Print
Category: Front Page News Front Page News
Published: 12 October 2018 12 October 2018

[Editor's Note: Apologies for this late publication. We are trying to catch up!]

By Mary Alice Murphy

After a few corrections to the minutes of the September meeting, New Mexico Central Arizona Project Entity Board members heard public comments at their Oct. 2, 2018 meeting.

Gerald Schultz said he was representing the Coronado Resource Conservation and Development District out of Truth or Consequences. 

"Some time back, the Black Range RC&D went out of business and the Coronado took over this whole area," Schultz said. He said the various RC&D districts were attempting to work together, but he didn't yet have the updated information, "but I know you can apply for funding."

The organization intends to put on a seminar on: How does this organization adapt to a hotter and drier climate? The event will be held in January.

"I will keep bringing you this information and to supply knowledge about water," Schultz said. "Even when I don't get here, I watch it on TV. I'm very focused on what is being said."

Allyson Siwik of the Gila Conservation Coalition informed the board members that the Grant County Water Commission was to meet that afternoon to discuss the regional water project that would reach from Hurley to Silver City. "I remain shocked that the ISC and the CAP Entity continue to withhold funding for this regional project." She alleged the funds are being inequitably directed to a New Mexico Unit, which will benefit only a few, as well as the large publicly traded copper company in the area. The AWSA (Arizona Water Settlements Act) funding was dedicated to residents of the four-counties. "It should be spent to provide water security to the 60,000 residents of the region."

The next item on the agenda was an update on the CAP Entity's proposed action for a New Mexico Unit from David Maxwell of Stantec Engineering. It addressed the information provided to the joint leads, the EIS schedule and the technical memos

[Editor's Note: The documents have been uploaded to www.nmcapentity.org. Most are under reference documents, including some received since the meeting.]

Maxwell presented the executive summary, which highlighted recent dates. June 30, 2018, the updated proposed action was submitted to the CAP Entity; July 5, 2018, an amended proposed action was submitted. Between July 2-July 13, public meetings were held to gather feedback. An alternative development meeting was held among the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, the New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission and the NEPA contractor, EMPSI. Technical memos followed in August and September. Revisions to the proposed action were approved by the CAP Entity Board on Sept. 4, 2018, and other technical memos were provided to Reclamation.

[Author's Note: Please refer to http://www.nmcapentity.org/documents/presentations/128-stantec-cap-executive-summary-for-oct-2-2018-meeting for table information included in this article.]

"At this point, the additional information needed by Reclamation is related to interviews with affected landowners pertaining to acquisition of right-of-way needed for the proposed action," the executive summary stated.

"We know the executive director is working on that," Maxwell said.

He then briefly talked about the summary of priority responses to data gaps, the surface diversion structure type, the diversion locations and storage in the various locations (all of which can be viewed in detail in the posted documents).

"Stantec has recommended a fixed crest weir with riffle rundown at the Upper Gila Diversion Site and the Spurgeon Diversion site on the San Francisco River," Maxwell said. "The recommendation is based on concerns regarding maintenance and operation of the other two alternatives, as well as a lower construction cost."

He said the Jordan-Shelley property is a recommended location on the Gila, because it has a willing property owner. "We are still considering The Nature Conservancy site."

Also under consideration is the integration of the Gila Basin Irrigation Commission proposal into the proposed action. "We don't have a design to look and we will have to look at it for capacity. We have verified a feasible alignment for the Fort West Ditch extension. It will require a 45-foot easement through three properties."

The Gila Farms-Fort West connector locations would provide 25 cfs with easement through two properties.

He noted that water out of ponds 2P and 3P, which feed to aquifer-storage-recharge (ASR) pumps, would be automatically measured and recorded in order to ensure only AWSA water is pumped and to measure seepage and evaporation. The proper depth of the ponds has to be analyzed.

Proposed production wells in the Cliff-Gila Valley would pump only AWSA water, which would also be measured and recorded. An equivalent amount of water would be released from storage into the river.

Maxwell said the Papadopulos and Associates reports, as well as a TNC report, showed that groundwater levels varied from three feet to 32 feet below the pond bottoms in the Cliff-Gila Valley and from 10 feet to 40 feet in the Virden Valley area.

He said ponds would begin to fill up from December to March but the levels would begin to go down from March into April, which would escalate from May to June. "Unless flows in the river are unusually high during late summer or early fall, the ponds will continue to empty. The models do not include precipitation during this period, which would benefit the irrigators."

Maxwell noted that when the ponds are full, water may flow through them because of lack of storage.

The yield models for the various projects on the Gila, the San Francisco and in the Virden Valley can be found on the www.nmcapentity.org website.

Joe Runyan, representing the Gila Farm Ditch, asked if the ponds were full, would there be an opportunity to put the water back into the river for the use of downstream users. "And could we refill the ponds during good seasons?"

Maxwell said most of the water, according to the historic record occurs in December to March. "If you have a greenhouse or a winter crop, water could be used in those months. You would still have to pay for the exchange costs, but the water that returns to the river will get credits."

Vance Lee, representing Hidalgo County, asked if the ponds would be lined to prevent as much seepage.

"Yes, they will be lined, except for 2P and 3P, which will be used for ASR," Maxwell said.

Van "Bucky" Allred, representing Catron County, asked if Winn Canyon (the largest proposed storage site of about 2,500 acre-feet of water) would be lined or unlined.

Maxwell said the proposed action has it as unlined.

He noted the model of scheduling and allocation of diverted water shows the percent of time daily that water is available for irrigation in each month of the year in each storage location.

Executive Director Anthony Gutierrez said because of the amount of land with the need for AWSA water in the Cliff-Gila Valley, the demand is higher in that location. "The less time you hold the water, the higher percentage is available. "

Maxwell said the acreage demand in the Cliff-Gila Valley is about 1,000 acres, with about 150 acres of demand in the Virden Valley.

Lee asked where the 150 acres had come from, as the area has about 2,500 acres under cultivation.

Gutierrez said about 150 acres have no adjudicated water rights, and the 1,000 acres in the Cliff-Gila Valley are also non-adjudicated or fallow.

Lee said Virden has about 150 acres that can be irrigated from the planned storage amount.

Maxwell said AWSA diversions would take place mostly in the shoulder months, with the adjudicated diversions taking water during the irrigation season.

A table (in the executive summary) shows the average river flows and average AWSA diversions by month.

 

The target demands for water at each of the three locations includes 1,000 acres, with about 3,000 acre-feet of water needed for the demand in the Cliff-Gila Valley; the 150 acres in the Virden Valley would require about 450 acre-feet of storage; and in the San Francisco Valley, 415 acres with 1,411 acre-feet of storage required.

Because the electrical load for the Winn Canyon booster pumps, the ASR production well pumps and the two conventional well pumps exceed the load capacity of the existing overhead power line, the reconstruction/rehabilitation of the three-phase power line would be required and is included in the scope of work for the proposed action.

AWSA wells in the Cliff-Gila and San Francisco valleys would have to be permitted like any other conventional production well by the Office of the State Engineer. Because of nearby private wells to some of the production wells, protests are likely, Maxwell said.

In order to keep AWSA water and adjudicated water "separate," measuring and monitoring will be required with close coordination with the OSE.

During storm events, any runoff water stored while AWSA diversion is allowed under the Consumptive Use and Forbearance Agreement (CUFA) may be counted as AWSA water. Any water stored while CUFA would not allow AWSA diversion must be treated as other impounded flood water and released within 96 hours of the storm event. These various "types" of water will have to be measured and accounted separately.

In the three diversion and storage locations, about 37 percent of the diverted water will be lost to seepage. Return flows to the river from irrigation have not been quantified at this point in the analyses but could be a significant portion of the water that is diverted, Maxwell said.

ISC's Ali Effati, who attended by telephone, said AECOM had produced return flow estimates and they were now posted on the ISC website. http://www.ose.state.nm.us/Basins/Colorado/isc_AWSA.php

New Mexico State University in 2014 did a study on crops that could benefit from the AWSA allocated water. The crops and their water needs are listed in the following table.

Maxwell said for the crop mixes, growers could expand their acreage and expand to higher value crops with a more reliable water source from storage. "We could see more pecan trees."

He said a mix of irrigation methods could be used, with about 17 percent sprinkler or drip and the rest flood irrigation. He said he has also been asked to provide which ditch segments should be lined. "We walked the ditches and considered which riparian areas should remain with ditches unlined. About one-third should be lined, with the rest to remain unlined (for the benefit of riparian habitat)."

Maxwell said the schedule for the draft EIS begins the first two weeks in October. The draft EIS should be available by Feb. 7 to accept public comment through April. When public comment closes, the final EIS will incorporate comments. The final EIS deadline is July 16, 2019, with the record of decision expected Nov. 22, 2019.

Gutierrez noted the EIS updates were presented by Howard Hutchinson, representing the San Francisco Soil and Water Conservation District, to the Legislative Finance Committee the previous week at its meeting in Deming. "The board members who spoke on the changes had different points of view of how the project was benefitting our local area. We had questions from what I would describe as a non-hostile committee. Usually we get hammered from people who are pretty much opposed to the project."

Maxwell and Gutierrez will attend the U.S. Society of Irrigation and Drainage Professionals in Phoenix this coming month doing a presentation on the New Mexico CAP Entity's proposed action. The presentation will be on challenges to the project and challenges to issues with the federal moneys. "We will also attend the NM ISC meeting to talk about the JPA amendment."

ISC Attorney Dominique Work, attending by telephone, said the ISC had moved its meeting to Oct. 5, and the JPA amendment was not on the agenda. She said the ISC would have to have a meeting in late October or early November. "At the September meeting of the Entity, members asked for the attorneys to have conversations on the amendment. We've all been very busy, but it should happen before a decision is made."

Gutierrez said Marcos Mendiola, non-voting member of the CAP Entity, representing the ISC, had sent an email saying the contract with AECOM would end June 30, 2019. "Since this board has chosen to have Stantec provide a lot of NEPA support, along with recommendations for potential components, we may have to enter into an additional RFP for design, and potentially into final design if we receive a favorable record of decision. I think we are near the constraints of our existing RFP, so next meeting, I will bring a document to receive services for design."

NM CAP Entity Chairwoman Darr Shannon said she would put it on the agenda. She also said she had received a lot of positive feedback about the LFC meeting and the good job the presenters had done. "I even had positive feedback from the assistant attorney general, who told me the reports were very well presented."

Gutierrez said he and Maxwell would be addressing concerns they had received in emails from Hutchinson.

"I would like to say about the email exchanges and the way we've been interacting with Mr. Gutierrez and Mr. Maxwell, with information that also goes to the ISC and Reclamation," Hutchinson said, "we get information and are asked to comment usually within 24-36 hours before they're supposed to be in the hands of the joint leads. I generate comments, and I get criticized because they say they are not of value because they address something that cannot be changed. If that is the case, why are we asked to comment? I have two levels of concern. One as a member of the CAP Entity board and second as a member of a cooperating agency on the EIS. As a board member I am one vote. As a cooperating agency representative, I have a different status and so do the other cooperating agencies. We should be recognized when we are moving forward elements for the action. We should be allowed to participate in the meeting with the joint leads as cooperating agencies. I don't appreciate getting criticized when we are not being notified of the meeting where the alternatives are being developed. If we are going to be ignored, then please tell us now. I don't appreciate getting criticized for commenting. I recognize if I made a comment on something that cannot be changed, that's OK. But if I have ideas that should be given equal consideration, I should be heard. Yes, it's up to the joint leads, but that's after a high level of work with the cooperating agencies. "

He said he wanted to address a couple of points made by Maxwell. "Why has the size of the diversion pipe from the Spurgeon diversion to Weedy Canyon storage gone back up to 48 inches. I think it will deliver more than we need to put water into storage. I didn't get a reason for the change back to four feet. If we're talking about 5,000 gallons a minute versus 10,000 gallons a minute, it would alter the power delivery demand."

Esker Mayberry, representing the Fort West Ditch, asked what the board needed to do to work with the Gila Basin Irrigation Commission on its project.

"I've been in discussion with GBIC engineers at Telesto," Gutierrez said. "I have requested that we be notified of the draft design of the GBIC project. The project has been entered and recommended as an alternative in the public scoping process. Once the alternatives have been solidified and if we decide the GBIC alternative is a viable design, then we could discuss it at our public meeting and bring to the board if we want to change the proposed action."

Lee asked if the entity, in getting rights-of-way, "which we need to come up with soon," anticipates paying for those rights of way.

"That's one of the issues right now," Gutierrez said. "Some may not want a right-of-way at all or only as part of a ditch re-alignment. They may want to get paid. We may have to negotiate after contacting them. We don't have an entity to do any type of condemnation process. We need to make contact and get input. I've been trying to contact individuals, but I may have to just go to their house and wait until I can talk to them. That's my priority No. 1 right now."

David McSherry, representing the city of Deming, said he realizes the focus is on getting the record of decision. "Can we start looking beyond that? I commend Mr. Maxwell for his thorough report and bringing to our attention the technical realities. One thing Mr. Maxwell said, I want to make clear to the irrigators to keep in mind, and that is the measurement devices, so we can account for separately the AWSA water and the adjudicated water, when it comes out of the river, when it enters the ponds and when it comes out of the ponds."

He said his family owns irrigation water rights on the Mimbres River. "When measuring devices were first brought up, there was an extreme level of disagreement on measuring. You need to be aware of that."

Shannon said because the next regular meeting would fall on Election Day, Nov. 6, she asked which date members would prefer, Monday, Nov. 5 or Wednesday, Nov. 7. The consensus was Wednesday, Nov. 7, for the next regular meeting at 10 a.m. at the Grant County Administration Center.