Arizona Colorado River Shortage Workshop – 2004
Date: Subject:
September 22, 2004 Report from Workshop Number 3 held on August 17, 2004
Summary The third workshop on Colorado River Shortages was held on August 17, 2004 to discuss the issue of sharing of shortages with other post-1968 entitlement holders. The first part of the meeting focused on review of background information and actions taken pursuant to the June 29 meeting regarding impacts to agriculture. The June meeting illustrated that potential impacts to agricultural districts were highly variable in nature. In addition, some districts could also suffer power impacts or restrictions on lands with respect to groundwater. ADWR staff is in the process of collecting and compiling information from the agricultural districts in the state with the intent that the districts might use the information for long-range shortage planning. The Department will update the information and use it to monitor shortage planning efforts during the next few years. Tom Carr also provided an update regarding the current status of shortage discussions between the basin states. The Upper Basin is greatly concerned with decreasing lake levels in Lake Powell and the resultant potential loss of Glen Canyon power. Additionally, the drought has reduced supply by 30% in the Upper Basin. The Upper Basin has expressed a desire to see voluntary water reductions, a decrease in their 8.23 MAF delivery obligation and shortage sharing with Mexico. The basin states are currently drafting a letter to the Secretary of the Interior informing her that the states are working to develop guiding principles and shortage criteria. Mr. Carr stated that the group is attempting to: (1) identify the legal and regulatory sideboards; (2) explore and make recommendations regarding criteria for designating a shortage; and (3) identify crisis avoidance operational activities. With respect to timing of the process, the plan is to develop alternatives and obtain feedback on those alternatives from the principle parties in midSeptember. The technical committee would then refine alternatives and the alternatives could be presented to the public. Tim Henley stated that the primary parameter of concern will likely be protection of water supply and that criteria need to be developed that protects the major water suppliers. Two notable sideboards will likely be CAP parameters and the SNWA intake elevation. Criteria will also need to consider both Lake Mead and Lake Powell power generation and environmental concerns. The second part of the meeting focused on the impacts of shortages on the post-1968 entitlement holders (Priority 4 users). Mr. Carr presented background information regarding the various priorities of water users in the state and how the entitlements are allocated between the M&I, agricultural and federal sectors. He presented two shortage scenarios, a 600,000 AF cut and an 800,000 AF cut to the Priority 4 users. The resultant shortage was a 34% and 46% reduction in their water supply. Impacted users presented their viewpoints regarding the impacts. In summary, they stated: Impacts are great because there are no redundant sources of supply available to them. Consequently, all of the reduction is a total loss.
Agricultural use within certain areas is limited, so the principle of agricultural water being the first to bear reductions doesn’t provide much relief. Many water users along the river used water well before the CAP and felt that they should have had an earlier priority. However, they were all lumped together when the contracts were done. Decreases in water deliveries can have economic impacts to the districts due to large portions of their costs being fixed costs that remain even if no water is delivered.
There was discussion regarding the role the Arizona Water Banking Authority would play. Mr. Henley explained that the AWBA does not firm for agricultural use but for M&I use only. There are 420,000 AF of credits that have been developed using general fund appropriations. One of the potential uses of those credits is firming for the on-river communities. The AWBA has identified that as the highest priority but has not exclusively reserved them for that purpose. There continues to be some concern that those credits could be swept by the legislature for other uses. The meeting concluded with Mr. Carr summarizing the future actions that need to be taken: Secondary, smaller meetings occur to develop concepts for shortage sharing between the CAP and the post-1968 Colorado River entitlement holders. ADWR staff completes compilation of agricultural district data. Information generated in meetings must be compiled into a report; the first will likely be background information, issues, concerns and impacts. September 28, 2004 meeting will include progress report regarding status of discussions with other basin states.