WaterWired

CRS Report: 'Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation (WIIN) Act - Bureau of Reclamation and California Water Provisions'

An updated (9 November 2018) CRS report by Charles V. Stern, Pervaze A. Sheikh, and Nicole T. Carter: Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation (WIIN) Act: Bureau of Reclamation and California Water Provisions 

Download CRS_Water_WIIN_9Nov2018

Summary
Most of the provisions in the Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation Act (WIIN Act; P.L. 114-322), enacted on December 16, 2016, relate to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. However, the WIIN Act also includes a subtitle (Title II, Subtitle J, §§4001-4013) with the potential to affect western water infrastructure owned by the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation; part of the Department of the Interior). Three sections in Subtitle J (§4007, §4009, and §4011) made alterations that would apply throughout Reclamation’s service area, the 17 states to the west of the Mississippi River. Most of the remaining sections of this subtitle include provisions specific to the Central Valley Project (CVP), a multipurpose water-conveyance system in California operated by Reclamation. Most of Subtitle J’s provisions were derived from bills that received consideration in the 112th, 113th, and 114th Congresses. 

Although most parts of the WIIN Act had broad stakeholder support when enacted, some of Subtitle J’s provisions were (and continue to be) debated. Particularly controversial provisions include those related to implementation of the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA; 16 U.S.C. §§1531-1544) as it relates to endangered salmon and threatened Delta smelt and to California water infrastructure, as well as authorities that alter Reclamation’s approach to water resources project development. The controversy of these provisions was evidenced by President Obama’s signing statement accompanying the bill, which focused on the Obama Administration’s interpretation of Subtitle J, particularly the act’s environmental provisions. 

 The WIIN Act was debated and enacted at a time when California was enduring severe drought. However, by most metrics, the drought in California ended with the wet winter of 2016-2017, which occurred after enactment of the WIIN Act. Regardless of hydrologic status, most of the WIIN Act’s drought provisions are to remain in effect until five years after its enactment, or December 2021. 

Due to the scarcity of water in the West and the importance of federal water infrastructure to the region, western water issues are regularly of interest to lawmakers. In addition to overseeing the implementation of CVP operational provisions in the WIIN Act, Congress also may consider their amendment, extension, or repeal. According to Reclamation, the relatively wet hydrology that followed enactment of the WIIN Act has largely limited opportunities to implement some of the act’s operational authorities, and some federal operational changes pursuant to the WIIN Act reportedly were proposed but deemed incompatible with state requirements. However, some of the operational changes authorized under the act have been implemented. Congress also has appropriated funding authorized for Reclamation (both for the CVP and for other projects) under the bill. CRS estimates that from FY2017 to FY2019, Congress appropriated a total of approximately $575 million for Reclamation projects and programs authorized under the WIIN Act. Some of the bill’s authorities have met their appropriations ceilings; thus, they may be proposed for extension or amendment. 

This report discusses selected provisions enacted under Subtitle J of the WIIN Act. It provides background and context related to selected drought- and water-related provisions, summarizes the changes authorized in the WIIN Act, and discusses issues and questions that Congress may consider. For additional background on the CVP, see CRS Report R45342, Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation, by Charles V. Stern and Pervaze A. Sheikh. 

 Excellent!

Enjoy!

"There is science, logic, reason; there is thought verified by experience. And then there is California." - Edward Abbey     

The Water Report IMAR Article: 'Incentivized Managed Aquifer Recharge' - Basin Scale Implementation of MAR

This article by David R. Tuthill, Jr. and Ronald D. Carlson of the Recharge Development Corporation appeared in Issue #176 (15 October 2018) of The Water Report. Editor David Light granted me permission to post it here.

David Tuthill is a former director of the Idaho Department of Water Resources. I met him for the first time at a meeting of the Western States Water Council in Newport last August and we talked about the IMAR approach. It's intriguing although I have not yet delved into it in great detail. I need to think about its 'patentable' aspect.

Download Incentivized_MAR_TWR

Here is the introductory material.

Introduction

A process of Incentivized Managed Aquifer Recharge, utilizing ownership of marketable Aquifer Recharge Units is being implemented within Idaho’s Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer. A powerful tool in establishing balanced and sustainable aquifer management, the Incentivized Managed Aquifer Recharge program could have beneficial application in suitable water basins throughout the West.

Managed Aquifer Recharge (MAR) may be defined as processes designed to move water from land surface to aquifer storage. MAR has been conducted in various locations throughout the world since ancient times. Modern MAR efforts in the western United States have been frequently documented in The Water Report (see Recharge References below). Virtually all of these efforts, however, have been undertaken by or through a governmental entity (state or municipal), or by a private entity at a local scale involving one or just a few wells. The State of Arizona created a basin-wide opportunity for crediting recharge water but this system applies only in Arizona. While localized efforts in other basins have been implemented, to date they do not provide cost-effective incentivized solutions at a basin scale.

The Recharge Development Corporation (RDC) is an Idaho corporation created for the purpose of developing infrastructure, processes, and strategies that will facilitate water retention projects to benefit residents and water users in the State of Idaho.

RDC is helping incentivize Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer entities to be involved in MAR through the application of Incentivized Managed Aquifer Recharge (patent-pending).

Incentivized Managed Aquifer Recharge (IMAR) includes the following seven concepts:

1) Ownership of Aquifer Recharge Units (ARUs) that are fungible, have value, can be bought and sold and are directly analogous to the space acquired in a surface reservoir

2) MAR volumes are measured and the measured volumes are allocated to ARUs which each represent one acre-foot of virtual space in an aquifer, and are fully tracked

3) Real-time measurements of MAR volumes are based on surface water flow measurements. The evacuation of ARU storage generally relates to a pumped volume attributed to the ARU holder

4) Water allocated to owned ARUs becomes available to enable pumping. When the ability to pump under other established water rights would otherwise not be available, allocated ARU storage can be withdrawn and used as a supplemental water supply — in the same manner in which surface storage credited to the space of a reservoir space holder is used to supplement a surface water right (entitlement) to divert natural stream flow

5) Canal companies are commonly non-profit corporations created to distribute allocated water supplies to the stockholders of the company. Similarly, a local non-profit organization that is owned and operated by ARU owners is established under state law to accomplish long-term management of the ARUs and associated MAR within a basin

6) The ARUs are associated on a one-to-one basis with the shares of stock in the local non-profit corporation

7) Specific MAR allocation protocols that are similar to an allocation priority are applied to certain ARUs based on the date of acquisition of the shares

An eighth concept that is being investigated and discussed but has not yet been achieved is to treat a local aquifer as an additional reservoir that is fully integrated with the surface reservoirs in a basin. Implementation of this concept is a work in progress.

This article provides an overview of the unique IMAR process. From its genesis, a group of Idaho water users, lawyers, engineers and technical experts developed the operational concepts and legal approach for a defensible and robust IMAR program. The article discusses: ARUs; municipal applications; ground water district applications; tribal opportunities; and costs. The existing implementation in the Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer in Idaho is described. Criteria for other eligible basins are listed. The result is a case for application of these concepts in other basins throughout the western United States and internationally. 

Cutting to the chase.....

Conclusion

The principals of RDC have spent eight years developing the concepts and techniques described in this paper, to provide for implementation of Incentivized Managed Aquifer Recharge. The system is now operational in one basin, with movements toward starting the process in many others. These processes provide opportunities for implementation of conjunctive management and for additional beneficial use of water in the spirit of western water law. The principals look forward to assisting others with implementation of these concepts.

For additional information:

Dave tuthill, Recharge Development Corporation, 208/ 870-0345 or dave@idahowaterengineering.com

Good stuff!

Enjoy!

"When we are no longer able to change a situation, we are challenged to change ourselves." - Viktor Frankl (quoted in @Forbes via @TheWeek)

 

Bless Their Hearts! NWF's Texas Living Waters Project Produces 'Best Bets for Texas Water' - A Guidebook for Texas' Water Future

Sarah Bates of the National Wildlife Federtation - one of the  brightest lights when it comes to the Western  water-land nexus - just sent me this missive about the Texas Living Waters Project. 

Funny I would receive this today. I just finished sending Texas Water Wonk (H2OWonk) extraordinaire Todd Votteler a message. He is editing a fiuture (July 2019) issue of Water Resources IMPACT on - you guessed it - Texas Water! Stay tuned!

 Here's Sarah's email:

NWF’s Texas Living Waters Project team has released an educational guidebook that establishes our positions on and explores the pros and cons of different water supply options in Texas. You can view the interactive guidebook here: https://texaslivingwaters.org/bestbets

This project came together thanks to many contributions and rounds of revisions from the Texas Living Waters policy, science and conservation team. Please send congratulations to: Tom Spencer, Annie Schmitt, Norman Johns, Jennifer Walker, Myron Hess, Susan Kaderka, Ruthie Redmond (Sierra Club) and Paula Paciorek (Galveston Bay Foundation).

In addition to this online release, our team will be leading outreach efforts through webinars for both reporters and the general public, and will leverage our print booklet to build relationships through a state legislative briefing, the Texas Tribune’s Rural Texas Symposium, and one-on-one meetings with local representatives in key counties.

Here’s the release we sent out earlier this week:

Free educational resource helps Texans play an informed role in preparing for Texas’ water future

The Texas Living Waters Project, a coalition of National Wildlife Federation, Sierra Club Lone Star Chapter and Galveston Bay Foundation, will release Best Bets for Texas Water this Thursday, Oct. 25. This guidebook explores strategies in Texas’ water security toolbox so that communities can prepare for both flood and drought without sacrificing wildlife and the environment.

The heavy rainfall that parts of Texas have experienced in recent weeks is consistent with climate change studies that predict more intense periods of both flood and drought across the state, causing hardship as communities struggle to prepare for both water extremes. Even as flooding events become more intense, Texas’ inevitable droughts will continue to threaten the long-term viability of the state’s water supplies.

While the most recent (2017) State Water Plan predicts a steadily rising population and growing municipal needs during the next 50 years, it also predicts the state will increasingly have fewer existing water supplies and higher potential for water shortages. As Texans grapple with the challenge of providing enough water for a growing state and a changing climate, the Best Bets for Texas Water guidebook breaks down the pros and cons of different water supply strategies so that community leaders, water suppliers and residents alike can understand the potential impacts of different water supply decisions.

This resource evaluates nine different water supply and management strategies against the following criteria:

• Environment: How does this strategy impact rivers, springs, bays and wildlife?
• True costs: This criteria looks beyond dollar signs to the big picture. How does this strategy affect the Texas economy (and water customers whose wallets foot the bill for water supply projects)?
• Long-term viability: Decades from now, will this strategy have been worth the investment? Looking forward, are there any opportunities and concerns that we already know to expect?

“The good news is that many strategies exist for Texas communities to prepare for a future with more people and less water,” said Tom Spencer, director of the Texas Living Waters Project. “But when it comes to implementing these strategies, the stakes are high. If water supply projects aren’t examined closely and done carefully, water could be wasted, rivers could be depleted, and wildlife could be harmed – all while Texans foot the costly bill.”

Texans can utilize this resource to better understand some of the strategies that will likely be considered during upcoming planning and decision-making processes, such as the 2019 Texas legislative session and the utility-led development of five-year Water Conservation Plans, due May 2019. As the individuals who typically bear the cost burden of water supply strategies through the water rates they pay, residents can use the information in this guide to hold decision-makers accountable for state and local water management approaches.

In addition to the digital version of this resource, the educational tool is also available upon request as a physical booklet. Texans hoping to take a deeper dive into these materials may do so by registering for a webinar that the Texas Living Waters Project team will host on Wednesday, Nov. 7 at 11 a.m. Central Time.

Press contact:

Tom Spencer
Director, Texas Living Waters Project
spencert@nwf.org, 512-610-7763

The Texas Living Waters Project is a collaboration of conservation groups working to ensure that there will always be enough fresh water. We do this by using science-based advocacy to encourage balanced approaches to Texas water management. It’s important for our wildlife, our economy and our kids.

I would have loved to have seen 'Best Bets for Nevada' but that's just me.

Enjoy!

"If that ain’t a fact, God’s a possum." - Texas saying

CRS Report: 'Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation'

The CRS just published this on 15 October 2018: Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation by Charles V. Stern and Pervaze A. Sheikh.

One of my favorite wicked water problems!

Download CRS_CVP_Issues_and_Legislation_15Oct2018

Introduction 

The Central Valley Project (CVP), a federal water project owned and operated by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), is one of the world’s largest water supply projects. The CVP covers approximately 400 miles in California, from Redding to Bakersfield, and draws from two large river basins: the Sacramento and the San Joaquin. It is composed of 20 dams and reservoirs and numerous pieces of water storage and conveyance infrastructure. In an average year, the CVP delivers more than 7 million acre-feet of water to support irrigated agriculture, municipalities, and fish and wildlife needs, among other purposes. About 75% of CVP water is used for agricultural irrigation, including 7 of California’s top 10 agricultural counties. The CVP is operated jointly with the State Water Project (SWP), which provides much of its water to municipal users in Southern California.

 

CVP water is delivered to users that have contracts with Reclamation. These contractors receive varying levels of priority for water deliveries based on several factors, including hydrology, water rights, prior agreements with Reclamation, and regulatory requirements. The Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers’ confluence with the San Francisco Bay (Bay-Delta or Delta) is a hub for CVP water deliveries; many CVP contractors south of the Delta receive water that is “exported” from north of the Delta.

         Shasta Dam, on the Sacramento River,  is shown below.

Development of the CVP resulted in significant changes to the area’s natural hydrology. However, construction of most CVP facilities predated major federal natural resources and environmental protection laws. Much of the current debate related to the CVP revolves around how to deal with changes to the hydrologic system that were not significantly mitigated for when the project was constructed. Thus, multiple ongoing efforts to protect species and restore habitat have been authorized and are incorporated into project operations.

Congress has engaged in CVP issues through oversight and at times legislation, including provisions in the 2016 Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation (WIIN Act; P.L. 114-322) that, among other things, authorized changes to operations in an attempt to provide for delivery of more water under certain circumstances. Although some stakeholders are interested in further operational changes to enhance CVP water deliveries, others are focused on the environmental impacts of operations.

Various state and federal proposals are currently under consideration and have generated controversy for their potential to affect CVP operations and allocations. In mid-2018, the State of California proposed revisions to its Bay-Delta Water Quality Control Plan. These changes would require that more flows from the San Joaquin and Sacramento Rivers reach the Bay-Delta for water quality and fish and wildlife enhancement (and thus would further restrict water supplies for other users). At the same time, the Trump Administration is exploring options to increase CVP water supplies for users. Efforts to add or supplement CVP storage and conveyance also are being considered. The state is proposing a major new water conveyance project (known as the California WaterFix) that would bypass the Bay-Delta and, under certain conditions, increase exports from north to south for users. Additionally, Reclamation and the state are studying other new, augmented storage projects that aim to increase CVP and SWP water supplies.

In the 115th Congress, legislators are considering bills that would aim to further increase CVP water exports compared to current baselines by altering environmental requirements and repealing parts of some existing restoration programs. Congress also is considering more targeted but potentially significant changes, such as appropriations provisions that would provide federal approval and funding for certain water storage projects in California, prohibit federal funding for the Bay-Delta Water Quality Control Plan, and prohibit judicial review of WaterFix and other water supply projects, among other things. Congress also may consider legislation that would extend or amend previously enacted CVP authorities (e.g., WIIN Act authorities that are expiring or have exceeded their appropriations ceiling).

This report provides background on the CVP, the process of allocating CVP water supplies, and associated controversies. It also covers major proposals associated with the project’s current and future operation. Finally, it discusses recently enacted authorities and proposed legislation related to the CVP.

 

Enjoy!

"Tradition is tending the flame, not minding the ashes." - Gustav Mahler, quoted in @dailytelegraph via @TheWeek 

Patrick Griffiths: Good Water News for the City of Bend - OWRD Conservation Award and More!

One of the first WaterWonks I met when I arrived in Oregon in 2006 was Patrick Griffiths of the City of Bend. Patrick hosted me on a visit to the water facilities and was a veritable fountain (pardon the pun) of information not only on Bend's legendary water system but also on Oregon water issues, people and idiosyncrasies. No question was too simple or vague.

Patrick and I have not communicated for a few years so it was wonderful to hear from him. He's now Water Resources Manager for the City of Bend so he was naturally proud of a recent award Bend received from the Oregon Water Resources Department (OWRD).

Here is the email he sent: 

So wanted to share some good news – you can decide if it is noteworthy and worthy of sharing on WaterWired or other channels.

Bend has again won Gold – tying for first with City of Ashland in OWRD's recent Conservation Awards  (news release attached):

Download 18-08AnnoucementofWinners

Much of the credit goes to budget bounce back post-recession and hiring a great Conservation Program manager and staff, but for me after 18 years of chipping away on the conservation continuum as part of my water resources responsibilities and supply portfolio, we submitted our “Top Ten Integrated Conservation Strategies” to try and show the whole iceberg of work going on to support our public facing WaterWise Program.

They (OWRD) liked it and I think responded to the comprehensive nature of what we have going on.  The 2000-2017 water production graph is a compelling look at water use too!  Clearly always more to do, but big data is getting into the water world with mostly good results!

I have also attached part of our nomination submittal for your review!  Please share out as you see fit.

Download 2018SummaryTopTen ConservationBend

In addition, we are concluding a significant Reclamation Basin Study with some interesting results for the Deschutes, and the irrigation districts are doing some of their best “system improvement plans” (SIPS) to date and chasing big federal money to modernize.  A particular frog and some federal statutes are helping prioritize them a bit…  so lots going on at the basin level too.  Add in the Oregon Legislature apparently making water a priority again as well… could be timely to talk water education!  The state and the Tribes are putting on a invite only water summit Oct 21/22 and facilitated by Jamie Damon. Perhaps you guys can score an invite? (I will raise OSU staff invites at a planning meeting later this week too).

On that note, regardless of the water summit dates, since we now have a little OSU Cascades Campus over here (and growing), I would love to invite you and perhaps your hydrogeologist partner in programmatic crime (Todd) over to sip something from one of our breweries, distilleries or wineries soon to do some informal brainstorming on some water coursework of the future! Be great to chat regardless!  If you have others over here we should pull in, let's do it!

We could throw in a  tour of our new state-of-the-art Water Filtration Facility too and inspect the raw materials of above mentioned product tasting!

Let me know your thoughts and always happy to answer questions and explain our work to date!

Cheers

pg

So good to hear from Patrick and the work he and his staff have done in Bend. I just may take him up on a visit to the other side of the mountains.

"We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit." - Aristotle