ESPA Comprehensive Aquifer Management Plan

1
ESPA Comprehensive Aquifer Management Plan
Idaho Water Resource Board

• Public Meetings
• December 2, 4, 10 2008

Jonathan Bartsch--CDR Associates
2
Presentation Outline

• Background and Overview of CAMP Process
• Management Alternatives and Packages
• Long-Term Hydrologic Recommendation
• Phase I (1- 10 year) Recommendations
• Additional Recommendations
• Funding Recommendations
• Public Comments and Next Steps

3
Background

• Framework Plan funded by 2006 Legislature
• Board conducted stakeholder outreach to develop
  ESPA CAMP Framework (2007)
• 2007 Legislative funding and authorization for
  Advisory Committee
• Presenting a completed plan to the 2009
  Legislature.

4
Goal for Aquifer Management
Sustain the economic viability and social and
environmental health of the Eastern Snake Plain
by adaptively managing a balance between water
use and supplies
5
Objectives for Aquifer Management

• Increase predictability for water users by
  managing for reliable supply
• Create alternatives to administrative curtailment
• Manage overall demand for water within the
  Eastern Snake Plain
• Increase recharge to the aquifer
• Reduce withdrawals from the aquifer

6
ESPA CAMP Advisory Committee Background

• Pursuant to House Bill 320 the Board created and
  convened the ESPA CAMP Advisory Committee (2007)
• Broadly based representatives across ESPA charged
  with developing consensus-based recommendations
  to Board (18-month process)
• Focus on long-term aquifer management plan
• Guided by the Goal and Objectives

7
ESPA CAMP Advisory Committee Background

• Committee composition established through a
  stakeholder nomination and Board selection
  process
• 16-member Committee met for first time in May
  2007
• 18 Committee meetings and numerous sub-committee
  meetings held
• Meetings convened across the ESPA
• Operating Protocols established
• Consensus-based decision making process

8
Fish and Wildlife Sub-Committee

• Purpose to examine impacts to Fish and Wildlife
  as a result of CAMP
• Development of features and factors document
  (checklist of important issues)
• Modeling effort analyzing changes to river and
  spring flows
• Observations and recommendations included in the
  technical report

9
Economic Analysis

• Cost effectiveness assessment of demand reduction
  options
• Identify costs of CAMP implementation
• Trade-offs between demand reduction strategies
• Economic model developed can be used to identify
  most cost-effective measures
• Analysis included in the CAMP technical reports

10
Management Alternatives

• Management Alternatives Examined
• Managed and incidental recharge
• Groundwater to surface water conversions
• Demand Reduction Strategies
• Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program
• Dry-year leasing
• Crop mix (incentives to plant low-water use
  crops)
• Buyouts and subordination agreements
• Water conservation measures
• Additional surface water storage
• Weather modification
• Below Milner Dam salmon flow augmentation
  exchanges

11
Management Alternatives Key Components

• Alternative Description
• Estimated Average Supply
• Estimated Cost
• Hydrologic Impacts
• Implementation Timeframe

12
Management Alternative Packages

• Packages Developed include
• Small (300 KAF) least expensive and quickest to
  implement
• Medium (600 KAF) more expensive and takes more
  time to fully implement
• Large (900 KAF) most expensive and will take
  decades to fully implement
• Demand Reduction and Recharge Emphasis

13
Long-term Recommendation 600 kaf Water Budget
Change

• 600 kaf Water Budget Change
• Robust mix of conversions, aquifer recharge and
  demand reduction strategies
• Implementation Timeline 20 years
• Cost 600 million not including OM
• Estimated annual revenue required - 30 M

14
What is a Water Budget?

• A water budget is a method for accounting the
  inflow and outflow of a system, e.g. ESPA.

15
Long-term Recommendation 600 kaf change

• Implementation will result, depending upon
  climate, in
• Improved aquifer levels (stabilization and
  potential enhancement)
• Increased river reach gains
• Increased certainty and water supply for all
  users
• Ability for municipal and industrial growth
• Decreased demand for litigation and
  administrative remedies
• Potential Fish and Wildlife opportunities and
  impacts in CAMP implementation

16
Phase I Recommendations

• Phase I (1 10 years)
• Hydrologic target of 200kaf 300kaf
• Intended to initiate actions that increase
  aquifer levels, and spring and river levels
• Geographically distributed across the ESPA
• Build institutional confidence with long-term
  plan implementation

17
Phase I Recommendations

• Groundwater to Surface Water Conversions
• Managed Aquifer Recharge
• Demand Reduction
• Buyouts, buy-downs and/or subordination
  agreements
• Rotating fallowing, dry-year lease agreement,
  CREP
• Crop mix modification
• Surface water conservation
• Pilot Weather Modification Program

18
ESPA CAMPPhase 1 Hydrologic Analysis

• A series of hydrologic analyses were conducted
  to determine the effects of the CAMP Phase 1
  actions on aquifer levels and reach gains (spring
  flows) from the aquifer. The period of 1980-2005
  was used as hydrologic input into the analysis.
  It was determined that over this time period, the
  Phase 1 CAMP actions could be achieved as
  follows
• Phase 1 CAMP Action Average acre-feet/year
• Recharge (Snake River) 91,223
• Recharge (Wood River) 22,565
• Conversions 85,027
• Water Use Efficiency 32,100
• Weather Modification 51,500
• Demand Reduction 44,835
• TOTAL 327,250

19
ESPA CAMPEstimated Increase in Reach Gains
(Spring Flows) from the Aquifer at Selected
Locations
20
ESPA CAMPEstimated Increase in Ground Water
Levels at Selected Locations
21
Phase I Recommendation 200 kaf 300 kaf
change

• Implementation will result, dependant on climate,
  in
• Improved aquifer levels (stabilization and
  potential enhancement)
• Increased gains in some river reaches
• Increased water supply certainty for all users
• Ability for municipal and industrial growth
• Decreased demand for litigation and
  administrative remedies
• Ongoing public process for CAMP implementation

22
Additional Recommendations

• CAMP Implementation Committee Refocus and
  restructure the CAMP Advisory Committee
• Environmental Considerations
• Continue to integrate environmental and other
  considerations
• Clearinghouse
• Evaluate options to implement a flexible
  mechanism that connects willing participants in
  the implementation of ESPA water management
  projects

23
Additional Recommendations

• Outreach and Education
• Develop and fund a broad water education and
  outreach effort
• Management Flexibility and Innovation
• Explore innovative approaches that can
  improve water supplies available for conversion,
  recharge, and/or enhancement of surface supplies
• Downstream Transfer Policy
• Encourage providing water for recharge and
  conversion projects through downstream transfers
  of surface water rights to the ESPA in a manner
  that enhances flows in flow-limited tributaries

24
CAMP Funding Principles

• CAMP Funding Principles
• Broad-based
• Universal to all water users
• Provides equitable benefit
• Efficient revenue collection
• Minimizes interest expenses

25
Phase I Cost and Recommendation

• 70 million 100 million dollars needed to
  implement a 200 300 kaf annual water budget
  change in first 10 years
• ESPA water users contribute 60
• State of Idaho contributes 40

26
Phase I Funding Recommendations

• Water User Categories
• Irrigated Agriculture
• Idaho Power/Co-Ops
• Municipalities
• Spring Users
• Industrial/Commercial Users
• State of Idaho
• Federal
• Recreation/Conservation

27
Phase I Funding Water Users Component

• Pay-As-You-Go. A financial policy that pays for
  capital outlays from current revenues rather than
  borrowing. An approach that pays for some
  improvements from current revenues and others by
  borrowing is said to be on a partial or modified
  pay-as-you-go basis.
• Idaho Water Resource Board Contract. Using the
  existing Board Authority to issue revenue bonds,
  in which principal and interest are payable
  entirely from the revenue received. This
  approach would be potentially taxable.
• Water Management Improvement District. Assesses a
  fee to defray part or all of the costs of a
  specific improvement or service. A Water
  Management Improvement District would require
  legislative action to grant authority to
  establish a separate district.

28
Phase I Funding State Component

• State Water Management Project
• General Fund Appropriations from kilowatt per
  hour (kwh) power franchise fee, a state sales or
  property tax, special product or service tax,
  etc. to pay for the state portion of the
  management plan
• State Water Fund
• Develop a state-wide water fund, funded through a
  state water management project, to authorize and
  fund such projects

29
Adaptive Management

• Involves taking action (Phase I actions),
• Testing assumptions,
• Monitoring, and
• Adapting and adjustment as necessary
• A way to take action in the face of uncertainty

30
Comment

• Ways to provide your input include
• Attend Public Workshop and provide comment,
• 2) Send written comment via mail (to Idaho
  Department of Water Resources Attn Sandra Thiel
  P.O. Box 83720 Boise, ID 83720-0098) or
• 3) Provide comment in electronic form via e-mail
  (to IDWRInfo_at_idwr.idaho.gov).
• Comments due by January 5, 2009

31
Questions

• What is your input regarding the long-range
  hydrologic goal and strategies outlined in the
  plan?
• What are your comments on the proposed Phase I
  hydrologic target and actions?
• What is your input regarding the funding and
  collection mechanisms outlined in the CAMP?
• Other Comments?

32
ESPA Comprehensive Aquifer Management Plan
Idaho Water Resource Board

• Public Meetings
• December 2, 4, 10 2008

Jonathan Bartsch--CDR Associates