State Water Planning Methodology of Texas Michelle Buckholtz Rebecca Cesa Wyatt Ellertson

Regional Water Planning 12 Interests Represented:  Public  Counties  Municipalities  Industries  River Authorities  Electric-Generating Utilities  Agriculture  Water Districts  Water Utilities  Small Businesses 16 Regions Also have Non Voting members from Gov. Agencies and liaisons from adjacent planning groups. TWDB Approves all Regional Water Plans

Specific Planning Tasks:  Quantify current and projected water demand 50 years out  Describe Regional Water Area  Evaluate current water supplies  Identify surpluses and needs  Recommend regulatory and legislative changes  Evaluate water quality  Describe how to finance projects Regional Water Planning Water Management Strategy:  Increase Water Supply  Maximize efficient use of existing supply  Reduce demands to address water needs Benchmark: 1950’s Drought of Record

State Water Planning Developed every 5 years Incorporates information from regional plans, but is more then a sum of the regional plans Topics addressed:  Climate  Supply  Demand  Projections  Financing  Strategies  Uncertainty  Policy Recommendations Serves as a guide to state water policy, presents data for the state, identifies trends, provides recommendations to state legislators

Planning for Climate Change Temperature Increase Projections  2000 to 2019 – 1 degree F  2020 to 2039 – 2 degrees F  2040 to 2059 – 4 degrees F Large degree of uncertainty with Texas Climate Change Models Plan at regional levels for the benchmark drought of the 1950’s Possible solutions:  Change to more water efficient crops (Cotton, Grain)  Adopt new technologies to extend lives of aquifers  Develop new reservoirs for surface water collection Current Actions Taken:  2008 Far West Texas Climate Change Conference  TWDB staff workgroup formed to monitor status of climate change and to evaluate water management strategies for climate change.

Population Growth Historical accuracy: +/- 10%

Economic Growth

SWIFT Prioritization [State Water Implementation Fund for Texas] Two levels of prioritization: Regional Level 16 Regional Water Planning Groups (RWPG) Uniform standards developed by Stakeholder Committee (SHC) Standards set it HB4, 83 rd Legislature and approved by TWDB Regional finals were submitted September 1, State Level Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) has rules that include a prioritization system for water projects applying for SWIFT and SWIRFT funds Rules laid out in 31 TAC §

Regional Prioritization

State Prioritization 100! Serves a large population Provides regionalization Meets a high percentage of water supply needs of users to be supplied by project Provides assistance to a diverse and rural population 30 Local contribution & federal funding Financial capability to repay Emergency need Readiness to proceed Effect of the project on water conservation Priority assigned by RWPG

Critiques Should include environmental flows as a need Consider water need in drought years, not demand Reduce water consumption related to power generation, ie. coal ~50% of all water withdrawals in the US (!) Project screening/prioritization Use of 1950s drought as the “drought of record” is questionable based on tree ring history (Cleaveland, et al Texas Water Journal) Conservation, conservation, conservation Critiques examined: Sierra Club, Southwest Farmers Association, Texas Living Waters (associated with Environmental Defense Fund)