AUGUST 2019 Long-Term Water Augmentation Options for Arizona EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Final Prepared for the Long-Term Water Augmentation Committee of the Governor's Water Augmentation, Innovation, and Conservation Council INTRODUCTION This project was initiated by the Long Term Water Augmentation Committee of the Governor's Water Augmentation Council (GWAC) which is now the Governor's Water Augmentation Innovation and Conservation Council (GWAICC). The Committee provided guidance to the project team consisting of Carollo Engineers, Montgomery and Associates, and Westland Resources, Inc. to evaluate water augmentation options for the twenty-two water planning areas throughout Arizona. The outcomes of this study are to be viewed as a menu of options that water users in each planning area can select from to increase their water supplies. The responsibility for selecting and implementing water augmentation options is up to the entities in each planning area that want to increase water supplies and are willing to fund the cost of additional water supplies. PURPOSE The purpose of this water augmentation project is to identify water augmentation options that the twenty-two different water planning areas in Arizona could take as ideas to augment water supplies. Objectives included: •• Identify state-wide water augmentation opportunities including rural planning areas. •• Look for Arizona’s next large water supply. •• Combine multiple water augmentation methods to increase water supply benefits. PLANNING AREAS, AUGMENTATION OPTIONS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY WATER AGUMENGATION PROJECT AD The graphic below presents the twenty-two Arizona planning areas. The table on the following page presents suggested water augmentation options that are an outcome of this study, organized into the following categories: water augmentation, best practices, projects and practices Arizona Strip between willing parties that improve water utilization, and water augmentation concepts requiring further development. Impediments to Navajo/Hopi water augmentation are also addressed. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY WATER AGUMENGATION PROJECT ADW Western Plateau Northwest Basins Central Plateau Arizona Strip FLAGSTAFF Colorado Main Stem North Navajo/Hopi Verde Bill Williams Western Plateau Northwest Basins Colorado MainColorado Stem North Main Stem South East Plateau Hassayampa/ Central Plateau Agua Fria West Basins YUMA Apache Verde Bill Williams Lower Gila Roosevelt FLAGSTAFF PHOENIX Hassayampa/ Gila Bend Agua Fria Basin and Range AMAs Roosevelt West Basins Colorado Main Stem South East Plateau Upper Gila Lower San Pedro Apache TUCSON PHOENIX Cochise West Borderlands Lower Gila Gila Bend Funded by the Arizona Department of Water resources and a grant from the Bureau of Reclamation Phoenix Area Office Water Conservation Field Services Program. YUMA Upper San Pedro Upper Gila Lower San Pedro TUCSON Cochise West Borderlands Legend Strategic Water Planning Areas Water Resource Planning Areas ARIZONA WATER PLANNING AREAS Data Sources: 2 Basin and Range AMAs Planning Areas, AMAs: ADWR Rivers, River Basin, Street Map, State Boundaries: ESRI O Feet Upper San Pedro WATER AUGMENTATION OPTIONS Projects and Practices Between Water Augmentation Willing Parties that Improve Water Concepts Requiring Further Management Development Water Supply Transfers for CAP and Colorado River Water Users Weather Modification Water Augmentation Best Practices that Improve Options Water Use Efficiency Ocean Desalination Agricultural Water Conservation Brackish Groundwater Desalination Enhance Aquifer Storage Modify Operation of the Roosevelt Dam to use the Flood Control Space Phreatophyte Management Groundwater Transfers from the Harquahala and Butler Groundwater Basins Reclaimed Water Utilization SRP-CAP Interconnect Facility Watershed Management Municipal Water Conservation Impediments to Water Augmentation Little Colorado River and Gila River Water Rights Adjudications Unresolved Indian Water Rights Claims Groundwater Management Planning Water Augmentation Options Water Augmentation Option 1 OCEAN DESALINATION Minute 323 entitled "Extension of Cooperative Measures and Adoption of a Binational Water Scarcity Contingency Plan in the Colorado River Basin," was entered into force on September 21, 2017 and included delegates from the United States, Mexico and the International Boundary and Water Commission (IBWC). In Section IX. B of Minute 323, "New Water Sources Projects," opportunities exist for joint cooperative projects with the potential to increase delivery or exchange of Colorado River water benefiting both the United States and Mexico, which include the following projects: •• Binational Desalination Plant at the Pacific Ocean coast; •• Binational Desalination Plant in the New River; •• Binational Desalination Plant, Sea of Cortez; •• Reuse of the effluent from the Mexicali Valley wastewater treatment plants in wetlands or riparian restoration of the Colorado River; and •• Re-use in the United States of South Bay International Wastewater Treatment Plant effluent. The Minute directed the formation of a Binational Desalination Work Group comprised of Federal, State, and water agencies from the United States and Mexico which would study potential new water sources projects. The next action tasked to the Binational Desalination Work Group is the development of a study of water desalination opportunities in the Sea of Cortez. The study is a preliminary investigation to identify the range of possibilities for potential future development of binational desalination opportunities that provide benefits to water users in the United States and Mexico. A consultant to conduct the study has been selected and the project is currently underway. The consultant's team will include engineering, desalination, and environmental experts from both Mexico and the United States. They will evaluate technical and environmental issues that include: •• Local and regional current and future unmet water needs in Sonora and Baja California, Mexico, and the lower Colorado River Basin, United States; •• Various desalination technologies that could be applicable in the region; •• Potential desalination opportunity locations along the Sonoran coast; and •• Possible impacts to the marine environment, flora and fauna. The study will include recommended desalination concepts to consider for possible additional investigation and is scheduled to conclude in 2020. This binational work group is the path for Arizona to consider opportunities for desalination projects with Mexico. 3 Water Augmentation Option 2 BRACKISH GROUNDWATER DESALINATION Brackish groundwater is water that has high levels of Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) and requires treatment before it can be used as a potable water supply. Brackish groundwater is located in multiple planning areas throughout Arizona, including: Basin and Range, Gila Bend, Navajo/Hopi, Cochise, Lower Gila, West Borderlands, Colorado Main Stem South, Central Plateau, Eastern Plateau, Northwest Basins, and Upper Gila water planning areas. The volume of brackish groundwater that can be recovered varies between 6,000 and 10,000 acre-ft per-year (AFY) in most of these planning areas. The Buckeye waterlogged area in Maricopa County might yield up to 50,000 AFY, and Yuma area desalination would yield more than 10,000 AFY. Reverse Osmosis Facility in Goodyear, Arizona Brackish groundwater treatment usually requires Reverse Osmosis (RO) treatment process which produces a brine stream that is expensive to manage. Brine Management options include: •• Brine evaporation ponds •• Deliver to an industrial facility for use in cooling towers •• Deep well injection •• Thermal Brine Concentration •• Vacuum Membrane Distillation Deep Well Injection Facility A Brackish groundwater treatment project consists of multiple wells, an RO treatment facility, a brine management system, potable water storage tanks, pumping, and a pipeline delivery system. For a facility capable of delivering 10,000 AFY (9 mgd) and TDS levels near 3,000 mg/L, the cost may vary between $1,500 and $2,000 per acre-ft (AF) of treated potable water. Brackish groundwater development at this cost is more likely to occur in the future when the price of water increases to the point that brackish groundwater supplies become economically viable. Thermal Brine Concentration Facility 4 Water Augmentation Option 3 GROUNDWATER TRANSFERS FROM THE HARQUAHALA AND BUTLER GROUNDWATER BASINS The Harquahala and Butler Valley alluvial groundwater basins are located west of Tonopah, AZ. Arizona State Statute allows groundwater from the Harquahala and Butler Valleys to be withdrawn and delivered to the Basin and Range Active Management Area (AMAs) by wheeling this water through the Central Arizona Project (CAP) Canal. Planning and development to extract this groundwater is underway by the several parties that own land in Harquahala. Additional supplies may come from the Butler Valley. When land ownership requirements are met, the McMullen Valley could also have groundwater extracted for potable use. Developing this groundwater supply requires wells, transmission lines, pump stations, storage, and delivery into the CAP canal. Groundwater may need to be treated before it is placed in the CAP canal. Then at the delivery point, a diversion from the CAP canal would be required along with surface water treatment, storage, and pumping facilities. The cost of water from the Harquahala basin would be approximately $1,800 - $2,000/AF. Photo provided by SRP 5 Best Practices That Improve Water Use Efficiency EXPAND AGRICULTURAL WATER CONSERVATION Agricultural water conservation has been an integral part of Arizona's agriculture industry for decades. Water conservation is achieved using multiple approaches to reduce water use either on the farm or through an irrigation district or company. Agriculture is a for profit enterprise so the agricultural conservation practices must be profitable. Agricultural water conservation does not necessarily free up water for another user except when land fallowing agreements are established. Agricultural water conservation can benefit any planning area. The cost varies with methods used. Photo provided by The Nature Conservancy Drip Irrigation on Carrots Reduces Water Use 40% - 60% ENHANCE AQUIFER STORAGE Aquifer recharge is the process of storing renewable water resources in the ground for later use, to preserve the aquifer, or enhance stream flows. Types of water that can be recharged: 1 Reclaimed Water 2 Surface water 3 Urban Enhanced Runoff (UER) The volume of water that can be recharged may vary significantly depending on the availability of each water supply. An aquifer recharge and recovery project consists of recharge basins, recovery wells, possibly groundwater treatment, storage, transmission, and pumping facilities. Water from aquifer storage and recovery facilities may cost between $800 and $1,500/AF and could benefit any planning area. Photo courtesy of Cochise County Palominas Flood Control and Recharge Project MUNICIPAL WATER CONSERVATION Municipal water conservation is the practice of finding ways to use less water with existing customers. Water conservation is applicable in any planning area where water use is high enough to benefit from water conservation. The amount of water that can be conserved varies widely depending on current practices. Savings can vary from a few percentage points to 30% of the potable demand over an extended period of time. One of the most effective ways to conserve water is to implement landscaping policies for new developments that limit the amount of turf. It is easier to design water conservation into a new development than to retrofit an existing development. Types of Xeriscaping to reduce water use 6 RECLAIMED WATER Reclaimed water, sometimes also referred to as recycled water, is wastewater that is treated to a high standard that makes this water suitable for multiple uses. Reclaimed water projects can be implemented in any planning area where a wastewater treatment facility exists. Reclaimed water projects can be combined with other augmentation project technologies such as aquifer storage of renewable water supplies. Reclaimed water recharge in an AMA provides the additional benefit that groundwater credits can be accrued for the water that is recharged. Permits issued by ADWR are required for recharge activities. Photo courtesy of Sierra Vista Reclaimed Water Recharge Facility Reclaimed water can be used in a variety of ways, including the following: •• Indirect Potable Reuse (aquifer storage and recovery) •• Direct Potable Reuse •• Non-Potable Reuse (Direct Reuse) Reclaimed water delivered for industrial or irrigation uses •• Enhance aquifer storage and/or stream flows Reclaimed water systems are valuable because they can recover up to 30% of the water delivered by a potable water system. Reclaimed water supplies increase with an increase in population. Aquifer recharge and recovery projects may provide potable water between $800 and $1,500/AF. The cost of water using Direct Potable Reuse may vary between $1,000 and $2,000/AF. Direct reuse projects may cost as little as $200/AF. 7 Projects and Practices Between Willing Parties that Improve Water Management WATER SUPPLY TRANSFERS FOR CAP AND COLORADO RIVER WATER USERS Colorado River and CAP water users may execute an agreement with willing priority 1, 2, or 3 Colorado River water users to fallow land and voluntarily transfer water, with compensation, to deliver water to areas that are served by the Colorado River or CAP canal. Transferring water supplies may benefit water users in the following planning areas: Colorado Main Stem North, Colorado Main Stem South, Basin and Range AMAs. The amount of water that could be transferred is unique to each agreement and the cost would be negotiated between willing parties. MODIFY OPERATION OF THE ROOSEVELT DAM TO USE THE FLOOD CONTROL SPACE Roosevelt Dam is operated by SRP. Modified Roosevelt Dam currently has ~556 kaf of storage designed as Flood Control space that was added as part of the Safety of Dams Act. The current Water Control Manual for the dam states that once water enters flood control space it must be evacuated within 20 days. This project proposed to take advantage of storage capacity in the flood control space when it is not needed for flood control through the use of Forecast Informed Reservoir Operations (FIRO). Water temporarily in flood control space could then be used for direct delivery and/or recharge for the Basin and Range Planning Areas. Recharge credits cannot be obtained with this water. The volume of water that could be beneficially used by using the flood control space is not determined. Additional water available with this method is irregular Photo provided by SRP Roosevelt Dam and Reservoir 8 and infrequent, but could be a valuable intermittent supply to a user who could take advantage of such a supply. Existing law limits the ability to recharge this water. Legislative changes could be made to maximize the benefit of flood control space use. Because this project would not require new infrastructure, the associated costs would primarily be permitting and any associated mitigation. SRP-CAP INTERCONNECT FACILITY The SRP-CAP Interconnect Facility (SCIF) is a proposed project to connect SRP’s South Canal with the CAP canal that together with the existing CAP-SRP Interconnect Facility (CSIF) will allow water to move between the SRP and CAP systems in both directions. This proposed facility would serve to build further regional water resiliency by increasing the flexibility of existing infrastructure. For example, water stored in New Conservation Space (NCS) in Roosevelt Lake is intended for use outside of SRP's boundaries, but can currently only be delivered using the SRP delivery system. The SCIF would facilitate delivery of this water to city water treatment plants outside of SRP's boundaries. Photo provided by SRP Granite Reef Dam and SRP, CAP Canals In addition, the SCIF will facilitate the recovery and efficient delivery of the over 1.9 million acre-ft of long-term storage credits located within SRP's boundaries. Long-term storage credit holders can arrange to use SRP's wells for recovery. Then one or more of SRP's 270 wells would pump the stored water and deliver it to SRP customers in place of the SRP water they would normally receive. The SRP water would instead be diverted into the CAP canal using the SCIF allowing the long-term storage credit holder to take delivery of an equal amount of water at their CAP water treatment plant. Water Augmentation Concepts Requiring Further Development WEATHER MODIFICATION Cloud seeding is a weather modification practice aimed at increasing precipitation in a target region by introducing seeding agents such as silver iodide into clouds to enhance the enlargement of cloud droplets and ice crystals with the intent to increase precipitation in the form of rainfall or snowpack. A permit is required from ADWR to do weather modification. Additional research and development is needed fully implement cloud seeding as an ongoing practice in Arizona. Cloud Seeding Equipment PHREATOPHYTE MANAGEMENT Non-native phreatophytes such as salt cedar (Tamarisk) and Arundo (elephant grass) grow along the Gila River and its tributaries. These phreatophytes, along with some native species use large volumes of water thus reducing groundwater and streamflows. Phreatophytes have potential impacts on groundwater recharge, streamflow, and runoff, as well as environmental effects on carbon cycling and evapotranspiration rates. Phreatophyte removal requires ongoing maintenance. Phreatophytes could be replaced with lower water using plants. Active management and control of these plants have the potential to help improve water supplies in several Arizona River Basins (Lower Gila, Gila Bend, Basin and Range AMAs, Upper Gila, Verde, Lower San Pedro, Upper San Pedro). Photo provided by the New York Times Phreatophytes along the Colorado River FOREST MANAGEMENT Managing forests with water supply and quality in mind is essential to freshwater supplies in Arizona. Forest management practices that employ forest thinning and prescribed burns have been shown to increase water runoff, reduce fire risk and decrease evapotranspiration losses. Preventing large forest fires also improves water quality. The key benefits of forestry management are a higher surface water quality and a more resilient water supply. More research is needed to quantify the influence of large-scale mechanical thinning efforts on runoff and to establish ongoing forestry management practices. Forests in the Watershed to be Managed 9 Impediments to Water Augmentation LITTLE COLORADO AND GILA RIVER WATER STREAM ADJUDICATIONS Two ongoing water rights adjudications in state courts will resolve surface water claims in much of the state. The stream adjudications, which started in the 1970s, aim to quantify water rights and establish priorities within the Gila and Lower Colorado River basins, which cover most of the state. The watershed of the Gila and its tributaries - the Salt, Verde, Agua Fria, Santa Cruz, and San Pedro Rivers cover most of the state’s population and agriculture. The Gila River Adjudication, which is in the Maricopa County Superior Court, involves more than 32,000 claimants and 57,000 claims. The Little Colorado River Adjudication, which is in the Apache County Superior Court, involves more than 5,000 claimants and 30,000 claims. The adjudications will comprehensively settle all water rights claims on the river systems, a complex task that began more than 40 years ago and will take many more decades to resolve. Since the 1970s, development has increased reliance on this water, the combined claims to which exceed the available supply. Eventual resolution of the claims in court means some current water users may no longer be able to use this water. This uncertainty presents a significant barrier to planning for future water needs and long-term reliability and prevents water users from assessing water augmentation needs. These claims also include environmental interests seeking water for instream flows, the needs of which can be difficult to evaluate without adjudicated water rights. 10 Land Areas affected by the Little Colorado and Gila River Water Rights Adjudications EXECUTIVE SUMMARY WATER AGUMENGATION PROJECT ADWR EXECUTIVE SUMMARY WATER AGUMENGATION PROJECT ADWR UNRESOLVED INDIAN WATER RIGHTS CLAIMS NavajoNavajo NationNation There are 22 federally recognized tribes in Arizona with reservation land that covers nearly 28% of the state. Eleven of those tribes have reached water rights settlements with the State of Arizona. Three tribes have partial settlements and eight have unresolved claims. 67,300/AF of Colorado non-Indian agricultural (NIA) water has been held in reserve for Indian Water Rights claims. The unresolved water rights claims are an important part of the Little Colorado and Gila River Water Adjudications. r er ive Riv o R do radolora o l Co C Lake Lake MeadMead Hualapai Hualapai Tribe Tribe Southern San Juan Southern San Juan PauitePauite Tribe Tribe Hopi Tribe Hopi Tribe Havasupai Havasupai Tribe Tribe Lit Litt tl e l e Co Col lor ora ad d oR oR ive ive r r Fort Mohave Fort Mohave IndianIndian Tribe Tribe The settlement of unresolved tribal water rights claims is important not only from the perspective of justice for Native American communities, but also in terms of assessing statewide water availability. Tribal interests cannot fully participate in water augmentation planning across the state until their claims are resolved. The settlement of all claims will result in allocation of water supplies that are reserved for settlements, allowing tribes to assess their complete water supply portfolio and consider participation in augmentation projects. Yavapai Apache Yavapai Apache NationNation er Riv rde er Ve Riv rde Ve Yavapai-Prescott Yavapai-Prescott IndianIndian Tribe Tribe Mountain White White Mountain Apache Apache Tribe Tribe Apachee Tonto Tonto Apachee Tribe Tribe Colorado Colorado River River IndianIndian Tribe Tribe Salt Pima-Maricopa River Pima-Maricopa Salt River Community IndianIndian Community Gila River Gila River Community IndianIndian Community Fort Yuma Quechan Fort Yuma Quechan IndianIndian Tribe Tribe G Fort McDowell Fort McDowell Yavapai Yavapai NationNation Salt Salt Riv Rive r er San Calos San Calos Apache Apache Tribe Tribe Ak Chin Ak Chin Community IndianIndian Community r iver Rive ila RGila PuebloPueblo of Zuniof Zuni Cocopah Cocopah Tribe Tribe Tohono O'odham Tohono O'odham NationNation r er Rivea Riv Gila Gil Pascua Pascua Yaqui Yaqui Tribe Tribe San Xavier San Xavier Reservation IndianIndian Reservation The settlement of tribal water claims also provides the potential Legend Legend EXECUTIVE SUMMARY WATER AGUMENGATION PROJECT ADWR for collaborative augmentation options as permitted by the Settled Water Rights Settled Water Rights Status of water right settlements with terms of the settlement. Some tribal entities currently lease a Unresolved Water Rights Unresolved Water Rights Indian Tribes Partially Resolved Water Rights portion of their water allocations off reservation to non-Indian Partially Resolved Water Rights Arizona Strip Water Resource Planning Areas Water Resource Planning Areas users. Unleased water represents water that could be available for off-reservation uses. The settlement of additional claims and Navajo/Hopi Lake Mead tribal allocation of the additional CAP water could potentially Western Plateau OO result in more water available for leasing. Feet Feet Northwest Data Sources: Data Sources: Planning Areas, Groundwater Basin: ADWR Planning Areas, Groundwater Basin: ADWR WaterSettlement Right Settlement Water Right Status:Status: CAP CAP RiverStreet Basin, Map, StreetState Map,Boundaries: State Boundaries: Rivers, Rivers, River Basin, ESRI ESRI Basins 0 0125,000 125,000 250,000 250,000 Central Plateau EXECUTIVE SUMMARY WATER AGUMENGATION PROJECT ADWR Figure # Water Rights Settlement Status Figure # Water Rights Settlement Status Last Revised: June 06, 2019 M:\Client\ADWR\11028a.00\GIS\mxd\Deliverables\Executive Summary\Water Rights settlement_rev2.mxd Last Revised: June 06, 2019 M:\Client\ADWR\11028a.00\GIS\mxd\Deliverables\Executive Summary\Water Rights settlement_rev2.mxd Colorado LACK OF STATEWIDE GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT Main Stem North Verde PLANNING Arizona Strip Bill Williams East Plateau The Groundwater Management Act of 1980 created AMAs Hassayampa/ which brought groundwater regulation to the state’s most Agua Fria Lake Mead Roosevelt populated areas that were experiencing groundwater overdraft. Western Plateau Outside of these AMAs, groundwater use is essentially West Basins Colorado Northwest Main Stem Apache Central Plateau Basins South unrestricted, providing little incentive for communities to invest Colorado in new supplies because local resources are not quantified Main Stem Lower Gila North Verde or protected. A groundwater management planning process Gila Bend Basin and Upper Gila Range Bill Williams AMAs involves quantifying groundwater resources, assessing the Lower San Pedro rate at which supplies are being depleted, setting goals for Hassayampa/ Agua Fria long-term reliability, and implementing sustainable practices Roosevelt Cochise and monitoring results. Evaluating augmentation needs and West BorderlandsColorado West Basins Upper Main Stem options are part of the overall planning process. Groundwater San Pedro South management strategies for rural areas will need to be unique Lower Gila Legend in each area to address the specific Gila Bend Basin and Range Active Management Area (AMA) needs of each planning area. AMAs Basin Fill Aquifers Navajo/Hopi East Plateau Apache Upper Gila Lower San Pedro Water Resource Planning Areas Data Sources: Planning Areas, AMAs: ADWR Rivers, River Basin, Street Map, State Boundaries: ESRI Upper San Pedro O 0 Cochise West Borderlands Feet 125,000 250,000 Legend Alluvial Fill areas with groundwater Figure # Basin-Fill Aquifers and Planning Areas in Arizona Last Revised: June 06, 2019 M:\Client\ADWR\11028a.00\GIS\mxd\Deliverables\Executive Summary\Basin Fill Auifers and Planning Areas in Arizona_rev1.mxd Active Management Area (AMA) Basin Fill Aquifers 11 Acknowledgments The Long Term Water Augmentation Committee of the Governor's Water Augmentation, Innovation and Conservation Council Wade Noble, Chair; Maureen George, Chair (retired); Bruce Hallin; Reed Blochberger; Warren Tenney; Chuck Cullom; Bill Plummer; Bill Garfield; Jamie Kelley; Sarah Porter; Scott Deeney; Stefanie Smallhouse; Virginia O'Connell; Chris Udall Arizona Department of Water Resources Gerry Walker; Cyndi Ruehl, Viviane Baji ; Martin Stiles; Zach Richards; Karen Modesto; Jeri McAnerny 12