Llano Estacado Regional Water Planning Group Meeting

March 25, 2004                                10:00 a.m.

 

1.       Call To Order and Welcome.

 

Chairman H. P. Brown Jr. called the meeting to order at 10:02 a.m. in the A. Wayne Wyatt Board Room of the High Plains Underground Water Conservation District No. 1 office, 2930 Avenue Q, Lubbock, Texas.  Notice of the meeting was provided to each member and was also filed in accordance with the Texas Open Meetings Act at the following locations: Lubbock County Courthouse, Administrative Offices of the High Plains Underground Water Conservation District No. 1, and the regional water planning group web site at www.llanoplan.org.  

2.       Welcome of the new LERWPG members.

Chairman Brown welcomed the new members of the LERWPG to their first meeting.  They are Mr. Don James representing agriculture; Dr. Sukant Misra, representing agriculture; and Dr. Ken Rainwater representing the public.

3.       Roll Call Of Members and Establish Quorum.

The following Llano Estacado Water Planning Group members were in attendance:  Chairman H.P. Brown Jr.; Vice-Chairman Ches Carthel; Secretary-Treasurer Jim Conkwright; and members Bruce Blalack, Delmon Ellison Jr.; Harvey Everheart, Don James; Bob Josserand; Richard Leonard, Terry Lopas; Don McElroy, Sukant Misra; Gene Montgomery, Ken Rainwater, and Jim Steiert.

Unable to attend (excused absences):  Those unable to attend today’s meeting were: Delaine Baucum (meeting conflict); Dallas Brewer, (meeting conflict); Bill Harbin, (meeting conflict); and Kent Satterwhite, (meeting conflict). Non-voting member Joan Glass was also unable to attend due to a meeting conflict.

Absent members (unexcused absences):  Jerry Webster. 

There was a quorum of the Llano Estacado Regional Water Planning Group members in attendance (15 of 19 members or 78.9% attendance).  A total of 36 persons attended today’s meeting.

Others in attendance: Dr. Herb Grubb, HDR Engineering; Temple McKinnon, TWDB; Jason Coleman, South Plains Underground Water Conservation District; Clyde Crumley, Llano Estacado Underground Water Conservation District; Wayne Edwards and Odie Hood, Lake Alan Henry Water District; Don McReynolds, High Plains Underground Water Conservation District No. 1; Cleon Namken, USDA-NRCS; Scott Orr, Bruce Rigler, and Judy Reeves, High Plains Water District; Steve Stevens, Mesa Water, Inc.; David Turnbough, Sandy Land Underground Water Conservation District; and Ben Weinheimer, Texas Cattle Feeders Association.  Carmon McCain of the High Plains Water District staff was also present to take minutes of the meeting. (Four persons failed to sign the attendance sheet for this meeting.) 

ACTION ITEMS:

4.         Approval of the November 23, 2003 meeting minutes.

The minutes of the November 20, 2003 LERWPG meeting were provided to members by e-mail / hard copy for review prior to today’s meeting.  There being no additions or corrections, a motion was made by Bob Josserand and seconded by Delmon Ellison Jr. that the minutes of the November 20, 2003 LERWPG meeting be approved as printed.  All voted “aye,” and the motion unanimously passed.

5.       Approval of the Treasurer’s Report. 

The Llano Estacado Regional Water Planning Group financial statement for the period January 31, 2003 to March 25, 2004 was provided to members for review prior to today’s meeting.  Mr. Conkwright reported that the January 31 beginning balance was $24,410.27.  He reported that receipts during this period included funding from the Texas Water Development Board in Austin, while the primary expenditures were to HDR Engineering, the consultant for Region O.  The report shows a March 25 ending balance of $82,942.11. A motion to accept the report as printed was made by Jim Conkwright and seconded by Terry Lopas.  All voted “aye,” and the motion unanimously passed.

6.       The LERWPG will elect officers to serve during 2004-2005.

A nominating committee, consisting of Chairman Robert Josserand, Delaine Baucum, and S. M. True Jr., presented a slate of officers for 2004-2005.  It is their recommendation that H.P. Brown Jr. continue as chairman, Ches Carthel continue as vice-chairman, and Jim Conkwright continue as secretary-treasurer. The chair then called for nominations from the floor.  Hearing none, a motion was made by Mr. Ellison and seconded by Mr. Josserand that the nominations cease and that the slate of 2004-2005 officers be elected by acclamation. All voted “aye,” and the motion unanimously passed.

7.       The LERWPG will review the following water conservation district management plan (High Plains Underground Water Conservation District No. 1).

Chairman Brown asked Jim Conkwright, manager of the High Plains Underground Water Conservation District No. 1, to provide a brief overview of the amendments to the water district’s 10-year management plan.  Mr. Conkwright stated the district’s plan had been provided by certified mail to the LERWPG as required by law.  The High Plains Water District’s management plan is unique in that the district was able to utilize the Southern Ogallala aquifer GAM run, the Texas Tech Water Resources Center model, and the LERWPG data in determining available ground water within the district. It was the district’s opinion that no one model fully depicted ground water conditions within the district’s 15-county service area. However, the TWDB allowed the High Plains Water District to use the model that most nearly reflected the current condition of the aquifer in each respective county.  He reported that the management plan has been submitted to the Texas Water Development Board for review and certification.

Ms. McKinnon asked if the rules of the High Plains Underground Water Conservation District would remain the same.  Mr. Conkwright said that the board of directors of the district is anticipating some rule changes in May or June.

Chairman Brown thanked Mr. Conkwright for submitting the plan for review. As a planning group, Chairman Brown said it was the LERWPG’s role to review the plan—but not to approve it. 

Chairman Brown then asked the managers of the Garza County Underground and Fresh Water Conservation District, Mesa Underground Water Conservation District, Sandy Land Underground Water Conservation District, and South Plains Underground Water Conservation District to provide an update on their respective management plans. Each reported that their plans had been certified as being administratively complete by the TWDB.  The Llano Estacado Underground Water Conservation District’s management plan is due in 2005.  The district is currently working on the document. 

8.       The LERWPG will consider the opportunity to apply for additional supplemental funding to be used to address changed conditions that have occurred since the preparation of the current regional water plan.

Ms. McKinnon reported that the deadline to apply for additional supplemental funding is April 1, 2004.  The requests will be reviewed and evaluated in April, and the TWDB will consider contracts in mid-May.

Dr. Grubb stated that $1.6 million in funding was held back by the TWDB for use at a later date to address changed conditions that have occurred since the preparation of the current regional water plan (2001). The TWDB is now accepting requests for proposals for regions to identify items for supplemental funding that were not covered in the original scope of work. 

Region A has provided copies of their request for supplemental funding, which includes coordination with Region O.  Part of Region O’s municipal and industrial water comes from Region A through the CRMWA system and Lake Meredith.  In addition, there was a strategy in the 2001 Llano Estacado Regional Water Plan to transport water from Hartley County to the south.  Region A has engaged a consultant to update the Northern Ogallala aquifer GAM and revise the ground water availability data for that area.  This would have a great impact upon Region O planning and activities in the region.  

Dr. Grubb also noted that Region A has requested supplemental funding to update the surface water model, or WAM.  This would show surface water availability in the Canadian River basin, in which Lake Meredith is located.  It is Region A’s contention that the WAM failed to take into account the most recent hydrology in the Canadian Basin, Palo Duro Creek, and other basins.  It also did not account for the impact of New Mexico reservoirs upon the Canadian River and Lake Meredith. 

Dr. Grubb presented a two-page draft document addressing the changed conditions that the LERWPG may wish to request supplemental funding for.  These include the recent decline in surface water supply at Lake Meredith. 

Chairman Brown commented that the management strategies between Regions A and O are different.   While most are aware of this, he is greatly opposed to anything that would allow one region to “trump” or mandate management over another region. It is important that the regions have the flexibility to recommend strategies that would best benefit residents in their respective areas. 

Under Task B, there was concern about the language “communicate and coordinate.” 

Gene Montgomery pointed out that the LERWPG had drafted a document about a year ago to obtain funding for regional coordination activities.  He said there was language in the document essentially stating that Region O will coordinate activities with other regions; however, the ultimate decision for the regional coordination lies with the LERWPG members. The regional water planning group would not be forced into any type of regional coordination against its will.

Mr. Josserand suggested that “coordinate” be stricken.

After considerable discussion by members, a motion was made by Ches Carthel and seconded by Jim Conkwright to approve the draft document with the noted revision. Once revised, the manager of the political subdivision (High Plains Water District) would file the application with the TWDB on behalf of the regional water planning group. All voted “aye,” and the motion unanimously passed. 

Mr. Montgomery asked if this agenda item included any supplemental funding for coordination between any other regions.  Chairman Brown stated that there was no other supplemental funding between Region O and other regions for consideration at this time. 

9.       The LERWPG will consider discussion regarding a public hearing to amend the 2001 Llano Estacado Regional Water Management Plan to include a water management strategy to supply water from Lake Alan Henry to the Lake Alan Henry Water District created during the 78^th Texas Legislative Session.

Chairman Brown introduced Mr. Odie Hood and Wayne Edwards, representing the Lake Alan Henry Water District.  Mr. Hood and Mr. Edwards are board members of the newly formed district. 

Chairman Brown stated that this has been an agenda item for several months.  However, dialogue between the City of Lubbock and the Lake Alan Henry Water District was delayed so that the district could hold its confirmation election and select their board of directors.   

Mr. Carthel reported that the City of Lubbock has been in preliminary negotiations with the Lake Alan Henry Water District.  The City had to establish a price for the water and develop a draft contract.   Mr. Carthel said the draft contract had been finalized and that the city hoped to present it to the water district next week.  There are preliminary indications from the City of Lubbock Water Advisory Council and the Lubbock City Council that negotiations and sale of water from the lake is of interest. The final contract must be reviewed by the water advisory council and sent to the City Council for approval. 

The Lake Alan Henry Water District wishes to apply to the TWDB for funds to supply water to portions of Kent and Garza Counties surrounding the lake. However, if funding is requested, the strategy must also be included in the appropriate regional water management plan.  Lake Alan Henry is located within Region G and Region O. Therefore, Regions G and Regions O would have to amend their regional plans to include this strategy before the TWDB would consider the funding request.  Chairman Brown stated that Region G stretches from the Lake Alan Henry dam to the coast of Texas.  Because of this, he expressed concern over legal notice and publicity costs should Region G choose to amend their plan to include this strategy. 

Ms. McKinnon said timing is critical if Region G is to revise their plan. The driving force is that the water district needs funds—but in 14 to 16 months, the regions will submit their initially prepared plans to the TWDB.  Some have suggested that Region G wait until the next round of regional planning to revise their plan since they have already revised their plan. 

Mr. Carthel said that he believed the contract between the City of Lubbock and the Lake Alan Henry Water District could be finalized within the next two months.  

Chairman Brown suggested that the Lake Alan Henry Water District contact Senator Duncan’s office in an attempt to expedite the process between the TWDB, the City of Lubbock, the Lake Alan Henry Water District, and Region G. 

No action was taken on this agenda item. 

BREAK

The chairman called a 10-minute recess at 11:00 a.m.  Mr. Carthel left the meeting at this time.   

The chairman reconvened the meeting at 11:10 a.m. 

10.     The LERWPG will receive an update on the status of an interregional cooperation agreement between Regions O and G, and consider any necessary action to be taken regarding the agreement.

Chairman Brown reported that most of the interregional cooperation would be between Regions A & O, with some involving Region G.  At the bequest of U.S. Senator Cornyn, U.S. Senator Hutchison, State Senator Duncan, and others, the A. Wayne Wyatt pipeline concept was revisited.  This pipeline, as designed, could transport water from Roberts and/or Hartley Counties southward to Lubbock, and even on to Midland/Odessa and San Angelo.  The expected cost of such a project would exceed more than one billion dollars.  Because of this cost, the project has been tabled indefinitely. 

However, there is current discussion regarding the sale of water from Lake Alan Henry to towns and cities south of the area.  Abilene is beginning the permitting process to construct a new reservoir above the location of the previously proposed Breckenridge reservoir (“Cedar Ridge”).  This would be about 60 miles upstream of Possum Kingdom Lake. 

Conceptually, Chairman Brown said interregional coordination with Region G could occur for the next twenty years.  This could be a “wheeling project” with a pipeline going south to Lake J.B. Thomas in Region F, and then the Colorado River Municipal Water District could transport that water to Lake Ivie or other reservoirs in their service area. Abilene could draw water from Lake Ivie as well.  Chairman Brown said he felt the interregional cooperation could be accomplished via the phone. 

Despite the upcoming April 1 deadline, Mr. Josserand said he felt it was premature for the LERWPG to ask for funding of additional work with Region G aside from what can be accomplished over the telephone. 

No action was taken on this agenda item. 

COMMITTEE REPORTS AND OTHER INFORMATION:

11.     The LERWPG will receive an update on the Senate Bill 1094 water conservation implementation task force. 

Chairman Brown serves on the agriculture subcommittee and Mr. Montgomery serves on the industry subcommittee of the Senate Bill 1094 water conservation implementation task force.   

With the exception of the representative from El Paso, Mr. Brown is the only agricultural representative on this 32-member task force.  He also noted that the task force is made up of 28 governmental employees and 4 non-governmental employees. He said he felt this was unfair representation. 

Chairman Brown expressed his concern about discussion of water well metering as best management practice that could be recommended.  If there were 120,000 water wells in Region O, with a cost of $4,000 per meter, then it would cost $240 million to install meters.  He recommended to the task force that the respective ground water districts should decide whether or not to meter wells in their service area.  This should not be a mandated best management practice. 

He added that the task force would release the proposed best management practices for public comment.  A final report would be provided to the Texas Legislature prior to the start of the session in January 2005. 

Chairman Brown said environmental groups have been very pro-active during this process.  For example, some environmental groups have stated that they believe brush control is of little help in areas where rainfall is less than 18 inches per year. 

He concluded by stating that this has been a very time-consuming process.  There are times when it seems unproductive, but agriculture must be pro-active. Otherwise, the state and others “will run over us.” 

Mr. Josserand asked if the regional water planning group should make others aware of the proposed best management practices recommended by the task force.  It was suggested that the regional water planning groups, regional councils of governments, and ground water conservation districts would have more clout with their comments than individuals. 

Dr. Grubb said he doubts if the proposed best management practices contain anything that the water industry is unaware of.   For example, some proposed municipal best management practices include retrofit and use of high-efficiency showerheads and other fixtures. This is included in the 2001 LERWPG plan. 

Mr. Josserand suggested that the public be informed of any objectionable best management practices through newspaper articles, letters to the editor, radio spots, and TV spots.  Mr. Conkwright recommended that Chairman Brown, Mr. Montgomery, and Mr. Everheart be appointed as a subcommittee to condense the best management practices and disseminate the four or five talking points to the appropriate entities.

Mr. Montgomery reported that the industry group is considering 14 best management practices for recommendation.  Within the draft language, all references to “will” have been replaced with “should” or “should consider.”  There are no mandatory requirements being placed in these recommendations. 

He expressed concern that some regulatory body will adopt the best management practice as the rule.  Most of the regional planning group members agreed.  Most of the recommended best management practices are procedures and techniques that have already been promoted within the High Plains region. Mr. Brown is concerned about how the manner in which they will be implemented and whether or not they will be cost-effective for producers. 

Mr. Montgomery distributed and explained a flow chart depicting the implementation process.  The best management practices and public policies should be treated as resources for the regional water planning groups to develop a plan. It is up to the planning group to decide if all, part, or none of the best management practices are to be incorporated into the plan.  They should only be “tools” in a water planning “toolbox.”

There was a question if water well metering was a water conservation best management practices.  As an agricultural producer, Mr. Ellison said he feels well metering will restrict water use.  He said that before one can conserve water, one must know the amount of water being used.  Once that is determined, there is a big fear among agricultural producers that there will be restrictions placed on water pumpage based on historical use.  He said he feels that it is important to show producers how water conservation can save money and make their farming operation more profitable.  The LESA and LEPA technologies have been readily adopted because they conserve water and help producers be more profitable.  He said water meters on every well would not achieve the same results.  Water meters only document the amount of water being used and that documentation may be used against the farmer at a later date. 

Scott Orr of the High Plains Water District staff stated that there are 30 pages of agricultural best management practices dealing with irrigation applications.  Most of these are “tried and true” practices that have come from the NRCS handbooks.  He expressed concern about the inconsistent use of the wording “should” and “shall” within these best management practices.  Mr. Orr said most of the proposed best management practices are currently included in the 2001 regional water plan.  Mr. Montgomery said the consultant is trying to correct the inconsistent “should” and “shall” language among the various best management practices. 

Chairman Brown noted that June 1 is the end of the comment period on the proposed best management practices.  It may be difficult to disseminate information about the best management practices through district newsletters and other publications. He appointed a subcommittee consisting of himself, Harvey Everheart, Gene Montgomery, Sukant Misra, and Cleon Namken to review the agricultural best management practices and offer comments. 

12.     The LERWPG will receive an update on the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) agricultural water conservation program, created by Senate Bill 1053, 78^th Texas Legislature.

Ms. McKinnon reported that requests for proposals for this demonstration project and other smaller grant funding were posted March 19.  The TWDB has 60 days to respond on the demonstration project and 30 days on the smaller grant funding.   Texas Tech is expected to apply for funding for the demonstration project and other smaller grants.  Dr. Misra provided additional information about the project to the regional water planning group members. 

LUNCH

Chairman Brown called a lunch recess at 12:30 p.m.  The meeting was reconvened at 1:14 p.m. 

13.     The LERWPG will receive a report and presentation on the TWDB’s stream flow assessment methodology and report format, and discuss and take appropriate action on Stream Flow Assessment of Appropriate Control Points.

Ms. McKinnon stated that surface water is not a major aspect of Region O, but she wanted the regional water planning group members to have the opportunity to comment on the methodology being considered by the TWDB. 

She reviewed a hard copy of a TWDB PowerPoint presentation about the stream flow assessment.  The regions are being asked to comment on the proposed methodology, determine the specific location of control points within the river basin(s), help identify strategies that may affect stream flow, and select statistics and format of results. 

There was some question regarding surface water and ground water interaction relating to spring flow and whether or not this methodology would address this.  Dr. Rainwater said there has been little or no research on spring flow from the aquifer escarpment in decades. 

Since the TWDB will be running analyses for the state water plan anyway, Dr. Grubb suggested the LERWPG adopt the same control points/data for the Brazos River basin. The same information would be made available to the regional water planning group. 

After discussion, it was the consensus of the group to accept Dr. Grubb’s suggestion. 

14.     The LERWPG will receive a report from the cost effective flow measurement committee.

Ms. McKinnon reported that a committee consisting of Delaine Baucum, Mr. Conkwright, Mr. Ellison, Mr. Everheart, and Mr. Montgomery are investigating and evaluating various direct and indirect flow measurement methods that can be implemented on center pivot systems.   The 17-page application for submission to the TWDB in mid-April asks for funding to conduct a study looking at different methods to measure flow (direct and indirect) and compare the different technologies for cost and accuracies.  Mr. Montgomery noted that extreme accuracy is not needed to achieve water conservation. Positive or negative changes in the measurement will indicate whether conservation is being achieved or not. 

He added that the measuring devices would be installed on Mr. Ellison’s pivot, north of Seagraves, and real-time data would be transmitted through the OxyPermian control system to their office in Denver City. The resulting data would be evaluated and correlated. 

A motion to send a LERWPG resolution of support to the TWDB for this grant project was made by Mr. Josserand and seconded by Mr. Steiert. All voted “aye,” and the motion unanimously passed.  Ms. McKinnon said that while the due date for this proposal is April 19, she felt sure that the TWDB would accept letters of support beyond this date.

15.     Status report by Consultant Herb Grubb with HDR Engineering.

Dr. Grubb called the planning group’s attention to the handout, “Status Report, Llano Estacado Regional Water Planning Group.”   

The TWDB has approved population projections and water demand projections for Region O in March and September 2003, respectively.   The LERWPG has requested the TWDB to run the Southern Ogallala ground water availability model (GAM) and provide computations of quantities of ground water available to meet projected water demands.  In addition, the LERWPG has asked the TWDB to provide GAM run information showing the quantities of water for each river basin area in each county for 2004, 2010, 2020, 2030, 2040, 2050, and 2060. 

Dr. Grubb also reported that progress is being made toward computing the water needs of the water user groups.  As soon as the water availability information is released, the remainder of the calculations of need (shortages) for other municipal water user groups and irrigation will be made.  The water management strategies will be updated as to, date needed, size of facilities needed, and costs.           

16.     Status Report by LERWPG Project Manager Temple McKinnon.

Ms. McKinnon said she had no other items to report on at this time.  Mr. Josserand expressed his appreciation to Ms. McKinnon for her good work serving as the liaison between the Llano Estacado Regional Water Planning Group and the TWDB. 

17.     Other Business: 

Chairman Brown commented on a recent report by the National Oceanic Group that stated that the Rio Grande Basin of New Mexico, including Taos and Santa Fe, is in an acute drought.

The group was reminded of several upcoming meetings of interest: 

·    The Senate Select Interim Committee on Water Policy will conduct an April 21 public hearing in Lubbock.  It begins at 10:30 a.m. at the Texas Tech University International Cultural Center, 601 Indiana Avenue. 

·    A June 15 symposium will be held at the State Capitol in Austin to commemorate the 100^th anniversary of the “Rule of Capture.”  Registration for the event is $25.  It is expected that several LERWPG members will attend. 

·    A July 9 meeting at Sul Ross State University in Alpine will discuss ground water leasing. Texas A&M University and Texas Cooperative Extension are co-sponsoring this event.  

·    A symposium, “High Plains Ground Water Resources:  Challenges and Opportunities,” will be held December 7-9 at the Lubbock Memorial Civic Center. 

18.     Adjourn

There being no additional business, Chairman Brown adjourned the meeting at 1:50 p.m

The above conveys my understanding of the issues discussed and conclusions reached.  I assume this understanding is correct until notice of the contrary is received.

Respectfully submitted, 

Jim Conkwright, Secretary-Treasurer

 

These minutes were approved by unanimous vote at the October 28 Llano Estacado Regional Water Planning Group meeting.