Relation ofRelation ofRegional Water Planning Process Regional Water Planning Process

to Water Marketingto Water Marketing

Lynn ShermanLynn Sherman

November 5, 2004November 5, 2004

presented by

Texas Water Law Institute

The State’s 1st privately funded company

committed to developing multiple wholesale water projects

around the state on a systematic basis

in partnership with landowners, governmental entities, and local

communities.

partners with:

•Landowners

•Local communities

•Water utilities

Bridging resources and communities

Demand exceeds available supply in 400 communities and 96 counties

TODAY.

If nothing is done, we will have severe shortages

throughout the state.

1950’s TODAY

De

vel

op

ed S

up

plie

s

Pe

r C

apit

a

ALMOST ON PAR WITH 50’S DROUGHT

Water Development Timeline

NEEDED

SUPPLIES

1950’sDROUGHT

UNPARALLELED GROWTH

FUTURE

DE

VE

LO

PE

D S

UP

PL

IES

DAM BUILDING ERA

1960’s-1980’s

POPULATION DOUBLES

IN 2050

EXISTING SUPPLIESDECREASE BY

20%

“NO DEVELOPMENT” PERIOD

1980’s to Date

How much more water do we need…

50% more50% more

That’s 7.4 million acre feet

……almost enough to flood almost enough to flood everyevery city in Texas 1 foot city in Texas 1 foot

deepdeep

Where will the water come from?

• Most rivers are fully or over appropriated

• Most good reservoir sites are gone

• Reservoir permitting is much more difficult

• Groundwater is most available for transfer

• Water transfers are the preferred method

• Bays and estuaries need increasing protection

Voluntary Water

Transfers

Source: Texas A&M survey of regional planning group participants regarding the most preferred and feasible water management strategies.

Voluntary water transfersrank second

behind reuse of treated wastewater

as the preferred

water management strategy

for Texas

The regional planning process is intended to “facilitate” water transfers.

The TWDB’s regional planning guidance principles must consider “the application of principles that result in voluntary redistribution of water resources.” TWC § 16.051(d)

The TWDB and each regional planning group is required to make “legislative recommendations…needed and desirable to facilitate more voluntary water transfers.” TWC § 16.051(e), 16.053(i)

Each regional plan is required to include consideration of the “voluntary transfer of water within the region” using mechanisms such as “sales, leases, [and] options.” TWC § 16.053(e)(5)(H)

“all potentially feasible water management strategies,

In addition, regional planning groups

are required to consider

including…acquisition of available existing supplies, and

development of new water supplies.”

However,

TWC § 16.053(e)(5)(c)

this is not being done.

There are at least three reasons:1. There is no established, formal process for submitting water management strategies.

3. Private water development interests are not represented on regional planning groups.

2. Unlike public water purveyors and other political subdivisions, private interests (even those with water supplies) cannot require a regional planning group to consider a change to its regional plan.

See TWC16.054(d)

As a result, voluntary water transfers

will not be included in the next set of regional plans.

involving private interests

The effect:

The problem: For the next 50 years, the most criticalyear for implementing strategies is 2010.

These projects might not be considereduntil the next regional planning cycle which will notculminate in a state water plan until 2012.

Summary of Regional Water Plans, February 1, 2001, p. 10.

Water for Texas –

a number of feasible

Science

“Like beauty, [groundwater] availability

is in the eye of the beholder.

Robert E. Mace, William F. Mullican, III, Ted (Shao-Chih) Way, Estimating Groundwater Availability in Texas, Texas Water

Development Board, January 2001, p. 9.

”Therefore, different regions have defined groundwater

availability differently for thesame groundwater source.”

“When producing from an aquifer, the water comes from three possible sources:recharge, storage, or cross-formational flow.“

Robert E. Mace, William F. Mullican, III, Ted (Shao-Chih) Way, Estimating Groundwater Availability in Texas, Texas Water

Development Board, January 2001, p. 1.

▼▼▼

▼

▼ ▼▼

▼ ▼Rain

Storage

Underflow

andRecharge

only from

1/3 of

the District

Recharge only

Recharge doesn’t reflect where the

groundwater

IS!oror or how much is there.

Source: LBG-Guyton Associates

Not only are groundwater districts limiting their consideration of water availability to recharge, some are ignoring significant aquifers altogether.

In one instance, the district’s recently adopted water management plan declares a deficit of 10,000 af/yrit refused to consider an aquifer that the preliminary GAM results suggest could satisfy ALL the district’s 2060 demands alone, without using any other aquifer.

; however,