recharge & Recovery • Off-Reservation Recharge/On- Reservation Recovery • Off Reservation Recharge/Off- Reservation Recovery • Lease/Exchange • Recovery of Existing Credits • Groundwater Transfers • Various Combinations

  46. Firming For Indian Settlements FUNDING AVAILABILITY

  47. Firming For Indian SettlementsFUNDING AVAILABILITY • Estimated Cost • Funding Sources • Current Statutory Restrictions • Historic Use

  48. Firming For Indian SettlementsFUNDING AVAILABILITY • Cost to Meet Obligation • Firming • In-Lieu • USF • Southside Replenishment Bank • Direct Delivery of Water

  49. Firming For Indian SettlementsEstimated Costs

More Related