Firming For Indian Firming For Indian Settlements Settlements
OVERVIEW OF OVERVIEW OF
WATER SETTLEMENT WATER SETTLEMENT ELEMENTSELEMENTS
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian
Settlements 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.
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian SettlementsSettlements“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.
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian
Settlements 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
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian
Settlements 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
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
Southside Replenishment Southside Replenishment ProgramProgram
PROTECTION ZONES
Western Protection Zones M&I Zone Industrial Zone
Eastern Protection Zones North South
Central Protection Zone
Southside Replenishment Southside Replenishment ProgramProgram
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
Southside Replenishment Southside Replenishment ProgramProgram
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
Southside Replenishment Southside Replenishment ProgramProgram
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
Southside Replenishment Southside Replenishment ProgramProgram
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
Southside Replenishment Southside Replenishment ProgramProgram
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
Southside Replenishment Southside Replenishment ProgramProgram
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
Southside Replenishment Southside Replenishment ProgramProgram
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
Southside Replenishment Southside Replenishment ProgramProgram
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian Settlements Settlements
SHORTAGE SHORTAGE
SHARING SHARING
AGREEMENTAGREEMENT
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian
Settlements 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
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian
Settlements 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
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian SettlementsSettlementsWATER AVAILABILITYWATER AVAILABILITY• Colorado River Operations
• Water Operation Model & Model Assumptions
• Calculation of Firming Requirements
• Estimated Firming Obligation
• Current Commitments
“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
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian SettlementsSettlementsColorado River OperationsColorado River Operations
1922 Colorado River Compact
AllocationsUpper Basin – 7.5 MAF
Lower Basin - 7.5 MAF
CA – 4.4 MAF
AZ – 2.8 MAF
NV – 0.3 MAF
AZ 50 KAF
Upper Basin
Lee Ferry
MX – 1.5 MAF
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
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian SettlementsSettlementsColorado River OperationsColorado 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.
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian SettlementsSettlementsColorado River OperationsColorado River Operations
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian SettlementsSettlementsWater Operation ModelWater 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”
INFLOW
LOWER BASIN
STATES
UPPER BASIN USES
PROJECTING WATER SUPPIESPROJECTING WATER SUPPIES
EVAPORATION
MEXICO
7.5MAF
1.5MAF
NORMAL SUPPLY
INFLOW
LOWER BASIN
STATES
UPPER BASIN USES
PROJECTING WATER SUPPIESPROJECTING WATER SUPPIES
EVAPORATION
MEXICO
8+ MAF
1.7MAF
SURPLUS SUPPLY
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian SettlementsSettlementsModel AssumptionsModel 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)
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian SettlementsSettlementsModel AssumptionsModel Assumptions
Upper Basin Water Demand Build-Up
AWBA Study Commission Projections
USBR Projections
1000’
895’
Normal (2.8 MAF)
Begin Shortages (2.3 MAF)
Shortage (2.3 MAF or less)
Minimum Pool
Surplus or Flood Control Releases
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian SettlementsSettlementsLake Mead Protect Levels
1145’ (62% full)
1125’ (54% full)
1000’ (17%)
895’
/ Full Domestic Surplus (2.8+ maf)
/ Partial Domestic Surplus (2.8+ maf)
Normal (2.8 maf)
Begin Shortages
MWD of CA takes first 1 MAF of shortages to AZ
Minimum Pool
Surplus or Flood Control Releases
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian SettlementsSettlementsInterim Surplus Guidelines
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
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian SettlementsSettlementsArizona Water Rights
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian SettlementsSettlementsModel AssumptionsModel Assumptions
Water Demand – Priority 4 Users Water Demand – Priority 4 Users Shortage StrategyShortage Strategy
Mainstream & CAP
CAP M&I Subcontractors & CAP Indian Contractors
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian SettlementsSettlementsModel AssumptionsModel Assumptions
Operation of the Yuma Desalter
Early Start Date (2004)
Delayed Start (2030)
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian SettlementsSettlementsModel AssumptionsModel Assumptions
Projections of CAP and Mainstream Water Use
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
2001 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060
LOW
SHORT
Mainstream
AG M&I & Indian Tribes
AWBA
Losses
Increasing
GRD
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian SettlementsSettlementsCalculation of Firming RequirementCalculation of Firming Requirement
Assumption Component
Scenario A Scenario D
Hydrology Start Year 1906 1906
Starting Reservoir Levels
Jan. 1, 2003 Jan. 1, 2003
Yuma Desalinization Plant
Begin Operation 2004
Begin Operation 2030
Upper Basin Demands 4.8 MAF 5.4 MAF
Surplus Strategy 70R ISG
Shortage Strategy 80P1000 80P1083
Hydrology 100 Year Analysis(1906 – 2002)
using 96 traces
100 Year Analysis(1906 – 2002) using 96 traces
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian SettlementsSettlementsEstimatedEstimated Firming Requirement Firming Requirement
Firming Component Scenario A Scenario D
GRIC (15,000AF)
NIA 6,000 67,000
M&I 272,000 533,000
TOTAL 278,000 600,000
GRIC (15,000AF) + Unallocated (8,724AF) = 23,734 AF
NIA 9,000 120,000
M&I 430,000 843,000
TOTAL 439,000 963,000
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian SettlementsSettlements
CURRENT CURRENT COMMITMENTS COMMITMENTS
FOR FOR CAP WATERCAP WATER
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian SettlementsSettlementsCurrent Commitments for CAPCurrent Commitments for CAP M&I Subcontractors
Indian Contractors
Agricultural
Incentive Recharge
CAGRD Obligation
Others CAGRD Reserve AWBA Intrastate AWBA Interstate
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian SettlementsSettlementsCurrent Commitments for CAPCurrent Commitments for CAP
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
Contracts/ SubContracts Indian Incentive Recharge CAGRD Obligation Other
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian SettlementsSettlementsCurrent Commitments for CAPCurrent Commitments for CAP
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
KAF
Contracts/SubContracts Indian Incentive Recharge CAGRD Obligation
CAGRD Reserve AWBA Intrastate AWBA Interstate Remaining Supply
• 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
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian SettlementsSettlementsOPTIONS FOR OPTIONS FOR NON- AWBA PARTICIPATIONNON- 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
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian SettlementsSettlementsOPTIONS FOR AWBA OPTIONS FOR AWBA PARTICIPATIONPARTICIPATION
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian SettlementsSettlements
FUNDING AVAILABILITYFUNDING AVAILABILITY
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian SettlementsSettlementsFUNDING AVAILABILITYFUNDING AVAILABILITY
• Estimated Cost
• Funding Sources
• Current Statutory Restrictions
• Historic Use
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian SettlementsSettlementsFUNDING AVAILABILITYFUNDING AVAILABILITY
Cost to Meet Obligation
• Firming• In-Lieu• USF
• Southside Replenishment Bank• Direct Delivery of Water
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian SettlementsSettlementsEstimatedEstimated Costs CostsComponent Scenario A Scenario D
GRIC (15,000AF) 278,000AF 600,000AF
In-Lieu $9,452,000 $20,400,000
USF $18,626,000 $40,200,000
GRIC (15,000AF) + Unallocated (8,724AF) = 23,734 AF
439,000AF 963,000AF
In-Lieu $14,926,000 $32,742,000
USF $29,413,000 $64,521,0000
Southside Replenishment Bank 15,000 AF
Delivery $900,000
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian SettlementsSettlementsFUNDING AVAILABILITYFUNDING AVAILABILITY
General Fund Appropriation
• Source
• Limitations on Use
• Historic Income/Use
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian SettlementsSettlementsFUNDING AVAILABILITYFUNDING AVAILABILITY
Ad-Valorem Tax
• Source
• Limitations on Use
• Historic Income/Use
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian SettlementsSettlementsFUNDING AVAILABILITYFUNDING AVAILABILITY
Groundwater Withdrawal Fees
• Source
• Limitations on Use
• Historic Income/Use
What Do We KnowWhat Do We Know• Why and What the Firming Obligation means;
• What the Southside Replenishment Program requires;
• The range of modeling assumptions that can be used to project the volume of water needed to meet the firming obligation;
• Approximate range of firming obligation volume;
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian SettlementsSettlementsSUMMARYSUMMARY
What Do We KnowWhat Do We Know• The variety of methods that can be used to meet the firming obligation;
• Current cost of excess CAP water supplies and cost to recharge;
• Current funding sources available; and
• Current statutory authorities.
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian SettlementsSettlementsSUMMARYSUMMARY
Why AWBA??Why AWBA??
• AWBA has existing authority and has performed a similar role
for M&I
• Existing Funding Authority- General Fund- Withdrawal Fees
• Can Integrate Needs Into AWBA Plan
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian SettlementsSettlementsSUMMARYSUMMARY
Form an AWBA Technical Form an AWBA Technical Advisory Committee to Develop Advisory Committee to Develop
Alternatives Alternatives that Benefit the State and the that Benefit the State and the
Tribes.Tribes.
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian SettlementsSettlementsRECOMMENDATIONRECOMMENDATION
Technical Advisory Committee ObjectivesTechnical Advisory Committee Objectives• Determine the modeling assumptions that are most appropriate to estimate the volume of water needed to meet the firming obligation;
• Determine the projections necessary to maintain or replenish the Southside Replenishment Bank;
• Develop options for meeting the firming obligations;
• Develop options to build the Southside Replenishment Bank;
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian SettlementsSettlementsRECOMMENDATIONRECOMMENDATION
Technical Advisory Committee ObjectivesTechnical Advisory Committee Objectives• Determine cost components for each of the firming options;
• Determine cost components to develop the Southside Replenishment Bank;
• Develop criteria for ranking the options;
• Determine the funding sources appropriate to finance the options;
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian SettlementsSettlementsRECOMMENDATIONRECOMMENDATION
Technical Advisory Committee ObjectivesTechnical Advisory Committee Objectives
• Determine the necessary changes to statute to meet the obligations; and
• Determine the impacts to other AWBA functions.
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian SettlementsSettlementsRECOMMENDATIONRECOMMENDATION
Technical Advisory Committee ObjectivesTechnical Advisory Committee Objectives
Firming For Indian Firming For Indian SettlementsSettlementsRECOMMENDATIONRECOMMENDATION
Develop alternative approaches for the Authority to review in order to make a recommendation to the Director of the
Department of Water Resources including the ranked options, the
estimated costs, and an identification of changes to statute.