Water Resources Review Committee (08/11/2015)

Final
STAFF SUMMARY OF MEETING

WATER RESOURCES REVIEW COMMITTEE

Date:	08/11/2015	ATTENDANCE

Time:	06:00 PM to 07:52 PM	Arndt	X
		Baumgardner	X
Place:	Salida Community Center	Becker J.	E
		Coram	X
This Meeting was called to order by		Hodge	X
	Senator Roberts	Jones	X
		Mitsch Bush	X
This Report was prepared by		Sonnenberg	X
	Greg Sobetski	Vigil	X
		Roberts	X
		X = Present, E = Excused, A = Absent, * = Present after roll call

Bills Addressed:		Action Taken:
Legislative Intent of Senate Bill 14-115 Concerning the State Water Plan Overview of the Second Draft of the Colorado Water Plan Arkansas River Basin Roundtable Basin Implementation Plan Public Testimony		- - - -

06:00 PM -- Legislative Intent of Senate Bill 14-115 Concerning the State Water Plan

Senator Roberts called the meeting to order and a roll call vote was taken. Senator Roberts explained the purpose of Senate Bill 14-115, which directs the committee to collect public feedback on drafts of the state water plan. The members of the committee introduced themselves. At the invitation of the chair, members of the committee discussed their interest in water and their objectives for the meeting.

06:14 PM

Senator Roberts encouraged members of the public to share feedback on the state water plan either through public testimony, written forms, or online feedback forms available on the committee's website. She then introduced Rebecca Mitchell, who presented information on the second draft of the state water plan.

06:16 PM -- Overview of the Second Draft of the Colorado Water Plan

Rebecca Mitchell, Water Supply Planning Section Chief, Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB), introduced herself and presented information on the second draft of the state water plan. She gave the history of the state water plan, which was requested of the CWCB by Governor Hickenlooper in May of 2013. She explained that the CWCB has drafted the plan with attention to the values stated in the executive order authorizing the plan. The most recent draft of the state water plan, the second draft, was released on July 7, 2015. The final plan will be released on December 10, 2015, and members of the public are requested to provide feedback by September 17, 2015, in order to allow feedback to be included in preparation of the final plan.

06:20 PM

Ms. Mitchell listed sections of the plan that she considered to be of interest to persons in the Arkansas River Basin. These included Sections 6.2, 6.3.3, 6.5, 9.4, and 9.5, as well as Chapters 7, 8, and 10. Ms. Mitchell explained that Chapter 10, concerning the critical action plan, contains about 80 critical actions that will require the participation of federal, state, and local partners. These actions were selected to support seven themes identified by the CWCB during its preparation of the state plan. She also explained that Chapter 10 includes a timeline for completion of each action, which the CWCB views as proactive and realistic. She encouraged members of the public to submit comments via the CWCB's online feedback form, or by email, by September 17.

06:28 PM

Senator Roberts explained that the committee is visiting sites in each major river basin in the state in order to gather feedback on the state plan. She thanked committee members for their participation in the Senate Bill 14-115 hearing process. She also explained that the committee will consider introducing legislation to address concerns raised by members of the public at these meetings. She also acknowledged and thanked staff for their service.

06:31 PM -- Arkansas River Basin Roundtable Basin Implementation Plan

Jim Broderick, Chairman, Arkansas River Basin Roundtable, welcomed members of the committee to the Arkansas River Basin and presented information regarding the Arkansas River Basin Roundtable Basin Implementation Plan (BIP). He thanked members of the roundtable for their participation in the production of the BIP, which consists of 525 recommendations. Some of these are ready for implementation, while others are only conceptual at this stage.

06:34 PM

Mr. Broderick enumerated the priorities of the basin, including agriculture, municipal and industrial use, recreation, and conservation. He expressed the roundtable's belief that each of these priorities requires the implementation of additional water storage. He explained that the basin both imports water from and exports water to other river basins, and that the roundtable therefore has a conflicted view of trans-mountain diversions.

06:37 PM

Mr. Broderick stated the roundtable's belief in the importance of promoting watershed health. He explained that the committee is attempting to utilize grassroots mechanisms to attain this objective, since many grassroots mechanisms are already in place in the basin. He also explained that the roundtable has not advocated many legislative solutions, as it prefers to address most issues at local levels.

06:40 PM

Mr. Broderick discussed the roundtable's approach to financing the projects it has identified. The roundtable recognizes that prioritizing funding for different programs is difficult, but considerations of financial priorities are explained in detail in the Arkansas BIP.

06:43 PM

Mr. Broderick explained the challenges of planning for wet and dry years simultaneously. He emphasized the importance of educating members of the public on basin water issues and the BIP, and stated that this remains an area of concern for the roundtable. He stated his support for multi-purpose funding mechanisms, but also contended that projects seeking funding must demonstrate that they will make progress toward reduction of the projected supply gap. He conveyed the roundtable's uncertainty about the strategic actions it will take after the final version of the

state water plan is published. Finally, he discussed the importance of expanded water storage not only for the sake of increased storage capacity, but also for flexibility in basin water planning and the strategic movement of water from one part of the basin to another.

06:51 PM

Senator Roberts thanked Mr. Broderick for his presentation and encouraged members of the public to provide feedback on the state water plan through public testimony.

06:52 PM -- Public Testimony

Tom Goodwin, representing himself, discussed the importance of food production. He explained that the share of personal income spent on food has decreased over the past several decades, but that the loss of agriculture could lead to rising food prices and loss of disposable income that consumers spend on other products. He stated his support for additional storage on the Eastern Slope.

06:56 PM

Bob Senderhauf, Chairman, Upper Arkansas Water Conservancy District, thanked Senator Roberts and the committee for visiting a water project in his district.

06:58 PM

Kip Petersen, Vice President, Pikes Peak Regional Water Authority, stated his district's concern regarding the security of its water supply. He presented information on the history of his district, and explained that the changing economy has spurred the district to seek water supply outside of its traditional sources (Attachment A). He thanked the CWCB and basin roundtables for their work on the plan.

Attachment A.pdf

07:01 PM

Mr. Petersen stated his organization's support for the water plan. He explained that unnecessary reviews and studies could delay the district's provision of water improvements to customers. He spoke in opposition to duplicate analysis, and stated that federal permitters should support and expedite projects identified as critical by the state. He also called for additional outside review of projects identified in the water plan that appear to benefit only Denver Water. He also expressed his concern that the plan may disincentivize partners from taking actions not mandated in the plan, as the plan does not appear to recognize past successes except as history.

07:04 PM

Mr. Petersen suggested that all means to increase municipal water supply, including especially direct potable water reuse, ought to be explored before expansion of trans-mountain diversions. He conveyed his district's concern that the plan focuses on municipal and industrial use, while not emphasizing agricultural use, which is much more extensive.

07:07 PM

Dick Brown, representing Pikes Peak Regional Water Authority, stated his support for Senate Bill 14-115 and thanked the committee for conducting public hearings to gather feedback on the state water plan. Mr. Brown stated that funding projects in the state plan would require multi-year financing, which could be difficult for the

legislature because of restrictions on long-term financing, including restrictions in the Taxpayer's Bill of Rights. He called for the state to provide financial support to farmers participating in water conservation, including via tax credits or other tax incentives. Finally, he called for extensive involvement of local actors.

07:11 PM

Mr. Petersen spoke on his experience as a planning director in Teller County. He explained that, in his experience, there was very little concern paid to discharge of mineral waste from mines, and suggested that assistance from the state would be necessary to resolve waste management issues resulting from the mineral waste discharge on the Animas River.

07:16 PM

Bob Kattnic, representing himself, stated his view that water is a human right and ought to be held in the public trust. He also stated his support for private property rights. He also suggested that the state's water supply has a human carrying capacity, and that an ideal population would be below the carrying capacity in order to preserve a healthy state. He stated his support for additional storage to reserve precipitation in wet years so that it can be used in dry years.

07:21 PM

Dr. Kattnic suggested that California's growth and political muscle would eventually lead it to draw more water from Colorado's Pacific drainage. He stated his concern that this could restrict the state's ability to divert water from the Western Slope to the Eastern Slope in years to come. He expressed his belief in the importance of irrigation, explaining that, without irrigation, the Wet Mountain Valley in Custer County would look like South Park. He stated his belief that Colorado is not an agricultural state, but rather a municipal state, and that water would eventually follow money to the detriment of the state's agriculture industry.

07:25 PM

Dr. Kattnic thanked the committee for its attention to his comments. He suggested that water planning would require prioritizing competing interests, and that the state only had one chance to create a successful plan.

07:28 PM

Drew Peternell, representing Trout Unlimited, introduced himself and his organization. He stated that, while Trout Unlimited has not completed its review of the state plan, it supports the portions of the plan that it has reviewed. Mr. Peternell conveyed Trout Unlimited's belief that the state ought to consider ideal stream flow rates through stream management plans, and stated his support for the inclusion of stream management plans in the current draft of the state plan. He suggested that these plans are underfunded in the status quo. He stated his organization's support for the emphasis on agricultural efficiency in the plan, and called for additional commitment of funds to these programs. He thanked the committee for its participation in the state water planning process.

07:34 PM

Brett Gracely, representing Colorado Springs Utilities, introduced himself and his utility, which is a full-service utility with experience in the energy and water nexus. He explained that his utility is the largest in the Arkansas Basin. Mr. Gracely explained his utility's engagement in two major projects, including delivery of water from Pueblo Reservoir to the east and northeast side of Colorado Springs and the utility's development of its own long-term plan.

07:38 PM

Mr. Gracely presented the utility's perspective on the state water plan (Attachment B). The utility believes that the plan ought to recognize that projects occur simultaneously, and often lack coordination with one another. Additionally, while the utility supports conservation, it believes that the level of conservation advocated in the plan will be difficult to achieve quickly because no court order or executive action can drive conservation at such a pace.

Attachment B.pdf

07:41 PM

Mr. Gracely discussed the utility's prior experience with multi-year trade, wherein the utility has traded presently available water for future commitments from other water right holders. He explained that these types of trades require the flexibility afforded by additional storage capacity. The utility also believes that navigating diverse regulations promulgated by different agencies can be difficult, particularly for smaller water providers, which will be a hindrance to the progress of projects identified in the water plan. Mr. Gracely explained that different BIPs have different goals and are, at times, in conflict with one another, which could lead to future inconsistencies in planning.

07:46 PM

Julie Nania, representing High Country Conservation Advocates, explained her organization's experience with heavy metal waste in the water supply of its town, Crested Butte. Ms. Nania explained that Crested Butte's water supply, Coal Creek, is listed as contaminated with heavy metals from mining, including cadmium and zinc. Coal Creek is treated via a water treatment facility that is required to operate in perpetuity, despite the plant's 1981 opening date and the financial difficulties faced by its owner and operator, U.S. Energy. Ms. Nania called for the state to revisit bonding to finance water quality projects. She explained that, under current law, the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment may utilize bonds, but that these are rare in practice and could require legislative review.

07:52 PM

Senator Roberts closed public testimony and thanked members of the public for their participation. The meeting was adjourned.