El Paso Municipal Water Supply: Availability, Development and Management

Bill Hutchison, Ph.D., P.E., P.G. Independent Groundwater Consultant

Public Service Board Meeting September 12, 2012

Planning Process
Compare supplies and demands decadally
2010 to 2060

If supplies > demand

No action needed

If supplies < demand

Needs Develop strategies to meet need

Overview
Discuss components of Regional Water Plan Discuss context of EPWU strategies Discuss how EPWU strategies fit into bigger state-wide picture (laws and regulations)

Major Components
Provided by TWDB
Demand projections

Developed by Regional Planning Group

Current Local Supplies Additional Local Supplies Future Imported Supplies

Per Capita Demand

2010 = 142 gpcd 2020 = 145 gpcd 2030 = 143 gpcd 2040 = 141 gpcd 2050 = 140 gpcd 2060 = 140 gpcd

Current Local Supplies

Rio Grande Diversion
Customer of local irrigation district

Groundwater
Hueco Bolson (East of Franklin Mountains) Mesilla Bolson (West of Franklin Mountains)

Current Local Supplies

Rio Grande Diversion
Customer of local irrigation district

Groundwater
Hueco Bolson (East of Franklin Mountains) Mesilla Bolson (West of Franklin Mountains)

Conjunctive Management of Surface Water and Groundwater

Surface Water Plants Hueco Wells Mesilla Wells

Conjunctive Use
Under Full River Allocation
Full Diversion Minimum Hueco Bolson Pumping

Conjunctive Use
Under Full River Allocation
Full Diversion Minimum Hueco Bolson Pumping

Under Drought Conditions

Low Diversion Maximum Hueco Bolson Pumping

EPWU Supply
140,000 130,000 120,000 110,000 100,000 Acre-Feet/yr 90,000 80,000 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0
5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000

27%

31%

16%
40,000

13%
30,000

6%
20,000

8%
10,000

60,000

50,000

35,000 30,000 25,000 25,000

25,000 25,000 70,000 75,000 80,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

3 Scenario

Reclaimed

Hueco

Mesilla

Rio Grande

10

2020 to 2060
Future Demands > Current Supply Define Needs Develop Strategies
Additional Local Supplies New Imported Supplies

Additional Local Supplies

Conservation
Reduction in Per Capita Use 3 gpcd/decade Assumes 125 gpcd in 2060 Supplies up to 22,000 AF/yr in 2060

Reclaimed
Increased by 6,000 AF/yr by 2060

11

Additional Local Supplies

Recharge of Treated Surface Water
5,000 AF/yr beginning in 2020

Treatment of Agricultural Drain Water

2,700 AF/yr beginning in 2020

Additional Local Supplies

Additional Conjunctive Use
Increased Rio Grande diversions (when available) and increased groundwater pumping during droughts 5,000 AF/yr in 2020 15,000 AF/yr in 2030 20,000 AF/yr 2040 to 2060

12

El Paso County Agricultural Demands

2010 = 247,111 AF/yr 2060 = 224,840 AF/yr

13

2040 to 2060
Future Demands > Current Supply + Additional Local Supply Define Needs Develop Strategies
New Imported Supplies

Potential Imported Supplies

Capitan Reef Aquifer and Upper Salt Basin
Diablo Farms in Hudspeth and Culberson Counties

Bone Spring-Victorio Peak Aquifer

Dell City Area in Hudspeth County

West Texas Bolson and Igneous Aquifers

Antelope Ranch in Jeff Davis and Presidio Counties Wildhorse Ranch in Culberson County

14

Dell City No PSB acres El Paso Diablo Farms ~ 29,000 acres Wildhorse ~ 21,000 acres Antelope ~ 25,000 acres

Importation Considerations
Distance (pipeline costs) Water quality (desalination) Current land ownership (PSB vs. non-PSB) Availability (quantity/sustainability)

15

2006 Regional Water Plan

Considered all four sites Developed 6 alternative scenarios
Alternative local supply amounts Alternative imported supply locations and amounts

Selected preferred alternative (Scenario 6)

Focused on Diablo Farms and Dell City Wildhorse and Antelope were considered for post-2060 supply

2011 Regional Water Plan

Compared to 2006 Regional Water Plan
Remained with Dell City and Diablo Farms Reduced importation amounts Delayed implementation Increased additional local supplies

16

Summary of Imported Supplies

2006 Regional Water Plan
Begin in 2030 Total in 2060 = 60,000 AF/yr

2011 Regional Water Plan

Begin in 2040 Total in 2060 = 30,000 AF/yr

17

Strategy Costs (2011 RWP)

Conservation Reclaimed Recharge of Surface Water Desalination of Ag Drain Water Expanded Conjunctive Use Importation from Dell City Importation from Diablo Farms $ 45/AF/yr $ 334/AF/yr $ 330/AF/yr $ 476/AF/yr $ 525/AF/yr $ 1,309/AF/yr $ 2,353/AF/yr

Key Questions
Why import groundwater?
Why not increase local supplies further?

Will locals in Far West Texas allow export of groundwater to El Paso?

18

Brief History
1921 First recognition of declining groundwater levels (limits on local groundwater) 1985 Wastewater effluent recharge project 1991 50 year Water Resource Management Plan (Boyle) 1991 Adopted Water Conservation Ordinance

Brief History
1992 Expanded surface water treatment capacity 2004 EPWU completed Hueco Bolson Groundwater Conditions Report 2006 Region E Plan update adopted 2007 EPWU completed KBH Desalination Plant

19

Limits on Local Supplies

Surface water
Drought Water rights Treatment capacity Transmission capacity

Groundwater
Groundwater levels Groundwater quality

20

21

22

25

22 SP1 401

23

100+ ft decline Stable since late 1980s

24

70+ ft decline Stable since early 1990s (plugged in 2009)

25

80+ ft decline Stable from late 1980s to early 2000s

26

ACE

27

70+ ft decline Stable/Recovering since early 1990s

Wastewater Effluent Groundwater Recharge Project

Fred Hervey Water Reclamation Plant Project started in 1985 Effluent used for:
Power Plant Cooling Golf Course Irrigation Hueco Bolson Recharge (> 70,000 AF since 1985)

28

29

30

Current Conditions
Groundwater Levels
Stabilized in most areas Slight recovery in some areas Slightly declining (again) in Mission Valley

Brackish Groundwater Intrusion

Being addressed through KBH Plant

31

Groundwater Flow w/o KBH

Well 39 - Airport 200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 1950 1960 1970 1980 Year 1990 2000 2010

Chloride (mg/l)

32

~ 75%

Groundwater Pumping w/ KBH

Groundwater Flow w/ KBH

33

KBH Desalination Plant

Redistribution of pumping (not an increase) when surface water is available Intercept brackish groundwater Protect fresh groundwater for increased pumping during drought periods

Previous Actions of PSB

Extended availability of local supplies
Conservation Ordinance Investment in additional surface water rights and treatment capacity Investment in wells Investment in desalination facilities Investment in transmission facilities Investments in data collection and model development

34

Since 1990
Reduction in per capita use Increases in surface water diversions Reduction in groundwater pumping

Since 2004
Evolving understanding of limits of Hueco Bolson
Investments in test hole and well drilling Investments in data collection Investments in model development and application

Regional Water Plan updates in 2006 and 2011 reflect the improved understanding

35

Next Regional Water Plan

Due in 2016 (every 5 years) Expect continued evolution
Operational data Groundwater level and quality data Model update Model simulations

Local Supply Takeaways

Conjunctive management of surface and groundwater provides for availability during droughts
Limits (physical, institutional, infrastructure) Continued investments will better define and overcome these limitations

Planned use of local supplies increased between 2006 and 2011 Regional Water Plan

36

Key Questions
Why import groundwater?
Why not increase local supplies further?

Will locals in Far West Texas allow export of groundwater to El Paso?

Acronyms
GCD = Groundwater Conservation District GMA = Groundwater Management Area DFC = Desired Future Condition MAG = Modeled Available Groundwater

37

Groundwater Conservation Districts

First districts formed in early 1950s Local management of groundwater resources Preferred method of groundwater management Currently 99 districts

38

Groundwater Management Areas

SB 2 (2001)
TWDB designated 16 GMAs Voluntary joint planning within a GMA

39

1 2 3 4 10 13 16 7
9

6 8 11
12

14

Groundwater Management Areas (GMAs)

15

HB 1763 (2005)
Regionalized groundwater planning Required joint planning
GCDs within a GMA were required to establish desired future conditions (DFC) by September 1, 2010

40

Desired Future Condition (DFC)

Quantified conditions of groundwater resources Specified time or times in the future Broad Policy Goal
Drawdown Spring flow Storage volumes

Updated at least every 5 years

DFC Factors (some)

The water supply needs and water management strategies included in the state water plan Socioeconomic impacts reasonably expected to occur The impact on the interests and rights in private property, including ownership and the rights of management area landowners

41

In Addition.
The desired future conditions must provide a balance between
the highest practicable level of groundwater production and the conservation, preservation, protection, recharging, and prevention of waste of groundwater and control of subsidence in the management area.

Modeled Available Groundwater (MAG)

Pumping that will achieve the DFC TWDB calculates based on DFC
Models

Included in GCD Management Plans One factor in permitting decisions Replaces Groundwater Availability in Regional Water Plans

42

Relevant DFCs
Adopted on August 13, 2010 by GMA 4 Diablo Farms area
Capitan Reef = 50 ft drawdown by 2060 Upper Salt Basin = 50 ft drawdown by 2060

Dell City area

Bone Spring-Victorio Peak = 0 ft drawdown

Relevant MAGs (Issued by TWDB)

Dell City = 101,429 AF/yr
PSB pumping projected at 20,000 AF/yr in 2060

Diablo Farms area = 24,414 AF/yr

PSB pumping projected at 10,000 AF/yr in 2060

Note that PSB pumping in both areas would represent change in use of current pumping
Contrast to new pumping Would require permits

43

Importation Takeaways
Importation more expensive than local supplies Limitations on local supplies may lead to importation at some time in the future
Continue to improve understanding of local supply limitations 2011 plan vs. 2006 plan = 10 year deferral and 50% reduction in amount

Importation Takeaways
By including potential PSB importation projects in Regional Water Plan
GCDs must consider as part of DFC Included in MAG Included in GCD management plan Eligible for financing from TWDB

44

El Paso Municipal Water Supply: Availability, Development and Management

Overall Summary
Availability
Limitations on local groundwater supplies were first recognized in 1921 Since 1990, actions and investments have resulted in a diverse portfolio of water resources Conjunctive management provides for availability during drought conditions

45

Overall Summary
Development
Expected population growth will result in increased water demands Continued need for infrastructure Continued need for non-traditional local supplies (re-use?) Continued need for data collection and analytical tools

Overall Summary
Management
Local water resources are limited
Physical Institutional Infrastructure

PSB investments have defined and helped overcome these limitations PSB is an active participant in regional water planning

46

Questions?

Bill Hutchison 512-745-0599 billhutch@texasgw.com

47