# Presentation: 370380

## Southwestern New Mexico Water Planning Workshop

**Deming, NM****October 26-27, 2007**

## Overview

**Arizona Water Settlement Act **
**Secretary’s Role**
**Reclamation’s Role**
**Planning Process Suggestions**

## AWSA

**Amended New Mexico’s Central Arizona Project benefits: access to water and funding **
**Ratified the Consumptive Use and Forbearance Agreement (CUFA)**

**Notes:**

CUFA defined the conditions for diverting up to an annual average of 14,000 acre-feet per year from the Gila River and tributaries in exchange for CAP water.

CUFA details will be addressed today by the Interstate Stream Commission.

## Secretary of Interior’s Role

**Disburse funds from the Lower Colorado Basin Development Fund to the State’s New Mexico Unit Fund**
**Responsible for Diversions under the CUFA**
**Owner of the CAP, **_**not**_** of a NM Unit**

**Notes:**
Authorized to disburse funds from the Lower Colorado Basin Development Fund to the State’s New Mexico Unit Fund
Responsible for Diversions under the CUFA
Owner of the CAP, NOT owner of a NM Unit
If New Mexico chooses to build a New Mexico Unit of the CAP, the Secretary will
Execute a NM Unit agreement within 1 year of receipt of notice from NM 
Contract with NM water users with the approval of the ISC
Design, build, operate and maintain a Unit unless NM wishes to fulfill those functions
Issue a Record of Decision by 2019 approving a project meeting certain conditions associated with safe yield and cost

## Secretary of Interior’s Role

**	****If New Mexico chooses to build a New Mexico Unit of the CAP, the Secretary will:**
**Execute a NM Unit agreement **
**Contract with NM water users **
**Design, build, operate and maintain a Unit **
**Issue a Record of Decision by 2019**

**Notes:**
Execute a NM Unit agreement within 1 year of receipt of notice from NM 

Contract with NM water users with the approval of the ISC

Design, build, operate and maintain a Unit unless NM wishes to fulfill those functions

Issue a Record of Decision by 2019 approving a project meeting certain conditions associated with safe yield 
and cost

## Reclamation’s Role

**Support of New Mexico’s Decision-Making Process**
**Manage the Lower Colorado River Basin Development Fund Management **
**Ensure environmental compliance of actions associated with Federal funds**

## Support of NM Decision-Making Process

**Assist NM in making decision by 2014**
**Participate in  technical studies**
**Participate in steering and technical committees.  **

**Notes:**
Assist NM in making decision by 2014 (not mandated by AWSA, but current PXAO policy)
 to take $66m for water utilization alternatives and/or take $128m and build a CAP feature.
It’s NM’s decision.

We’ve done a lot of tech studies under CAP authority and can continue to help
Whatever the process – most have a steering committee and at least a technical committee.  
Reclamation can participate in a variety of capacities on various types of committees, 
but steering committee leadership is a state and local function

Reclamation (and  other feds) does not have to be a part of NM’s decision at all.  
However, because of the federal funding, Reclamation will have NEPA and environmental  compliance responsibility for whatever NM does, so it’s easier in the long run (I think) if Reclamation and FWS are involved.

## Lower Colorado River Basin Development Fund

**Manage the LCRBD Fund**
**Deposit funds into the New Mexico Unit Fund to pay for costs of either:**
**Water utilization alternatives in the Southwest Water Planning Region of New Mexico  **
**                               ****-or-                                                              **
**A NM Unit**

**Notes:**
as determined by the NM ISC in consultation with the Southwest New Mexico Water Study Group or its successor

including costs of planning, environmental compliance, environmental mitigation and restoration

## New Mexico Unit Fund

**$66 million in 10 annual installments starting in 2012 **
**An additional $34 million if a NM Unit is chosen**
**Up to $28 million more towards a NM Unit  based on Fund’s earnings**

## Environmental Compliance

**Reclamation is the lead agency for complying with environmental regulations**
**Key environmental regulations governing Federally funded actions.**
**NEPA**
**FWCA**
**ESA **
**National Historic Preservation Act and others**
**New Mexico may be co-lead agency**

**Notes:**
Reclamation works with FWS, State agencies and others to meet regulatory requirements.

The FWS will talk today primarily about their involvement with the FWCA and ESA.

## National Environmental Protection Act

**Required when using Federal funds or if Federal approval is required.**
**Compliance can be :**
**a simple checklist**
**an environmental assessment (EA) or**
**an environmental impact statement (EIS)**
**EA and EIS processes include substantial public involvement  requirements**
**Objective: allow an informed decision that considers the potential impacts of a project. **

**Notes:**
The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) requires that a Federal agency comply with the regulations implementing NEPA for Federal projects, projects on Federal lands, using Federal money, or for which a Federal approval is required.  
Compliance with NEPA can range from filling out a simple checklist for routine actions having little impacts; preparing an environmental assessment to determine whether or not a project is likely to result in significant impacts; to preparing an environmental impact statement (EIS) for major actions that are likely to result in significant impacts to the human environment. 

With the exception of the simple checklist, both the EA and EIS processes include a public involvement component to the project, both in identifying issues that should be addressed in the NEPA document, and in reviewing the NEPA document to address its adequacy in describing the environmental impacts likely to result from implementing the proposed project.  The final document enables the decision-maker(s) to make an informed decision regarding the potential impacts of a project.  The State of NM would be invited to be a co-lead in the preparation of any EA or EIS prepared for AWSA projects.
Compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) is also required.  This law ensures that cultural resources within the “area of potential effect,” including historic, archaeological and paleontological resources, are identified and either protected from damage or appropriately studied prior to implementing a project.  Depending upon the amount and quality of resources that would be affected, data recovery costs could increase the cost of the project(s) if avoidance is not possible.  Consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer and any potentially affected tribes would be undertaken.

## National Historic Preservation Act

**	****The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) ensures that:**
**	****	**
**Cultural resources are identified and protected from damage or appropriately studied **
**The State Historic Preservation Officer and any potentially affected tribes are consulted**

## Planning Process Suggestions

**Involve all stakeholders**
**Get on the same page**
**Create focus**

**Notes:**
How do you develop a planning process?  It’s up to you but here is some advice based on experience.
First: involve all stakeholders.
Large groups are unwieldy but in today’s political world, any uninvited group can stop you....invite all users and environmental groups
As tempting as it might be to include only elected offices to “vote”, it won’t work.**
Second:  get on the same page – ie have the same objectives
Visioning workshops similar to this one with all stakeholders
Reach agreement (not consensus) on:
what do you see the future to be without doing anything?
Do you like  it?
If everyone likes the future – go home.
If not, work thru deciding what to do about it.
No progress will be made till most of the stakeholders are more afraid of the future without action than they are of each other.
What’s required to enable decisions to be made?
Focus!
How would I create focus?
Initiate a Planning study

## Planning Process

**Draw a line around an area **
**Decide on a future in that area **
**Understand the water needs of **_**every**_** user**
**Determine if demand can be reduced**
**If there is unmet demand...identify the water supply sources – **_**all**_** of them**
**Do the science**
**Do the math**

**Notes:**
With respect to process - Sorry – no fast way around it.
Ready – fire – aim ....hasn’t produced results yet.
We did not really do a planning study under CAP.
Our focus then was to decide what CAP feature to build if any.
We were not looking at other options.
That will be critical this time, because of NEPA and to have a legitimately accepted process.

Some folks might know what they’d like the answer to be....but for there to be the support necessary, everyone has to go thru the process.
What process?
Draw a line around an area.  Make it big enough to include anyplace that could get part of the $66m.  Don’t decide yet on how to divide the $66m.  Get some idea of the scope of the problems first.

Decide on a future in that area.  How much water demand?  Where?  When?  Understand and include the water needs of every sector: agri, m&I, envir, tribal, energy, recreation, etc.
Can demand be reduced?  Growth controlled? Can conservation help meet needs?

If there is unmet demand...identify the water supply sources – all of them.

Do the science:  No preconceived notions about what will or won’t work.  Look at the Gila – figure out enviro concerns and whether or how much water can be taken off the river.  Look at agri water rights and mining rights.  This is jist of study – with no power to reallocate rights.  Just developing data.  Understand all of the pros and cons of sources.  Understand groundwater quantity and quality.  Look at effluent reuse.  Understand the environmental impacts of all sources.

Do the math: figure out what sources to move where and how much it will cost. 

## Planning Process continued....

***ONCE YOU HAVE BASIC DATA*****........**
**Do the economic and financial analyses**
**Do the institutional analysis **
**Choose a solution that helps as many stakeholders as possible**

**Notes:**
ONCE YOU HAVE BASIC DATA.....

Do the economic and financial analyses: can the people who need the water pay for the water based on the costs developed?  

Do the institutional analysis:  can we move the water as planned?  What needs to change? Be negotiated?

Chose a solution that helps all parties – the better to get support

I was working on Upper Gila when my daughter was born, 23 years ago
This is not fast or easy but it is necessary, unless you want to spend another 23 years moving sideways.

Reclamation can help with this – but it’s basic planning that can be done by you.
Key is to involve everyone, and I mean everyone!

.