Federal Colorado River framework could mean deeper water pressure for Arizona

A federal environmental review released July 31 outlines a framework under which Arizona, California and Nevada could collectively reduce their Colorado River use by up to 3 million acre-feet a year through 2036. Arizona officials objected to the framework, saying it places mandatory reductions on Lower Basin users, gives priority treatment to senior California rights and includes no mandatory reductions for the Upper Basin.

The document does not immediately cut Arizona’s water supply. It is a Final Environmental Impact Statement, not the final operating rule or allocation decision. The next major step is a federal Record of Decision and operating guidelines that the Arizona Department of Water Resources says will establish operations through 2028 and a framework for the following eight years.

What the federal framework says

The Final Environmental Impact Statement is part of the federal post-2026 process. Existing documents governing key Colorado River operations, including the 2007 Interim Guidelines and 2019 Drought Contingency Plans, are scheduled to expire at the end of 2026.

The federal framework analyzes potential reductions for the three Lower Basin states. It does not include mandatory reductions for Colorado, New Mexico, Utah or Wyoming, although the federal process covers the entire basin and the Upper Basin states have continued to participate in the negotiations.

The potential maximum is a collective Lower Basin reduction of 3 million acre-feet annually. An acre-foot is about 326,000 gallons. The figure applies to Arizona, California and Nevada together, not to Arizona alone. According to the Associated Press, the actual reductions would be determined every two years based on conditions throughout the basin.

The framework would divide part of the reductions under an existing three-state plan before applying water-right priorities. Those priorities generally benefit senior California users over users with lower-priority rights in Arizona and Nevada, according to the Associated Press. Arizona is contesting that approach.

Why Arizona is objecting

The Arizona Department of Water Resources called the framework’s “sideboards” unacceptable. The department cited the potential for up to 3 million acre-feet in annual Lower Basin reductions, the priority treatment of certain California rights and the absence of mandatory Upper Basin reductions.

ADWR said Arizona will continue working with the federal government, tribes, agricultural interests, municipalities and other Colorado River Basin states while preserving the state’s legal rights. The department also said the forthcoming federal documents will provide the operational details.

The Associated Press reported that Arizona has some of the lowest-priority rights in the Lower Basin and that Arizona officials consider the framework flawed. The Upper Basin states have argued that mandatory reductions there could conflict with the Colorado River Compact. The July 31 framework does not impose mandatory Upper Basin reductions.

What it could mean for Arizona residents

The July 31 document does not order an immediate household water shutoff. The practical issue for residents is what utilities and water agencies might have to do if Colorado River deliveries become less reliable or more expensive under the final rules.

Possible responses include using more groundwater, expanding wastewater treatment, buying replacement supplies or pursuing other sources that can cost more than Colorado River deliveries. The Associated Press reported that cities in metro Phoenix do not rely entirely on the river and are likely to keep taps running, but that some water rates could rise as agencies replace or supplement Colorado River supplies.

Central Arizona Project is a key part of that exposure. CAP operates a 336-mile system that supplies Colorado River water to central and southern Arizona, including the state’s most populated regions. CAP customers, municipalities and other providers will need to watch the federal decision, future operating guidelines and their own supply and rate notices.

Farmers and tribal water users could face additional pressure over deliveries, conservation and water prices. Agriculture in Yuma and other parts of Arizona is connected to Colorado River supplies, and reduced deliveries could contribute to fallowing or more expensive replacement water. Those are potential consequences, not outcomes ordered by the FEIS.

Arizona’s alternative proposal

Arizona’s preferred short-term approach is outlined in the Lower Division States’ May 1 proposal for operations through 2028. The proposal calls for Arizona, California and Nevada to share 1.25 million acre-feet in reductions in each of 2027 and 2028. It also calls for a minimum cumulative 700,000 acre-feet of additional system conservation during the implementation term, with a goal of exceeding that amount if possible.

Under the proposal, Arizona’s indicated annual reduction contribution would be 760,000 acre-feet, compared with 440,000 acre-feet for California and 50,000 acre-feet for Nevada. That figure belongs to Arizona’s alternative proposal; it is not a reduction assigned to Arizona by the federal FEIS.

The proposal says the reductions and conservation commitments depend on operational, financial and implementation terms. It is voluntary and non-precedential, and it preserves the states’ legal claims and defenses.

What happens next

The federal Record of Decision and operating guidelines will determine the binding operational details for the initial period through 2028. They are also expected to establish a framework for the next eight years.

Arizona and other basin interests may continue negotiating over reductions, conservation funding, water-right priorities and implementation agreements. Litigation remains possible if states or water users conclude that the final federal action conflicts with existing law or agreements.

For Arizona residents, the immediate development is the Final Environmental Impact Statement released July 31, not a completed statewide water cut. The consequences will depend on the federal Record of Decision, the operating guidelines, future river conditions and how Arizona utilities, farms, tribes and other water users respond.

Sources

Discover more from Interactive News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.