National Park 6/18/2013

Ron Doba, CPWAC Coordinator Deborah Tosline, Bureau of Reclamation Tom Whitmer, City of Cottonwood Partners   ADEQ  Hualapai Tribe  ADWR  National Park Service  AZ Game & Fish  Natural Resource Conservation District  AZ State Land Dept.  Natural Resources Conservation Service  Bureau of Reclamation  Navajo Nation  City of Flagstaff  Northern University  City of Page   City of Sedona San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe  City of Williams  The Nature Conservancy  Coconino County  Town of Tusayan  Doney Park Water Co.  U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service  Glen Canyon National Recreation Area  U.S. Forest Service  Grand Canyon National Park  Coconino National Forest  Grand Canyon Trust   Havasupai Tribe  U.S. Geological Survey  Hopi Tribe

Map of CPWAC Geographic Area Some of Our Accomplishments   North Central Arizona Water Supply Study completed (Appraisal Level) - 2006  Unanimous vote to pursue Feasibility Study-2006  At-Risk Water Resources Research Project - 2008  Developed a Comprehensive Water Ethic that incorporates environmental, social and cultural needs  Currently developing a Sustainable Water Management Framework for the  Hosted a screening of “The American Southwest: Are We Running Dry?” and discussion with Director Jim Thebaut.  Participating in USGS Regional Groundwater Flow Model

Adopted Water Ethic   Water is life. As individuals and as a community, we take responsibility for our region’s water. We value water for its social, cultural, and environmental roles. We have an ethical obligation to manage water and use it in a purposeful manner, recognizing our choices and their consequences. To quote Aldo Leopold, “A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends otherwise.”

Our Current Focus: Complete the North Central Arizona Water Supply Feasibility Study (Coconino County, Arizona Feasibility Study) Coconino Plateau Water Advisory Council Website http://cpwac.org North Central Arizona Water Supply Study Report of Findings October 2006

Northern Arizona Regional Study Area ARIZONA The Purpose of the Appraisal Study • Determine if there is an unmet water demand in the demand areas (projected to 2050).

• If there is a projected unmet water demand, determine if there is at least one regional alternative to meet future demands.

• Determine if there is a Federal objective in which there exists at least one regional plan that can be recommended to be carried forward into a Feasibility Study. Water Demand Centers

• Hopi Tribe • Navajo Nation • Flagstaff & surrounding area • Williams & surrounding area • Tusayan • Grand Canyon National Park

Is there a problem? Determine if there is an unmet water demand in the demand areas, projected to 2050.

-28,100 acre-feet of unmet water demand is projected in 2050.

- 790 acre-feet of unmet water demand is projected for the GCNP in 2050.

Is there a solution?

• If there is a projected unmet water demand, determine if there is at least one regional alternative to meet future demands.

- 6 regional alternatives identified - Components from 3 determined to be viable Identified Alternatives The Alternatives were Evaluated for:

Completeness – a Project that includes all the necessary parts and actions to produce the desired results.

Effectiveness – the extent to which a Project solves the stated problem and meets the goals and objectives of the WAC.

Efficiency - a Project that minimizes cost and is cost effective.

Acceptability - an acceptable Project to all decision makers and the public and is compatible with existing laws, regulations and public policies.t Viable Alternatives Is there a Federal Objective

• Determine if there is a Federal objective in which there exists at least one regional plan that can be recommended to be carried forward into a Feasibility Study.

The TAC has recommended that an EIS be completed as part of the Feasibility Evaluation.

The emphasis is on components from alternatives one thru three.

Expansion of the study area to include other demand centers such as Hopi Villages, Dilkon and Leupp can also happen during the Feasibility Study.

Feasibility Studies

• Feasibility Design Report • EIS • Economics

P.L. 109-451 Rural Water Supply Act of 2006

North Central Arizona Water Supply Feasibility Study (NCAWSFS)

The study consists of the viable components identified in the North Central Arizona Water Supply Appraisal Study.

. Lake Powell to Cameron . Moenkopi to Kykotsmovi . Cameron to Flagstaff . Flagstaff to Williams . Cameron to Grand Canyon and Tusayan . Red Gap Ranch . Williams Wells

NCAWSFS Background

– 2010 authorized under Rural Water Program

– Under Rural Water the NCAWSFS is referred to as “Coconino County, Arizona, Feasibility Study”.

– The study consists of features between Lake Powell and the City of Flagstaff, Arizona including spurs to Bitter Springs and Tuba City.

– Includes design of a new pipeline and appurtenant features including reservoir-side pumping plant, booster/re-lift plants, forebay tanks, water storage tanks, air changers regulating tanks, pressure reducing valves, valve vaults, and participant delivery vaults. NCAWSFS Partners

Feasibility Study Status Partners ADWR Cost share agreement in place City of Flagstaff Cost share agreement in place Navajo Nation Cost share agreement in place Coconino County Cost share agreement in place City of Page Cost share agreement in place Hopi Tribe Cost share agreement being developed GCNP Reconsidering becoming a participant NCAWSFS Partners NCAWSFS Federal Funds Received from Rural Water Program

– FY2010-FY2011 $500,000 – FY2011 additional $450,000 – FY2012 $1,400,000 – FY2012 additional $330,000

– Total federal funding to date $2,680,000

– No federal funding FY2014

North Central Arizona Water Supply Feasibility Study

Entity Cost Share Tasks Amount Provided to Date ADWR $250,000 Cash City of Flagstaff $1,980,305 Red Gap Ranch hydrogeologic investigations, groundwater modeling, pipeline alignment Navajo Nation ~$45,000 Page geotechnical analyses Coconino $46,695 Lidar data and aerial photos County City of Page $0 None to date NCAWSFS Federal Budget Update

Rural Water Policy Administrators:

– Need non-federal cash cost share commitments by June 28, 2013 for project to continue

– If project does not receive cash cost share commitments, must write a concluding report

– Project would be on hold until receipt of: • additional federal funding • cash cost share from Partners NCAWSFS Reclamation Phoenix Office FY2013 Proposed Tasks

• Process data from mapping Highway 89 to Tuba City into plan-and-profile drawings. • Award contract and perform mapping from Grey Mountain to . • Incorporate mapping data from Coconino County from Sunset Crater to Flagstaff into drawings. • Incorporate mapping data from City of Flagstaff from north edge of town to terminus at Wildcat treatment plant into drawings. • Execute 638 modification with Navajo for Page pipeline alignment analysis. • Award mapping contract from Page to LeChee. • Award geologic investigations test pits from Hwy 89 to Tuba City. • Award geologic investigations test pits from Grey Mountain to Flagstaff. • Initiate Soil Resistivity testing throughout alignment. • Survey pipeline alignments to ensure there are no unintended interferences along the route. • Continue developing plan and profile drawings. • Quantify water demand figures, based on population projections and daily water use, in order to optimize pipe size, pumping facilities, and power requirements. • Write scope of work for EIS. NCAWSFS Reclamation Phoenix Office FY2014 Proposed Tasks

• Plan and profile drawings from Gray Mountain to Flagstaff • Complete final alignment for Page area • Evaluate intake options • Finalize pipeline hydraulics • Scour studies for Hopi Tribe alignment

~$300,000 • Scour studies for Grand Canyon / Tusayan alignment • Geologic investigation along Hopi Tribe alignment • Geologic investigation along Grand Canyon / Tusayan alignment • Soil resistivity along the Navajo and Flagstaff pipeline sections - this would be contract work versus Reclamation labor and if extra funds are available or if issues arise that prevents completing other tasks, this item could be substituted. • Fly Hopi Tribe lateral for aerial mapping from Moenkopi to Keams Canyon (cost estimate $240,000.00) • Fly Grand Canyon / Tusayan lateral for aerial mapping (cost estimate $175,000.00) • If aerial topography for the Page - LeChee segment cannot be completed in FY2013, it would be flown in FY2014 (cost estimate $82,000.00) • Begin geologic investigations for pumping plants and structures ($200,000.00) • Prepare scope of work for Environmental Impact Statement ($32,000.00)

Proposed Cost Sharing for $300,000 Work Effort

Cost Share Table for $300,000 Needed to Continue Study

Totals Credits Revised Totals % Share Navajo $381,959 $69,000 $312,959 8% $24,810.17

Hopi $526,739 $526,739 14% $41,757.82

Flagstaff $2,995,305 $1,662,452 $1,332,853 35% $105,663.41

Williams $0 $0 0% $0.00 Grand Can. $756,285 $756,285 20% $59,955.34

Tusayan $406,862 $406,862 11% $32,254.44

Coconino Co. Sub.(flag) $308,647 $46,695 $261,952 7% $20,766.54 Page $65,033 $65,033 2% $5,155.56

Coconino Co. Sub.(Parks) $121,559 $121,559 3% $9,636.73

Total $5,562,389 $3,784,242 100% $300,000 NCAWSFS How to Participate

• Sign a cost share agreement with Reclamation • Verify demand and turnouts • Provide some cash cost share • Identify applicable in-kind cost share Supporting Documents for the NCAWSFS

Can be found at: http://www.usbr.gov/lc/phoenix/reports/nca wss/ncawssfull.html

Questions

NCAWSFS Contact: Deborah Tosline [email protected] 623-773-6277