Government Goings-on

Looking ahead at 2014, significant government actions on water-related issues are not appearing on the horizon in large numbers.  Congress appears ready to pass legislation on water infrastructure projects, though none in Arizona.  The battle over how to define “waters of the United States” has still not been resolved.   The Environmental Protection Agency will issue final rules on haze that will tell the tale for Navajo Generating Station.  NGS provides the power to move Arizona’s Colorado River water uphill through the CAP canal.  If the TWG alternative is adopted, closing one unit and cutting electrical production and associated emissions by about a third, then NGS is likely to stay open past 2020.  Interestingly, this approach of closing older units and thus curtailing emissions has just been adopted for the Four Corners Plant in Farmington, so it could be a workable solution.  If the original EPA approach is formalized in rule, NGS closure after 2020 becomes more likely, and power to move the water will have to be purchased elsewhere.  It won’t be cheap.  The resulting high costs of CAP water could turn customers towards using groundwater again, potentially undercutting the progress made in Arizona in curtailing groundwater mining.  Final rules are due from EPA in the spring.

Those familiar with the Arizona Legislature all say that the acrimony between leadership and the Governor left over from last year’s session runs deep.  Funding for ADWR and ADEQ is always a concern as the budget is discussed, particularly if the agencies become pawns in another session battle.  It seems unlikely that any water-related legislation will be passed, or even introduced.  Many politicians have their eye on the 2014 elections:  who to run, who to endorse, who to blame.

At ADWR, the biggest item on their plate remains the development of the Fourth Management Plan.  One focus is on how to provide rewards and penalties to those who store water underground such that recharge occurs much closer to areas where groundwater is being withdrawn.  ADWR came up with a set of ideas that were then modified by AMWUA and other entities as part of the overall effort to change recharge, tailoring the program to address localized imbalances.  A series of public stakeholder meetings at ADWR has begun to talk about the various concepts.  An early item of discussion has been the Area of Impact as it affects recovery wells.  ADWR has long defined it as a one-mile zone around an Underground Storage Facility; other voices are calling for a hydrologically sound definition based on what is likely occurring within the aquifer, where the water is actually going.  An interesting addition from AHS members at ADEQ is the idea of enhancing water quality within the aquifer by offering incentives for storing water higher in quality than the groundwater already there.  Click here to learn more about these stakeholder meetings.

Alan Dulaney