Irrigation Leader January 2013 by Water Strategies

Volume 4 Issue 1

January 2013

Reaching the Crossroads: A Conversation with Luana Buckner about Water in Texas

Learning from Others By Kris Polly

ne of the missions of Irrigation Leader magazine is to help people in the irrigation and hydropower generation communities learn from the experiences and successes of others. This issue of Irrigation Leader magazine contains interviews with three interesting and accomplished people. Ms. Luana Buckner is a nononsense Texan who wears many hats. Her featured interview discusses the water supply challenges facing Texas and the importance of investing in water infrastructure, and underscores the western mindset of solving problems locally. Mr. Philip Moeller, commissioner to the Federal Energy and Regulatory Commission (FERC), grew up in rural Washington State. His interview provides our readers with a unique insight to FERC and the regulatory measures concerning low-head hydro development. In meeting and speaking with Commissioner Moeller, it is clear he is a highly intelligent individual and focused on practical solutions. Mr. Jim Nichols is an extraordinary man who has seen many changes in water resources development during his 62-year tenure with Freese and Nichols. Nearly 20 years ago, when I first started with the National Water Resources Association (NWRA), I asked retired Col. Jess

Baldwin (who also worked for the NWRA at the time and was a Texan), “Why do you always call him ‘Mr. Nichols’?” Jess’s reply was, “Let me tell you something: Everyone calls him Mr. Nichols.” I do not recall exactly how Jess elaborated on his answer, but our interview with Mr. Nichols provides readers a good explanation. In closing, I would like to say how very pleased and honored we are to have former Reclamation Commission Bob Johnson join Water Strategies, LLC. He is a wealth of knowledge and a true problem solver. During the time I worked for him at Reclamation, I never heard him swear or say an ill word about anyone. He set a standard that made his people want to do the best work they could and be better people. Kris Polly is editor-in-chief of Irrigation Leader magazine and president of Water Strategies, LLC, a government relations firm he began in February 2009 for the purpose of representing and guiding water, power, and agricultural entities in their dealings with Congress, the Bureau of Reclamation, and other federal government agencies. He may be contacted at Kris.Polly@waterstrategies.com.

Who Reads Irrigation Leader? Irrigation Leader details the accomplishments, issues, and stories of today’s irrigation and water supply industries. The magazine provides a forum for the people who facilitate the use, transport, and infrastructure of the West’s source of life—water. Hard copies of Irrigation Leader are mailed to the nearly 650 irrigation district general managers and their respective boards of directors in the 17 western states; the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation; Congress; all western state legislators’ and governors’ offices; and a variety of western water-related organizations, engineering firms, and individuals. The magazine is supported by advertisements and does not have a subscription fee. Since our debut issue in October 2010, our mailing list has more than tripled to over 12,000 individuals. An additional 1,000 readers receive e-mail notification when the magazine is posted to our website at www.WaterandPowerReport.com. Irrigation Leader is published 10 times a year, with November/December and July/August as combined publications. If you are not receiving Irrigation Leader in the mail, please send your mailing address to Irrigation.Leader@waterstrategies.com, and we will be happy to add you to our distribution list. 2

Irrigation Leader

C O N T E N T S

JANUARY 2013

2 Learning from Others Volume 4

Issue 1

Irrigation Leader is published 10 times a year with combined issues for November/December and July/August by: Water Strategies, LLC P.O. Box 100576 Arlington, VA 22210 Staff: Kris Polly, Editor-in-Chief John Crotty, Senior Writer Robin Pursley, Graphic Designer Capital Copyediting, LLC, Copyeditor SUBMISSIONS: Irrigation Leader welcomes manuscript, photography, and art submissions. However, the right to edit or deny publishing submissions is reserved. Submissions are returned only upon request.

By Kris Polly

4 Reaching the Crossroads: A Conversation with

Luana Buckner about Water in Texas

10 Encouraging Low-head Hydro Development

in Irrigation Canals

16 Leaving the Woodpile a Little Higher

A Conversation with Jim Nichols

20 Texas Ag Water Forum to Bring the Facts of

Irrigated Agriculture to Austin By Linda Fernandez

22 Former Bureau of Reclamation Commissioner

Bob Johnson Joins Water Strategies, LLC

24 Large Nebraska Pipeline Project to Boost

River Flows

ADVERTISING: Irrigation Leader accepts one-quarter, half-page, and full-page ads. For more information on rates and placement, please contact Kris Polly at (703) 517-3962 or Irrigation.Leader@waterstrategies.com.

28 Contractual Liability Pitfalls

CIRCULATION: Irrigation Leader is distributed to irrigation district managers and boards of directors in the 17 western states, Bureau of Reclamation officials, members of Congress and committee staff, and advertising sponsors. For address corrections or additions, please contact our office at Irrigation.Leader@waterstrategies.com.

By James D. Ogsbury

Copyright © 2013 Water Strategies, LLC. Irrigation Leader relies upon the excellent contributions of a variety of natural resources professionals who provide content for the magazine. However, the views and opinions expressed by these contributors are solely those of the original contibutor and do not necessarily represent or reflect the policies or positions of Irrigation Leader magazine, its editors, or Water Strategies, LLC. The acceptance and use of advertisements in Irrigation Leader do not constitute a representation or warranty by Water Strategies, LLC or Irrigation Leader magazine regarding the products, services, claims, or companies advertised.

COVER PHOTO: Luana Buckner, general manager of the Medina County Groundwater Conservation District (GCD). Photo by Kimberly Wilson Heyen. Irrigation Leader

By Joel Pearson

PROFILE

30 The Western Governors' Association District Focus:

32 Farmers Irrigation District: Creating Revenue

through Innovation

Water Law:

34 Show Me the Money—or Else? By Bob Lynch

36 Red River Shootout Goes to Washington:

Supreme Court Agrees to Decide Texas– Oklahoma Dispute with Important Implications for Water Management By Jim Oliver

The Innovators:

42 Saving Water and Shielding Soldiers By Tom Matheson

44 Low Impacts, High Returns: Lucid Energy’s

In-pipe Power Generation

REACHING THE CROSSROADS: A Conversation with Luana Buckner about Water in Texas

ver the last 20 years, Luana Buckner has grappled with Texas water issues from a variety of perspectives: She is the general manager of the Medina County Groundwater Conservation District (GCD), the chairman of the board of the Edwards Aquifer Authority, and the incoming president of the Texas Water Conservation Association (TWCA). Formed in 1989, GCD works to provide the efficient and beneficial use of water for the benefit of the citizens and economy of Medina County. GCD is a single-county district with jurisdiction over three main aquifers: the Trinity in the northern part of the county, the Leona Gravel in the center of the county, and the CarrizoWilcox in the southern part of the county. Interestingly, GCD is funded not through user fees, but through an ad valorem tax assessed on property owners in the county. Irrigation Leader’s editor-in-chief, Kris Polly, spoke with Ms. Buckner as she prepares to retire from GCD and help lead TWCA.

Kris Polly: What are the responsibilities of your ground water district? Luana Buckner: One of the things we are most actively involved in is the joint planning process. My district is in three different Groundwater Management Associations—9, 10, and 13. Those are mainly the Trinity Aquifer; the Edwards Aquifer, which underlies the Leona Gravel; and then the Carrizo Wilcox. We engage in joint planning with 23 other ground water districts. We also do a lot of water-level monitoring. We have three or four Trinity wells that we monitor. We have three Leona Gravel wells that we monitor, and we have one Carrizo Wilcox well that we monitor. We report the results back to the board on a monthly basis.

Irrigation Leader

Kris Polly: How are you involved in the Edwards Aquifer? Luana Buckner: I am chairman of the board for Edwards. I have served as chairman for four years and was just reelected Tuesday night for another two-year term. There are 17 members on that board. Kris Polly: That is a good-sized board. Luana Buckner: That is a very good-sized board. And there are five members on the board of GCD. My board president was on the board in 1992 when I was hired. We have longevity here. Kris Polly: How much farming do you have in your district? Luana Buckner: We have a lot of ground water– irrigated farming. The Leona Gravel is only for irrigation and domestic livestock. In the Gravel, which is a very shallow, very minor aquifer, GCD has issued 107 irrigation permits accounting for a total of 35,300 acre-feet. For a “minor” aquifer, that number is not so minor. Farmers use pivots almost exclusively here. That ground water is very high in nitrates. We don’t recommend it to people for drinking water, but there are folks who have been drinking that water for years. I have had some people tell me that, at least in their areas, the nitrates are so high that they no longer use it for their cattle or horses. Kris Polly: What crops are predominant? Luana Buckner: Corn and cotton. We also have quite a few oat growers and a large number of hay famers who sell to ranchers. Because of healthy commodity prices, particularly for corn, and warmer temperatures this year, we have seen multiple plantings—two, even three. It has been good for our farmers’ incomes. However, there has been no rainfall, and the aquifers are not recovering the way they have in the past. We are seeing [the inadequate recharge] in the Leona Gravel,

Irrigation Leader

and we are seeing it in the Edwards Aquifer as well. It is a particular problem in the Gravel because the total depth of the formation is 70 feet. So when it is gone, it’s gone. We’ve had a number of farmers in the last year whose wells were pumping 1,200 gallons per minute 18 months ago; now they are pumping half of that. Kris Polly: What is the length of your growing season? Luana Buckner: Normally, corn goes in President’s Day, mid-February, and it ends on the Fourth of July. And they go through a dry period before harvest. Cotton goes in a little later and goes out a little later. A lot of farmers here just grow corn, but some grow a little winter rye or wheat. Kris Polly: How much rainfall do you get in a normal year? Luana Buckner: I’d say about 30 inches. This year, so far, we’ve had 17. Kris Polly: What is the number one challenge for your irrigators right now? Luana Buckner: Not running out of water. One of the most difficult challenges for the district is trying to balance irrigators’ permitted rights with the drawdown effect on neighboring domestic livestock wells. Kris Polly: How much water can farmers withdraw? Luana Buckner: Existing aquifers are permitted at 2 acre-feet. However, after a recent state rule change addressing overallocation concerns, any new permits are limited to 1.5 acre-feet. We do require all nonexempt wells to be metered, and they report that to us annually. Our exempt wells are for livestock and domestic use. Kris Polly: Looking back over your tenure as general manager of GCD, how has the job changed? Luana Buckner: It has become more and more of

a challenge to be a manager of a ground water district. There are so many state requirements that did not exist in the past. The position has become much more bureaucratic, but then again, the Texas ground water management structure has changed. When I started out, there were 22 or 24 ground water districts, and now there are 100. Kris Polly: As incoming president of TWCA, what are the most pressing issues facing TWCA members? Luana Buckner: The top item is how to fund the state water plan. TWCA has a committee working on that issue, but they have not reached consensus on a funding mechanism. Legislation was introduced last session [in the Texas House of Representatives] and probably will be in this upcoming session, but there are some mixed feelings amongst the membership about whether utilizing a paid tap fee as the primary financial mechanism is a good idea. Beyond the state water plan, there are several key federal issues, particularly endangered species designations and EPA [Environmental Protection Agency] rulemaking. Kris Polly: With respect to the funding mechanism, it sounds like you are looking within the state. Is that correct? Luana Buckner: Yes. Texas has a savings account, the “Rainy Day Fund.” Right now there is somewhere between $8 and $10 billion in that account. A number of Texas legislators have said that we need to put money from the fund into the state water plan. One house member has suggested a $1 billion investment, with the hopes of leveraging much more. Whatever the appropriate mechanism, the state needs to step up to make it happen. We’ve been in a drought for two years, and people are running out of water. Kris Polly: Texas is unique in that it has a water development board for the purposes of providing funds for water projects. Can you tell our readers about the board? Luana Buckner: The Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) is a valuable resource for Texas ground water

districts, river authorities, and municipalities. TWDB has a wonderful staff—they provide assistance in water conservation, planning, technology, and financing. You name it, they do it. TWCA has a lot of back and forth with TWDB in planning processes. Kris Polly: What would you say Texas needs to do to adequately address its water supply issues? Luana Buckner: I think we are at a crossroads between doing the right thing and failing to sufficiently invest in water resource development. Failure to make those investments may cripple economic development. In my view, that would be taking a step backward instead of a step forward. It is going to take politicians who are more concerned about doing the right thing than getting elected.

Irrigation Leader

Texas

Water Day 2013 February 5-7, 2013

The Liaison Capitol Hill Hotel Washington, D.C.

As all of you are aware, the TWCA, through its Federal Affairs Committee and the Texas Water Development Board, has scheduled the Ninth Annual Texas Water Day, which will take place February 5-7, 2013, in Washington, D.C. We will kick off the activities with a planning session, briefing, assignments, and get together in the Hub/Grid Room at 3:30 p.m., February 5, 2013, in The Liaison Capitol Hill Hotel, 415 New Jersey Ave., NW. Another briefing will be held at breakfast, which will be served starting at 7:30 a.m. on Wednesday, February 6, 2013, in the Metropolitan East/West. The Congressional Reception will be held on Wednesday, February 6, 2013, at 6:00 p.m. in Room B-339 of the Rayburn House Office Building. Key Texas Delegation Members, prominent federal agency heads, and others will be asked to speak to and discuss the priority Texas water issues with Texas Water Day participants. More details will be provided when you register. A block of rooms have been reserved at The Liaison Hotel Capitol Hill. Room rates are $259.00 per night, with a deadline of Friday, January 11, 2013. Call (866) 233-4642 for reservations.

Texas Water Day is an effort to inform the Texas Delegation and other key members of Congress, and members of committee staff and federal agency staff of the critical water, environmental, and regulatory issues facing the state today.

The TWCA and the Federal Affairs Committee respectfully request you complete the registration form, found on the TWCA site, as soon as possible so that proper arrangements can be made. We would appreciate a registration form for each participant.

texas water conservation association

Leadership

Water

Resources

for

Te x a s

Encouraging Low-head Hydro Development in Irrigation Canals

ommissioner Philip D. Moeller brings a real eastern Washington understanding of hydropower to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Having grown up on a ranch near Freeman, Washington, he is now a two-term commissioner, serving under Presidents Bush and Obama. Prior to his work on the commission, Mr. Moeller worked in energy in the private sector, advised U.S. Senator Slade Gorton (R-WA) on energy issues, and served as staff coordinator for the Washington State Senate Committee on Energy, Utilities and Telecommunications. Irrigation Leader's magazine editor-in-chief, Kris Polly, and VanNess Feldman’s Rick Agnew, in his capacity as a member of the Low Head Hydro Working Group, talked with the commissioner about the role of hydropower in FERC’s portfolio, the untapped potential of low head, and ways to facilitate the growth of America’s biggest renewable resource. Kris Polly: Please tell us about your background and your career prior to becoming a commissioner for FERC. Commissioner Moeller: My family moved from Chicago to eastern Washington State when I was seven years old. I grew up on a ranch—we didn’t live on an irrigated piece of land, but we did a bit of self-irrigation. My dad was with the Farm Credit system. Much of the success of eastern Washington agriculture is based on irrigation and the Columbia Basin Project. I always had an interest in energy. Even in high school, it was the national debate topic when I was a senior on the debate team. I also studied it a little bit when I was at Stanford. I ended up working for the Washington State Legislature doing energy issues—I was the lead energy analyst in the state senate early in my career. I also did utility issues there, including telecom, water, and nuclear. I would often drive and see the canals and the full extent of irrigation projects. Some of the utilities, namely Seattle City Light, have some hydropower resources tied into irrigation canals. It was something I was very comfortable with and associated with.

FERC Commissioner Philip D. Moeller.

I then went on to work with [Washington’s] U.S. senator, Slade Gordon, on water, appropriations, and energy issues. Subsequent to the senator leaving office, I worked in the energy industry for a power developer and an integrated utility. I came to the commission in 2006. Kris Polly: As a commissioner for FERC, what are your responsibilities? Commissioner Moeller: FERC’s main responsibility is to ensure that the nation has reliable, safe energy production in the areas the commission regulates. The commission also ensures that the rates FERC regulates are just and reasonable so that consumers don’t pay too much and that the people providing the service have adequate returns on investment to continue to provide safe, reliable, and affordable service. FERC is an economic regulator of oil and natural gas shipped in pipelines. FERC has the authority to grant certificates that allow for the construction of both natural gas pipelines that cross state Irrigation Leader

lines and on-shore liquefied natural gas facilities. We also regulate electric wholesale markets, which takes up most of our time—part of that is ensuring the reliability of the bulk power system. We are a major enforcement agency. We have penalty authority ranging up to $1 million per day per violation. Then, of course, FERC regulates the hydropower industry in this country, except dams owned by the federal government. FERC regulates the safety of dams producing energy going out to the grid. In addition, part of the commission’s hydro responsibility encompasses the newer technologies of hydrokinetics. Canal irrigation is, perhaps, a traditional type of hydropower, but it also represents a new and exciting technology as people try to harness gravity moving water from one place to another. Rick Agnew: Do you think there has been a change in the public perception of hydropower? Commissioner Moeller: I still think we have a long way to go. Most people are influenced by what they’ve experienced. When you come from the West, particularly the Pacific Northwest, hydro is just a way of life. There is a lot of hydro around, and people are comfortable with it. The same is true with irrigation, which has provided the livelihood of farmers . . . including farmers I’ve known, particularly in the Columbia Basin. When you grow up recognizing that value, it is second nature to you. For residents in the East, who rarely see an irrigation canal, it is a situation of “out of sight, out of mind.” We have a lot of education to do, but that is what your readers can help do. Getting their elected officials out, certainly the ones who represent their areas, to see what this infrastructure can provide and to understand hydropower’s potential. I certainly want to do my part to promote it both at FERC and in a larger setting. Kris Polly: What are your thoughts regarding the development of small-scale, or what engineers typically call “low-head,” hydropower within existing irrigation district canals and systems?

Irrigation Leader

Commissioner Moeller: I am excited about it and want to promote it as best we can within our legislative jurisdiction. I think there is enormous potential there. Using this position to promote it and highlight it is something I would like to do more of because it is an incredible resource. The fuel is free, as your readers know. It is often in a facility, unlike a free-flowing river or even a river that has a dam on it, that is contained. There are fewer environmental issues related to it. The potential is so big that I’d like the nation to be promoting the development of this resource. Rick Agnew: Readers of this publication—water districts, irrigation districts, leaders, general managers, commissioners—they hear a fair amount of this “all-of-the -above” federal energy policy, but don’t quite know what to make of it. Does it mean that we are trying to encourage these newer energy sources like tidal and irrigation canals? Do irrigation canal generating units fall under the all-ofthe-above philosophy? Commission Moeller: Well certainly it fits into my all-of-the-above philosophy. I do strongly endorse the concept, although the details matter. We do want to have optionality on the table. The nation has been blessed with this abundant supply of natural gas that we really didn’t know was available until about five years ago. It has been a complete energy revolution based on hydrofracturing and horizontal drilling. Where just five years ago we were discussing importing liquefied natural gas, now we are discussing exporting it—a complete 180-degree turnaround based on this technology. The downside is that some people are concerned about price volatility of natural gas going forward, and from my perspective, even though I support it, there is an issue about being reliant on a pipeline versus a 90-day pile of coal from a reliability perspective. The good thing about hydro generally speaking is that you can count on it. You have a much better idea about what the resource is on an hourly, monthly, and yearly basis. The nice thing with solar and wind is that fuel is free, but it is hard to predict when the wind will be there or when clouds will block the sun. With hydro, you just have a lot more certainty, which is what the system needs. To the extent that development costs might be higher for some hydro projects, they have a great advantage on the renewable front on being dependable.

Kris Polly: With that in mind, let's talk about some of the specific issues involved with irrigation districts developing hydropower. Some irrigation district canals and drains have been in place for nearly 100 years and move water to and from fields. Should hydropower projects in such facilities be treated the same as projects in natural streams or rivers? Commissioner Moeller: No, I don’t think so because [conduits and natural streams] are different. Because of theses differences, hopefully canals and drains are resources that can be permitted in a more efficient and timely manner. Kris Polly: Some irrigation districts have experienced interest from third parties in developing hydropower projects within their irrigation canal and drain systems. How can irrigation project systems be protected while ensuring third-party hydropower development opportunities? Commissioner Moeller: We have a program in place that focuses on small and low-impact hydro. It was developed to ensure that the owners of the canal, and those that want to develop the hydropower, whether those parties are the same or different, have a good idea of what the process entails. Approval of those types of projects can happen in as little as two months as long as everyone is talking to each other, there is adequate stakeholder involvement, and required application information is vetted. The information is on our website, and it is intended to provide every entity involved with good information on how to apply, the process involved, which stakeholders have which rights and responsibilities, and how parties can go about expediting the process. We do have a very competent and professional staff in our Office of Energy Projects. They are very motivated to try and help move people through the process. With respect to third-party developers, if the canal owner is either working with someone else coming in or working on his or her own to develop a project, and if there is an issue of a developer wanting to access a canal that he or she doesn't own, there are important property rights involved. That could be contentious if the property owner doesn’t want to provide access. I would guess that, in those cases, the developer would want to go somewhere else. We haven’t faced that situation yet, so I wouldn’t

want to speculate on how we treat it. In these kinds of developments, it is always going to go a lot smoother if the project owner and the project developer are on the same page and have the same objectives. Rick Agnew: It sounds like you think it is important, in the context of FERC permitting, for irrigation districts to work with local officials and neighboring landowners. Commissioner Moeller: Absolutely. We are highly deferential to stakeholder support for just about anything that is brought to us, whether it is settlement on a wholesale electric case or the development of a new hydro project. If people are on board and supportive, it is a much easier decision for FERC than if it is contentious. Kris Polly: What is your advice to irrigation districts interested in developing their own hydropower resources? Commissioner Moeller: I am not sure where to send them in terms of developers. That is not really our job. But I do think they should talk to FERC and our staff. Our staff is very amenable to helping people through the process and pointing them in the right direction in terms of the issues and what they have to do. As with major, billion-dollar natural gas pipeline projects, it always behooves an applicant to talk to the staff early before he or she files something to get some guidance as to the most efficient and right way to propose something. I think we have a staff that is eager to help people through the process and one that will help develop a resource when it makes sense. There is some legislation, as you know, in Congress that is sponsored by a very good friend, Cathy McMorris-Rodgers, from my home district. She is trying to promote [low-head] as part of a broader small hydropower bill that’s had a lot of good bipartisan support through the process so far. The legislation, and the publicity that comes out of it, will help canal owners and developers better see the potential of this tremendous national natural resource. For more information, go to the FERC website: www. ferc.gov. People can go to our hydropower page and learn about the process and about which projects fit into which categories, and hopefully find a lot of useful information that can inform their decision to potentially pursue a project.

Irrigation Leader

Pivot stuck again? Put your log chain away.

RAAFT TRAcks will solve your problem. by PolyTech LLC

• Quick & easy to install • Keeps center pivots from getting stuck • Reduces or eliminates tracks and ruts • Fits tire sizes: 11.2x24, 11.2x24.5, 11.2x38, 14.9x24 • Can withstand bridges yet float with ease over acres of muddy terrain Wholesale prices available to irrigation districts, NRDs, groundwater management districts, and other distributors for large purchases.

RAAFT tracks are manufactured using a rugged polyethylene/carbon composite plastic that is 100% recyclable and floats with ease over acres of muddy terrain. RAAFT Tracks are designed to operate in field conditions from 40° F to 105° F, with water being applied to the wet the track. It can be winter moved at temperatures down to -10°. Lightweight enough to be carried/dragged by one person, 4 to 6 bolts for installation per tower, depending on the model.

For more information, please visit our web site at

www.RAAFT.com

e-mail raaftsales@gmail.com or phone (402)

261-5774

Leaving the Woodpile a Little Higher A Conversation with Jim Nichols

reese and Nichols is a multidiscipline consulting firm that offers services in water and wastewater engineering, architecture, environmental science, construction, and planning. The firm’s chairman emeritus, Jim Nichols, has been a leader in water resources engineering for over 60 years. Honored locally and nationally for his professional accomplishments and civic activities, he was appointed to the Texas Board of Professional Engineers by Governor George Bush and later named chairman by Governor Rick Perry. Mr. Nichols currently consults with clients, leads executive client visits, teaches classes around the state on professional ethics for Freese and Nichols University, and consults with project teams. Irrigation Leader’s editorin-chief, Kris Polly, spoke with Mr. Nichols about his firm, his long career, and the future of water resources in the state of Texas.

Jim Nichols in his office with A Century in the Works, a history of Freese and Nichols' first 100 years. In keeping with the firm's traditional support of professional education, he teaches classes on engineering ethics for Freese and Nichols University. 16

Kris Polly: Can you provide our readers with some background on Freese and Nichols?

Jim Nichols: A civil engineer from Minnesota named John Hawley started the company. Around 1890, he came to Fort Worth to work for a group that designed the first municipal water system in the area. Prior to that time, people had shallow wells or cisterns, not a comprehensive water system. He was employed to design the intake structure of the Clear Fork of the Trinity River. It was primarily a water quality plant, where they pumped water into a small distribution system. After he completed that assignment, he decided to stay in Fort Worth and open up a consulting engineering practice focusing on water. That was the beginning. From 1894, when this organization was really started, through World War I, [Hawley] practiced as a consulting engineer, working with small and large cities to develop water supplies. Prior to 1922, as far as I know, Mr. Hawley practiced by himself. In 1922, he was employed by the City of Paris, Texas, to design a small lake water treatment plan and distribution system. The work required more than he could take on by himself. He a hired a man named Simon Freese to join the firm. It became Hawley and Freese at that time. Later on, they received another project in Fort Worth from what is now the Tarrant Regional Water Board to design and be the construction managers of two large reservoirs. The project cost about $6 million, which was a large sum of money in the 1920s. Hawley and Freese hired Marvin Nichols, a city engineer up in Amarillo, to be the project manager on the reservoir projects. Over the next two or three years, the relationship matured, and the firm became Hawley, Freese and Nichols. Marvin Nichols was my father. During the Depression, the firm struggled, and was one of only a few consulting firms that survived that period. Hawley retired in 1938 or 1939, and the firm became known as Freese and Nichols. Freese and Nichols remained a partnership until 1976, when it incorporated. We started with one sole proprietor and now we have 43 shareholders. Our total staff is now 525 people. Water matters are a major focus in our practice. We also have branched out into other disciplines. Kris Polly: How old was your father when he started working with Mr. Hawley? Irrigation Leader

Pictured (left to right) are Bob Nichols, Marvin Nichols, and Jim Nichols. This photo was taken in 1965 in Fort Worth at a Texas Society of Professional Engineers event. Bob's current title at Freese and Nichols is President Emeritus; Jim is Chairman Emeritus.

Jim Nichols: He was born in 1897, so he would have been 31 years old. He was born north of Fort Worth in Roanoke. His father was a Methodist minister. They were people of very modest means. He worked his way through the University of Texas and received a bachelor's in engineering in 1918, and then a couple of years later he received a master’s degree from the University of Illinois. During World War I, he went through pilot training and was stationed in San Antonio on an air installation. When the war he was over, he was discharged. Kris Polly: How old were you when you joined the firm? Jim Nichols: I was in the service stateside for three years in the signal corps, repairing radar equipment. After my discharge, I went down to Texas A&M to earn a bachelor’s and a master’s degree in civil engineering. I joined the firm in 1950 at the age of 27. Kris Polly: What kind of changes have you seen in the water resources industry over the span of your career? Jim Nichols: When I started in 1950, there were a lot of projects that needed to be built. During the Great Depression, there were no resources to develop water resources. Then, in World War II, most financial resources were used for the war. After the war, there was a tremendous amount of water resources development. Irrigation Leader

Our focus was primarily in West Texas in the areas where there was not a whole lot of ground water. Most of our projects involved surface water supplies. That [type of work] carried us through until the 1980s. Then for a number of reasons, primarily regulatory, the number of surface water development projects dwindled down to zero. As we speak, I don’t believe there are any dams or lakes being developed in Texas. Kris Polly: What has been the most effective engineering innovation in water resources over your career? Jim Nichols: The advent of the computer. When I came on board, the largest part of our workforce was dedicated to drawing schematics by hand. Now we have CAD technicians. The advancements in technology are truly amazing . . . mind-boggling. There is no telling what we will see in the future. I have been here 62 years, and gosh, I have seen a lot. I hope to stay a few more years to see what is coming next. The thing I enjoy about engineering is that you can travel around and see the results of projects that we have been involved in. There is a lot of satisfaction in knowing that people are better off as a result of our efforts. To me that is very rewarding. Kris Polly: Based on your knowledge and experience, what needs to happen in the water industry for Texas to stay on top of its water needs? 17

Jim Nichols: Out here in Texas, the permitting process requires multiple years and lots of money. While going through the maze of [government] departments to push a project through, all sorts of groups attempt to prevent water resources from being developed. Then, of course, financing the project is another matter. In the past, to some extent for some reservoirs, we’ve been able to depend on federal dollars. That financial resource is drying up. The challenge is finding the funds to develop these projects. In 1952, Freese and Nichols In 2010 Freese and Nichols became the first architecture/engineering company to completed Lake J.B. Thomas, a receive the Malcolm Baldrige Award for Performance Excellence. To celebrate adherence 204,000 acre-foot water supply to the firm's "hedgehog concept" of being "the very best at client service, resulting in reservoir, for the Colorado long-term, mutually beneficial relationships," the company–wide celebration included toy hedgehogs. River Municipal Water District (CRMWD). We prepared the preliminary drawings, a profile, the cutoff, the location, 1920s to study new technologies in wastewater treatment. and those sorts of details. We submitted [the information] We have a policy to help staff members who wish to to the state regulatory agency for its staff to review. They get graduate degrees by helping to pay for tuition and processed it in about a month. At the recommendation of books, and giving them the opportunity to take time off the agency, we went down to Austin with our attorney for a as required. We also have Freese and Nichols University, hearing and provided testimony. The staff presented theirs. which is an in-house department. We offer all kinds of The permit was granted, it was written that afternoon, and courses taught by experts in their respective fields. We we came home that night with a permit in hand. have won a number of awards: In 2009, the National Our last major reservoir project, the O.H. Ivie Reservoir, Society of Professional Engineers and the Texas Society of took years to go through the permitting process. CRMWD Professional Engineers honored Freese and Nichols with spent millions of dollars jumping through all kind of hoops the Private Practice Professional Development Award, with respect to endangered water snakes. The permitting and in 2006, Freese and Nichols was named Best Place to process is entirely different than it was years ago. Learn by the Dallas Chapter of the American Society for As you know, the Texas Water Development Board Training and Development. develops a state water plan for Texas. We know where Engineers at Freese and Nichols can take all of the the surface water is, and we know how to develop it. The continuing education courses they need to renew their primary issues are regulatory and financial—how to pay for professional licenses. Continuing education has always the projects. I hope that the legislature, when it convenes been an important part of our firm. Not only does the in January, will take a look at these issues. We need to be employee benefit, but the firm benefits as well. developing projects. Kris Polly: What advice would give to a young person Kris Polly: Your firm is very interested in continuing just coming out of engineering school? education and takes a great interest in the personal development of your staff. Can you share with our readers Jim Nichols: If they were coming here to Freese the philosophy behind that interest? and Nichols, I would advise them to take advantage of the opportunities we have here. We have a mentorship Jim Nichols: That philosophy goes back to John program. Also, take advantage of Freese and Nichols Hawley, the founder of the firm. He had a great interest University. Take advantage of our policy to pursue a in continuing education. His policy was to further the graduate degree. We have a saying here: “Work hard and education of the bright, young engineers working for him. leave the woodpile a little higher than you found it.” He sent Simon Freese to Cambridge, England, in the

Texas Ag Water Forum to Bring the Facts of Irrigated Agriculture to Austin By Linda Fernandez

exas is talking water in a big way, and the topic is likely to heat up further as the Texas legislature convenes January 8 for its regular biennial session. The consensus is that water will be a priority topic for lawmakers. The 2011 drought—the worst one-year drought in the state’s history—coupled with the sobering water demand projections contained in the 2012 Texas State Water Plan have focused attention on the critical question of how to ensure that Texas has adequate water supplies well into the future. Irrigated agriculture has been struggling for some time, and the situation is worsening: dropping aquifer levels in the productive northern plains region of the state and decreasing stream flows in the fertile central and southern regions. Just about everywhere, irrigated agriculture is facing water curtailment or, worse still, complete suspension. And all eyes are on irrigated agriculture, currently the biggest user of water in the state. But that’s about to change.

Municipal and Industrial Demands Eclipsing Ag Water Use in Texas

The State Water Plan projects that the population in Texas will increase 82 percent over the next 50 years. With population growth comes increased municipal demand, forecast to grow from 4.9 million acre-feet per year to 8.4 million in 2060. In contrast, ag irrigation water is projected to decline from 10 million acre-feet per year to about 8.4 million in 2060. According to the plan, in 2060 irrigation and municipal demand will balance out, with each at slightly more than 38 percent of total water demand in Texas. However, there’s more to the story. Demand from the manufacturing and steamelectric sectors also is growing rapidly, in step with an expanding population. By 2030, total municipal and

industrial demand will surpass that of irrigation. And by 2060, total municipal and industrial demand of almost 13 million acre-feet per year will constitute just under 60 percent of water demand in Texas.

Strategies for Everything but Ag Water

Irrigation is the only sector in which water demand is projected to decrease over the 50-year planning horizon. Even livestock and mining show gains (although small) over the planning horizon. The plan explains the reasons behind decreased irrigation demand: “More efficient irrigation systems, reduced groundwater supplies, and the transfer of water rights from agricultural to municipal uses.” Increasing ground water supplies admittedly is beyond the capabilities of state policymakers. Not so is supporting more efficient irrigation systems and/or facilitating those preordained “transfers of water rights from agricultural to municipal use.” But little is being done on either topic in Texas water planning. A key goal of the planning process is developing strategies to meet identified needs. In the state plan, three strategies account for more than two-thirds of the additional water that will be needed by 2060: • Other Surface Water*: 33.9% • New Major Reservoir: 16.7% • Irrigation Conservation: 16.7%

* Defined as “existing supplies that are not physically or legally available at the present time” such as “an existing reservoir that has no pipeline to convey water to some or all users, a water user that does not have a water supply contract with the appropriate water supplier, or an entity that has no ‘run-of-river’ water right to divert water for use.” Yet despite the seeming significance of irrigation conservation to long-range water planning in Texas, nowhere in the State Water Plan is there any discussion of specific water management strategies to achieve the 1.5 million acrefeet per year in water savings projected for this sector. Whatever water

Irrigation Leader

management strategies exist for irrigation, they account for only 2 percent of the total capital costs of recommended strategies in the 2012 plan: $1.2 billion of a total $53.1 billion. Almost 17 percent of needed water at only 2 percent of total identified costs? All eyes may be on agriculture to conserve water, but few have been looking at how to make that conservation possible. The 2013 Texas Ag Water Forum intends to reverse that dynamic.

Refocusing Attention on Ag Water Opportunities

The Texas Ag Water Forum—scheduled for February 25, 2013, in Austin—will shine the spotlight on feasible and economical opportunities to achieve water savings in irrigated agriculture support. “We’ve structured the forum as an informational event to raise awareness among Texas lawmakers about the issues affecting water use in agriculture and trends for the future,” notes Wayne Halbert, general manager for Harlingen Irrigation District. For one thing, multiple ag demonstration initiatives in Texas (several funded by the Texas Water Development Board) have proven there are opportunities to make irrigated agriculture much more efficient in using water. As North Plains Groundwater Conservation District General Manager Steve Walthour explains, “Our 200-12 project and other demonstrations across the state have shown that combining common-sense practices with the latest science and technology can extend the life of our aquifers and the viability of agriculture in the state.” And often, investment in irrigation infrastructure can produce significantly more water at a lower cost than many of the municipal strategies. Take, for example, the 2011 Rio Grande Regional Water Plan, one of 16 regional plans incorporated into the State Water Plan. The 14 municipal water management strategies (which range from water rights acquisition to seawater desalination) would cost almost $1.9 billion and produce 381,594 acre-feet of water by 2060. In contrast, the two irrigation strategies (on-farm conservation and irrigation conveyance system conservation) would cost just over $325 million and produce 438,011 acre-feet. Clearly, it makes sense to consider innovative approaches to resolving water needs in Texas that break down the wall between “municipal water” and “irrigation water.” “With the forum, we’re looking to bridge the knowledge gap about what’s possible and at what cost,” says C.E. Williams, general manager for Panhandle Groundwater Conservation District. “One goal is to

Irrigation Leader

identify potential cooperative opportunities that will allow us to move from talk into action and ensure sustainable supplies for all.” Ronald Gertson, chair of the Colorado Water Issues Committee for the Texas Rice Producers Legislative Group, echoes this emphasis. “We must find innovative ways of growing more with less water, and we must all work in concert with each other to do so.” Jesus Reyes, general manager for El Paso Irrigation District, sums it all up: “Water plus farming is one of the most important issues in our country today.”

About the 2013 Texas Ag Water Forum The Forum takes place Monday, February 25, 2013, 9 am–3pm at the Sheraton Austin. Confirmed speakers include Carolyn Brittin, Texas Water Development Board, and Kevin Wagner, Texas Water Resources Institute. Featured presentations will describe three ongoing ag demonstration projects in Texas: • Texas Project for Ag Water Efficiency (Harlingen Irrigation District) • Texas Alliance for Water Conservation (High Plains UCD/Texas Tech) • The 200-12 Project (North Plains GCD) Panel sessions will address: • Challenges in Meeting Regional Conservation Goals: Report from Ground Zero • Crops & Water: The Perspective from the Farm • Partnerships for Ag Water Efficiency & Conservation: Who & How? Invited speakers include Texas Agriculture Commissioner Todd Staples, House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Allan Ritter, Senator Robert Duncan, and Represenative Eddie Lucio III. Forum sponsors are El Paso County Water Improvement District #1, Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority, Harlingen Irrigation District, High Plains Underground Water Conservation District, Lower Colorado River Authority, Lower Rio Grande Valley Water District Managers Association, North Plains Groundwater Conservation District, Panhandle Groundwater Conservation District, Rio Grande Regional Water Authority, Texas Irrigation Council, Texas Rice Producers Legislative Group, and WaterPR. The 2013 Texas Ag Water Forum is produced by WaterPR. For more information on the Forum, visit www.TexasAgWaterForum.org 21

Former Bureau of Reclamation Commissioner Bob Johnson Joins Water Strategies, LLC

ater Strategies, LLC, is pleased to announce that former Bureau of Reclamation Commissioner Robert “Bob” Johnson has joined the firm as senior advisor. Commissioner Johnson brings more than 30 years of water planning and policy experience, as well as in-depth knowledge of Reclamation management and operations, to the firm. He will provide the firm strategic planning advice and will help advocate on behalf of its clients with respect to water-related issues at the federal agency and congressional levels. Commissioner Johnson spent more than 30 years working for Reclamation. He joined the Mid-Pacific Regional Office in Sacramento, California, in 1975. He later moved to the Boulder City, Nevada, office, and then to Washington, DC, where he served as Chief of Water Contracting and Repayment in the Commissioner’s Office. He returned to Boulder City, first as the chief of the region’s Water, Land, and Power Operations Division, and then as the deputy regional director. He served as regional director of Reclamation’s Lower Colorado Region from 1995 to September 2006. As regional director, Johnson served as “water master” of the lower Colorado River on behalf of the secretary of the Interior. He oversaw the management of the last 700 miles of the Colorado River from Hoover Dam to the Mexican Border, as well as numerous other Reclamation activities in southern Nevada, southern California, and Arizona. He initiated and directed significant changes in the management of the Colorado River, including the first watersharing agreements among California, Arizona, and Nevada and the first water supply guidelines to define conditions for surplus and shortages on the Lower Colorado River. Confirmed as Reclamation’s commissioner on September 30, 2006, Johnson became the 20th person to lead the Bureau. Among his many accomplishments in the position, he implemented the Managing for Excellence Program, which focused on improved customer collaboration, accountability, and efficiency; he developed the Water for America program to address water-related problems associated with drought and climate change; and he worked to implement loan guarantee and rural water planning legislation. Commissioner Johnson will continue to serve as senior consultant to HDR Engineering, where he advises and assists HDR and its clients on water development and management programs. Born in Lovelock, Nevada, Johnson was raised on a farm that received its irrigation water from a Reclamation project. Commissioner Johnson earned his bachelor’s and master’s degrees in agriculture and resource economics from the University of Nevada. Over the scope of his career, Commissioner Johnson has received numerous awards, including the President’s Meritorious Executive Award and the National Water Resources Association’s Distinguished Service and Water Statesman Awards. To contact Commissioner Johnson, e-mail Bob.Johnson@waterstrategies.com.

Irrigation Leader

Large Nebraska Pipeline Project to Boost River Flows

ater managers across a wide swath of Nebraska are cooperating on the largest pipeline project of its kind in the region, designed to increase flows in two rivers to meet interstate and Nebraska water obligations. Under the Nebraska Cooperative Republican Platte Enhancement project (N-CORPE), water that otherwise would have been irrigated on and consumed by corn and other crops will instead be piped into the Republican and Platte Rivers when needed to meet river flow requirements. The cost is significant—more than $100 million, including land costs—but is cheaper than alternatives such as purchasing surface water from irrigation districts or paying farmers to retire farm ground from irrigated production. Including land, pipeline construction, and operating costs, the cost per acre-foot of water under N-CORPE is expected to be $300 to $500. Leasing surface water in Nebraska’s Republican Basin can cost four to five times that amount. And paying farmers to permanently retire land from irrigated production can cost $5,000 to $6,000 per acre-foot.

In December, four of Nebraska’s Natural Resources Districts (NRDs) purchased 19,500 acres in Lincoln County, Nebraska, that lie squarely between the Platte and Republican Rivers. About 15,800 of those acres have been irrigated. Ceasing irrigation of those acres will essentially allow water that otherwise would have been used for irrigation to be stored in the underlying Ogallala Aquifer. Then it can be piped from approximately 30 ground water wells into the Republican and Platte Rivers when needed to meet river flow obligations. There is an abundant supply of ground water underlying the property purchased by the NRDs—the saturated thickness of the Ogallala Aquifer in the area is approximately 400–600 feet. The Platte River is the most well-known river in Nebraska, crossing the entire state and acting as an important agricultural, municipal, and environmental water source. A state law passed in 2004 required NRDs in the upper Platte Basin to impose moratoriums on new ground water irrigated acres in a large stretch of the river that was deemed overappropriated—essentially having an imbalance between water supplies and demands. NRDs in the overappropriated area have to return the Platte River to 1997 conditions, and ultimately, to a fully appropriated condition. In the Twin Platte NRD, the requirement to return to 1997 conditions as spelled out in an integrated management plan it has with the state is to begin placing 5,859 acre-feet of offset water annually into the Platte by the end of 2013, increasing to 7,700 acre-feet annually in 50 years. More water could be required after 2019 to return the portion of the Platte Basin in the Twin Platte NRD to fully appropriated. In addition, an agreement among Nebraska, Colorado, Wyoming and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service aimed at protecting federally endangered species requires Nebraska to return the Platte to 1997 conditions. The agreement also sets requirements for new water annually

Irrigation Leader

of 130,000 acre-feet during the first increment of the agreement, which could increase in subsequent increments to over 400,000 acre-feet of new water annually in the critical habitat area of the Platte River. The Republican River dissects the southwestern and south-central parts of the state. Its use is dictated by a 70-year-old interstate water compact among Kansas, Nebraska, and Colorado that the State of Kansas has used to instigate litigation in recent years. Kansas is currently seeking a permanent shutdown of ground water irrigation on 300,000 acres in Nebraska, or about one-quarter of all ground water–irrigated acres in Nebraska’s part of the basin. This proposed remedy has not been acceptable to residents of Nebraska. The NRDs in the Republican Basin have long imposed water restrictions to reduce consumptive use of water, and development of new ground water–irrigated acres is prohibited. And, millions of dollars have been spent to permanently retire some irrigated acres that have substantial impacts on stream flow. Unlike obligations in the Platte, NRDs in the Republican Basin will not have to use the project annually to increase river flows. It will only be used during exceptionally dry times when needed to offset any projected exceedance of allowable depletions to stream flow caused by ground water pumping in Nebraska’s portion of the basin. The

Family Farm

LLIANCE The Family

pipeline to the Republican Basin will be constructed first; the main pipeline is expected to have a 48-inch diameter and be 6 miles long. Historically, annual water use for crop irrigation on the 15,800 acres purchased by the NRDs has been approximately 15,000 acre-feet. Approximately that much water, then, is anticipated to be available for use in the project on an annual basis. When the project is not used, water can accrue for use in future years. The project will be paid for using Nebraska’s unique occupation tax on irrigation. Currently, three NRDs in the state impose the tax that can be up to $10 an acre, and the three NRDs are all part of the N-CORPE group that is undertaking the project: Upper Republican NRD, Middle Republican NRD, and Lower Republican NRD. Twin Platte NRD will begin to levy an occupation tax over the next couple of years. The occupation tax has been levied in the Republican Basin over a 6-year period on approximately 1.1 million acres, generating about $25 million in revenue for water projects. In 2011, a legal challenge of the tax was exhausted when the Nebraska Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the tax. The four NRDs hope to have the Republican Basin of the pipeline project operational this coming summer.

Farm Alliance is a powerful advocate for family farmers, ranchers, irrigation

districts, and allied industries in seventeen Western states. The Alliance is focused on one mission To ensure the availability of reliable, affordable irrigation water supplies to Western farmers and ranchers. As a 501(c)(6) tax exempt organization, our support comes exclusively from those who believe our mission is important enough to contribute. We believe the cause is important enough to ask for your support - Please join us by completing the web form at http://www.familyfarmalliance.org/ProspectiveContact.cfm.

For more information contact Dan Keppen by phone at (541) 892-6244, or by e-mail at dankeppen@charter.net

Steven L. Hernandez attorney at law Specializing in

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Contracts and Western Water Law 21OO North Main Street Suite 1A P.O. Box 13108 Las Cruces, NM 88013

(575) 526-2101 Fax (575) 526-2506 Email:

slh@lclaw-nm.com

Contractual Liability Pitfalls By Joel Pearson

rrigation districts are sometimes requested to enter into contracts in which they agree to indemnify other parties. Before signing such an agreement, a district should discuss the indemnity provisions with its insurance broker to make sure it has insurance coverage to back it up and that the insurance company is willing to accept that liability. Standard commercial liability policies provide contractual liability coverage for the tort liability of others assumed in certain types of contracts. Also, additional insured endorsements can provide coverage for indemnified third parties, but only as a result of the insured’s negligence. The following are two specific examples of contractual liability problems. The first involved an aquatic herbicide manufacturer. To get the chemical, the districts were required to sign an agreement stating that once they took possession of the product, the district assumed full liability for thirdparty claims, including the manufacturer’s product liability. The agreement also had insurance requirements for commercial liability coverage, and the districts were required to provide a certificate of insurance as evidence of coverage. The problem was that commercial liability policies exclude pollution liability; therefore, any thirdparty liability claim resulting from the use of this chemical would be excluded. Separate pollution coverage is needed. So a district could have signed that agreement, provided the required insurance certificate to the manufacturer, and yet would have had no insurance coverage to protect it if a liability claim did occur. The second issue involves the Bureau of Reclamation contracts with some districts. These contracts contain a provision that the district indemnifies the United States for claims or lawsuits arising out of the neglect or misconduct of the district, or the United States. They will readily indemnify the Bureau of Reclamation for claims involving the district’s negligence, but when you logically think about this, what insurance carrier is going to agree to indemnify the United States for the negligence of the Bureau of Reclamation? The answer is probably few, if any, assuming they are aware of the exposure. As an insurance broker representing many insurance companies, we have the obligation to make the insurance company is aware of an exposure like this. When we have, a typical response is, “We can only indemnify the Bureau and [the] USA for the negligence of our insured in the O&M [operation and management] of the project. It is important to confirm that our indemnification is limited to our insured’s negligence only.” Agreeing to sign this contract could severely limit the district’s ability to purchase liability insurance coverage. Plus, there are some jurisdictions that do not allow indemnifying others for their sole negligence. These are only two examples. The lesson is this: Read the indemnity agreements and insurance language in any contract you sign, and share that information with your insurance broker and insurance company before you sign the agreement. Joel Pearson is the managing director of the Central Washington Offices for Wells Fargo Insurance Services USA, Inc. He may be contacted by phone at (509) 853-4211 or by e-mail at joel.pearson@wellsfargo.com.

Irrigation Leader

The Western Governors’ Association By James D. Ogsbury

he Western Governors’ Association (WGA), created in 1984, represents the governors of 19 western states and 3 U.S.-flag islands. Through WGA, the governors develop and promote bipartisan policy recommendations with respect to western policy issues involving water, forests, energy, wildlife, environmental protection, and like matters. Recent examples of WGA activity include publication of a report on western water transfers and development of a bipartisan position on federal energy subsidies and the extension of production tax credits. Western Water Water is the lifeblood of the West. Western governors have worked together over the years to improve policies across the full range of water issues, including flood control, drought response, water quantity and quality, water transfers, and water rights. Water Needs and Strategies for a Sustainable Future is a series of WGA reports (published in 2006, 2008, and 2010) setting forth a comprehensive agenda for western water. The governors are working together to develop water solutions to accommodate economic growth, sustain western communities, and improve quality of life. Farmers and ranchers play a critical role in this discussion—agriculture developed much of our water supply infrastructure and still accounts for over 80 percent of the total water use in the western states. This past December, the governors released a report, Water Transfers in the West, identifying regional strategies for meeting western water demands with voluntary marketbased sales and leases of water rights. Cognizant of the importance of agriculture, the governors passed a policy resolution in 2011 urging states to “identify and promote innovative ways to allow water transfers from other uses . . . while avoiding or mitigating damages to agricultural economies and communities.” Water transfers can be valuable tools for water managers to meet new demands related to changes in farming practices, energy development, and urbanization. They are also present an opportunity for agriculture to diversify revenue streams, create investment in water infrastructure, and enhance local economies. Western governors have directed WGA staff to develop recommendations and identify best practices in several other areas to ensure a sustainable water future for the West. • Water Infrastructure: The West requires additional investment in water storage, conveyance, and treatment infrastructure. WGA and its affiliate, the Western States Water Council (WSWC), host a biennial symposium on financing and permitting water infrastructure. We will be releasing a report on this topic in June 2013. • Drought and Extreme Weather: Western governors are acutely aware of the impacts of drought on agriculture, cities, the environment, and quality of life. They spearheaded the establishment of the National

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

WGA Objectives

Develop and communicate regional policy Serve as a leadership forum Build regional capacity Conduct research and disseminate findings Form coalitions and partnerships to advance regional interests 6. Build public understanding and support for regional issues and policy positions Integrated Drought Information System and are working with federal agencies and local communities to assess drought impacts, streamline the delivery of disaster relief, and prepare for continued drought in 2013. • Basic Water Data: The level of investment in monitoring the quantity and quality of water in the West continues to decline. Yet our water demands continue to grow, and we need a better understanding of our complex hydrologic systems to ensure smart water management and the design of effective policy. WGA and WSWC are compiling water supply and water use information from across the western states in a “Water Data Exchange” (http://www.westernstateswater.org/wade/). We will be working with the U.S. Geological Survey and other partners to provide a platform where decisionmakers can find accurate and accessible data on our water resources. Looking Ahead to 2013 and Beyond WGA is the creation and instrument of western governors. It exists to promote their policies in an effective and bipartisan matter. The association has a proud legacy of success, illustrated by its pioneering effort to meet the demand for distance learning in the West with the creation of the Western Governors’ University. Looking ahead, our goal is to help realize the governors’ goals and provide strategic support for implementation of their policies. Especially considering the state of gridlock in Washington, DC’s (the “new normal,” as it were), the western governors are ideally situated to lead the nation, particularly on matters of importance to the West. James Ogsbury is the executive director of the Western Governors’ Association. Having previously served as the staff director of the Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development of the U.S. House Appropriations Committee and the federal relations manager of the Salt River Project, Mr. Ogsbury has more than 20 years of experience creating and implementing public policy with an emphasis on energy and water. For more information about WGA, visit its website at www.westgov.org. Irrigation Leader

District Focus

Farmers Irrigation District:

Creating Revenue through Innovation

or Farmers Irrigation District (FID), water delivery, innovation, and conservation are essential. FID is located in Hood River, Oregon, nestled between Mount Hood and Mount Adams in the Columbia River Gorge. Founded in 1874, the district currently provides water to 5,800 acres of residential and agricultural land. The basin upon which FID is situated is an ancient lahar, so much of the soil is made up of compressed volcanic ash and silty loams. Given the fertile soil and other environmental conditions, the district primarily supports orchardists. In the 1860s and 1870s, some of the early settlers of the area started planting fruit trees. By the turn of the 20th century, Hood River was exporting apples all over the world. The Hood River Valley now produces internationally recognized, high-end pears, apples, cherries, and wine grapes and is the biggest exporter of winter pears in the United States.

Hydropower in the Hood

FID strives to play a direct and supportive role in achieving sustainable practices of water use for the common good. Jer Camarata, Farmers’ general manager, stressed that “[w]hat is good for the environment is also good for us as growers.” FID established its foundation for sustainable practices in 1980, when it embarked on a small-scale hydroelectric program to create revenue for water conservation projects. The district’s two hydro facilities create a total capacity of 4,800 kilowatts and produce over 24 million kilowatts per year. Electricity sales now generate 73 percent of the district’s annual revenues. Since the district embarked on the hydroelectric program, FID has made approximately $37 million in capital investments, from pipeline conversion to habitat restoration. The district has converted almost 61 miles of canal to pipe. With the recent conversion of the Lowline Canal to pipe this year, Farmers’ infrastructure will be only a few miles shy of being transformed from a completely open system to a completely closed system. Over 100 years old and plagued by leaks, landslides, and blowouts, Lowline Canal failures annually dumped an average of 2,290 tons of sediment into the Hood River. Placing canals such as this into pipe reduces maintenance costs, prevents excess sediment from reaching the river, and ensures reliable water delivery to patrons and power plants. With the final stretches of the last remaining open segments of Farmers Canal placed in pipe by 2015, the district will be 100 percent piped and pressurized.

The Farmers Screen

Following the construction of its hydroelectric facilities, FID employed rotary drum and vertical screens to help ensure the safety of the abundant coldwater

The Farmers Screen at FID.

fisheries of the Hood River Basin. Sediment and debris would often impinge upon and clog the screens, requiring a significant amount of manpower for maintenance and cleaning. In addition, rotary drum screens required power through a direct feed or solar panels. In 1996, a massive flood event destroyed FID’s infrastructure. At that point, with customers in need of water and power and debt obligations on the line, FID staff and board decided to design a new kind of fish screen, one without moving parts and safe for fish. By 2001, FID had extensively tested the new design and constructed the screen at a diversion on the Hood River. FID owns a patent on a horizontal fish screen called the Farmers Screen. The district licensed it to the Farmers Conservation Alliance (FCA), a 501(c)(3)

Screen Installation Requirements • • • • • •

Off-channel siting with flow to the screen regulated by a headgate Adequate flow in the source river or stream to ensure bypass flow Elevation drop from the point of diversion to the end of the screen structure (1 foot in elevation differential is typically adequate) Head generation at flume entrance and the leading edge of the screen (enough to induce velocities of 3–7 feet per second) Source river slope exceeding slope of the diverted water conveyance Willingness of screen owner/operator to agree to operate the screen as designed and as specified in the operation manual

nonprofit social enterprise founded in 2006 that markets, sells, and installs the screen across the West. Leasing the screen patent is a revenue source for FID. Whenever Irrigation Leader

FCA sells a Farmers Screen, they pay FID a small royalty fee. This year, FID will receive about $15,000 in revenues from the screen, and next year the district projects $20,000 in revenues. If successful, these numbers should begin to quickly increase by several percentage points each year. For FID, deploying the Farmers Screen translated into substantial savings. At one diversion, FID would spend anywhere from $95,000 to $100,000 a year on operating and maintaining the old screens. Once it changed over to a Farmers Screen, the operation and maintenance costs associated with the old screens disappeared. For example, because the screen is substantially self-cleaning, FID does not need to have a crew dedicated to cleaning out the screen during leaf season, nor do moving parts need to be maintained and replaced.

Spurring Agricultural Technology Investment

FCA tries to foster the development of more agricultural technologies, more agricultural entrepreneurs, and a support system for those entrepreneurs. Julie O’Shea, FCA’s executive director, sees a real challenge for agricultural investment: People invest in what they know and what they need. “There is a real disconnect between the technology investment community and the agricultural community.” Therefore, Ms. O’Shea spends a lot of time talking to impact investors, foundations, and financial investors looking for investments in both technology and community goods. She touts the synergies in the agricultural and environmental sectors. The Farmers Screen, with its National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)-created and ‑approved specific criteria, goes hand in hand with off-channel hydropower. FCA is taking significant steps to couple hydropower with screen operation to protect fish, manage debris, and provide a consistent flow of water to generators. Pairing the fish screen with hydropower fits into a systematic approach to smart investing: optimal water delivery for customers; reductions in overall water use; and reliable, continuous energy production. It is a win for the investor, for the irrigation district, and for farmers.

Turning Megawatts into Dollars

The benefits to hydroelectric facilities go beyond electricity revenues. FID is trying to quantify all of the positive attributes of clean energy. With that in mind, Mr. Camarata started looking at how many megawatthours FID produced annually and tried to determine the

Farmers Screen Impacts • 484.20 cubic feet per second of diverted water converted to fish-friendly diversions • 27,883 acres of farmland protected • 10 megawatts generation capacity of green, fish friendly hydropower enabled • 167.70 river-miles opened for safe fish passage • $493,700 saved annually in avoided operation and maintenance costs Irrigation Leader

district’s relational carbon footprint. As a result, he recently established the nation’s first-ever Voluntary Carbon Offset Retirement Fund for Water & Power Purveyors. FID operations and maintenance adds an estimated 120 metric tons (264,555 pounds) of carbon to the Earth’s atmosphere every year. However, FID produces approximately 24,000 megawatt-hours (equivalent to 24,000 Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs)) of carbonneutral, renewable energy every year, offsetting a total of 51,810,960 pounds of carbon each year—over 195 times greater than FID’s operational carbon footprint. Even small infrastructure improvements, water delivery efficiency gains, and streamlined operation and maintenance procedures equate to very large reductions in global carbon over time. Mr. Camarata says FID is “as green as it gets.” Banked RECs can be sold into state markets with renewable portfolio standards, such as in California. Renewable standards are set forth by the state and require providers to purchase a percentage of their power from a renewable source. FID attempts to sell the balance of its annually produced RECs to enhance revenues for water conservation and in-stream flow projects and to help others offset their carbon footprints each year. But Mr. Camarata does not sell surplus RECs without first setting aside and retiring enough RECs to make sure that the district remains carbon neutral. Through efforts such as this, FID increases its chances of successfully applying to sources, such as the Energy Trust of Oregon (ETO), to gain funds for energy enhancement projects. By transferring some of its credits to ETO and enhancing hydropower production through piping Low Line Canal, FID will receive $150,000.

Systemic Thinking to Optimize Service

Jer Camarata is honored to work for FID. “I feel like we have done the right thing [for our customers and our region] by making significant investments in our infrastructure and environment.” The district has also positioned itself for continued effective service through its many technological accomplishments, from building a webbased water accounting program to setting up a web-based GIS to connecting the district’s power plants and telemetry via wi-fi to closely tracking and trending data for system inefficiencies. That kind of innovation results in significant gains. “It helps our workforce and our customers succeed. Certified green renewable hydropower really works for the common good. It neutralizes our carbon footprint, helps pay the bills for irrigated agriculture, creates and maintains local jobs, and supports millions of dollars worth of conservationbased in-stream and water delivery capital improvement projects. The more our efficiencies climb, the healthier our environment becomes and the more our water patrons benefit.” For more information on the Farmers Irrigation District, visit its website at www.fidhr.org or call Jer Camarata at (541) 386‑3115. To learn more about the Farmers Screen, contact FCA’s Les Perkins at les.perkins@fcasolutions.org or (541) 716‑6085. 33

Water Law 34

Show Me the Money— or Else? By Bob Lynch

It has been a familiar pattern for years that resource agencies are short-changed in the appropriation process. This is especially true in their requests for capital to repair, replace, or upgrade infrastructure. Realistically, this pattern is destined to continue. The Office of Management and Budget has even designated portions of agency capital requests as having to come from project beneficiaries/customers. More and more, the agencies we deal with (the Bureau of Reclamation, the Corps of Engineers, and the Power Marketing Administrations) are looking to us for this money. Reacting to this situation, a variety of local or regional strategies have been developed to help make up the shortfall that affects these areas. The success of these efforts is tempered, however, by some limitations we face in implementing our strategies. Capital expenditures sometimes have to be annualized, rather than amortized, creating upward pressure on rates. Customer funding is capped by the creditworthiness of the customer(s). Most importantly, capital funding that needs (or should have) more than same-year accounting treatment is subjected to scoring issues, Cut-Go congressional rules (previously Pay-Go), and even earmark ban scrutiny. Which raises (to me at least) a fundamental question: Why should monies originating from outside the federal government “score”? Isn’t it a good thing to save taxpayer dollars by having others (typically project customers) provide the funds? Guess what? The federal government doesn’t think like that. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) frowns on third-party financing, criticizing it as spending outside the oversight of Congress, cost inflating, and allowing agencies to do things Congress hasn’t authorized. In short, something negative; something to be treated with suspicion (CBO Economic and Budget Issues Brief: Third-Party Financing of Federal Projects, June 1, 2005). And this attitude is not new. The grounding document for this attitude is the 1967—get that, 1967!—Report of the President’s Commission on Budget Concepts (October 1967, p. 25). So today, we are being hamstrung by “concepts” articulated in a 45-year-old report! To make things worse, CBO issues brief starts with assumptions that don’t even apply to our customer funding programs. How do we deal with this? Someone once said that

in order to eat an elephant, you have to take one bite at a time. That may be true here also. Let’s start with what we want and should get for our money: 1. Partnerships, not paternalism 2. Benefits to the projects we support 3. Accountability for funds provided 4. Life of the asset amortization to control rate impacts Who knows? You may have things to add to this list. But that is the point. We contract with the agency. It gets money for the project in question. We get our list. Where do we start? Well, we need to confront the scoring issue, and we can. We need to make our case to Congress and to CBO that our financing is different. We can also ask Congress to start removing barriers to our doing the financing. One of those efforts is already underway. Last summer, House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Doc Hastings introduced H.R. 6247. The bill collects a lot of things the chairman had been working on. Additionally, section 6 of the bill takes a step toward removing one barrier to customer financing. It amends one sentence in the Hayden O’Mahoney Act that is preventing some customers from funding their projects. It isn’t the whole answer, but it’s a start. If it passes, it will encourage others to propose other solutions. In any event, one thing is certain. The agencies are looking for money. If they don’t get it from us, they’ll get it from other people who want to make money and who see us as being on the menu, not at the table. Robert S. Lynch is an attorney in private practice in Phoenix, Arizona. His firm’s website is www.rslynch-az.com. To contact Mr. Lynch, please phone (602) 254-5908 or e-mail RSLynch@rslynchaty.com.

Irrigation Leader

Water Law 36

Red River Shootout Goes to Washington: Supreme Court Agrees to Decide Texas–Oklahoma Dispute with Important Implications for Water Management By Jim Oliver

arlier this month, the Supreme Court agreed to hear a case previously described in these pages, Tarrant Regional Water District v. Herrmann. The case involves issues familiar and important to those in the water management community. At bottom, it is about whether courts will properly enforce the plain meaning of interstate compacts governing water allocation or instead allow states to evade their obligations under those compacts. The Supreme Court now has the opportunity to undo some dangerous precedent. In the spirit of college football’s “Red River Shootout,” the case pits Texas—through the Tarrant Regional Water District, which is responsible with other regional providers for supplying some 6.5 million residents in the Dallas–Fort Worth area—against Oklahoma—in the form of Oklahoma’s Water Resources Board, which is responsible for administering (or in this case, prohibiting) the export of water from the state. Appropriately, the water at the heart of this dispute comes from the Red River Basin. At its core, the case implicates Texas’s and Oklahoma’s respective rights and obligations under the Red River Compact, which both states entered into, along with Arkansas and Louisiana, to allocate water from the Red River Basin. The Red River Compact is 1 of more than 30 agreements that various states have entered into (with the consent of the federal government) to address the allocation and appropriation of water across state borders and water sources. The stated goal of the compact in this case is to “promote interstate comity and remove causes of controversy between each of the affected states.” To help accomplish that goal, the compact grants to each of the four signatory states “equal rights to the use” of all water flowing into the Red River (below certain major dam sites) at Texas’s borders with Oklahoma and Arkansas, so long as certain minimum downstream flow requirements are met. The Tarrant Regional Water District, like most of Texas, is in dire need of new sources of water. On top of current shortages caused by prolonged drought, forecasts show that by 2060, the population served by the district will have more than doubled, and its

customers’ demand for water will exceed supply by more than 155 billion gallons per year. Oklahoma, in contrast, is often flush with water. Oklahoma finds itself in the heart of the Mississippi River watershed and uses less than 6 percent of its available surface water, with the rest flowing out of the state, ultimately bound for the Gulf of Mexico. Because Texas cannot get its share of the Red River from within the state, Tarrant, as part of its plan to alleviate future water shortages, is seeking to exercise Texas’s “equal rights of use” of Red River Basin water under the compact by acquiring a portion of its share from within Oklahoma. Oklahoma, however, is covetous of its water and has passed a number of laws to prohibit the export of water from the state, even though that prohibition conflicts with its responsibilities under interstate agreements such as the Red River Compact. Tarrant went to court to challenge Oklahoma’s water export restrictions as a violation of the federal Supremacy and Commerce Clauses. While the compact is essentially a contract, because Congress approves it, it also takes on the force of federal law. And, according to the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution, federal law trumps (or “preempts”) conflicting state law. The upshot is that federal courts must enforce Oklahoma’s obligations under the compact the same way they must enforce any other federal law—which means applying the compact as written, contrary state laws notwithstanding. Unfortunately, the lower courts in this case failed to apply the clear language of the compact to ensure that Oklahoma does not thwart Texas’s right to access its share of Red River water. For example, while the words “equal rights of use” have a clear meaning to most people, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals muddied the phrase by employing an interpretative device called the “presumption against preemption” to its reading of the Red River Compact. The court used this device to avoid the plain meaning of the phrase, instead reading it to provide for an equal share to each state only from water already within that state’s boundaries. The court read the provision this way even though the provision does not refer in any way to state lines, and even though the court accepted as fact that it is impossible for Texas to obtain its equal share from Irrigation Leader

within its own borders. To make matters worse, the Tenth Circuit used boilerplate language in the compact to hold that Congress, when it approved the compact—which was designed to enhance cooperation and resource sharing among its signatories—expressly authorized Oklahoma to enact discriminatory state water laws that would otherwise violate the Commerce Clause. Most troubling, the same boilerplate language is present in most water-sharing compacts among western states. There are more than 20 such agreements to which almost every western state is a party. On the Tenth Circuit’s understanding, each state that entered into a compact meant to ensure and encourage the sharing of water is now, ironically, free to enact discriminatory laws that prevent other states from accessing water that is both promised and needed. The Tenth Circuit’s holding therefore creates the very real risk that disputes over water will flourish in the West, creating heated cycles of retaliation that leave us all worse off. If it is allowed to stand, the consequences could be dire, not just for millions of residents of Texas, but for the entire country. Tarrant picked up a powerful ally when the Supreme Court asked the Solicitor General of the United States for its opinion on whether the Court should take the case. The Solicitor General—known in legal circles as the “Tenth Justice” because of its influence with the Supreme

Court—agreed with Tarrant that the plain language of the compact requires Oklahoma to give Tarrant access to Oklahoma water, and that the Tenth Circuit was wrong to bend over backwards to help Oklahoma embargo its water in violation of the compact and the Constitution. The Solicitor General also agreed with Tarrant that because of the stakes involved, the Supreme Court should take the case in order to correct the Tenth Circuit’s mistakes. The Supreme Court has now agreed to hear the case, which will be argued in mid-April and which the Court will decide by late June, after further briefing by the parties and “friends of the Court” who have an interest in the resolution of the issues. The Supreme Court now has the opportunity to undo the Tenth Circuit’s dangerous precedent, and in doing so, help ensure that water compacts continue to be a viable method of resource allocation and interstate cooperation. Jim Oliver is the general manager of Tarrant Regional Water District in Fort Worth, Texas. For more information on TRWD, please visit www.trwd.com.

Irrigation Leader Advertising Works Irrigation Leader directly markets your message to the decision-makers on irrigation and other water infrastructure projects. Hard copies of Irrigation Leader are mailed to the nearly 600 irrigation district general managers and their respective boards of directors in the 17 western states; the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation; Congress; all western state legislators' and governors' offices; and a variety of western water-related organizations, engineering firms, and interested individuals. In other words, advertising in Irrigation Leader is like having over 12,000 people stop by your vendor booth.

“We are getting business from your magazine! Please continue our ad.”

~Jill Carding, AquaLastic®

For information on advertisement rates, packages, and placement, please contact our office by e-mailing Irrigation.Leader@waterstrategies.com. Irrigation Leader

Irrigation Leader

The Innovators

Saving Water and Shielding Soldiers By Tom Matheson

or 43 years, Matheson Painting Contractors has prepared and coated everything from farm equipment to tanks to nuclear industry parts. We understand coatings and concrete. In 2003, Matheson Painting formed a new company, Hydro Consulting, LLC, for the specific purpose of solving problems in the irrigation industry. Hydro Consulting, LLC, has now repaired over 12 million linear feet of canal in 8 states with nearly 100 percent success.

Our Products

Hydro Consulting, LLC, has developed an AquaLastic® Canal Repair System consisting of our original AquaLastic® polyurea, AquaLastic® LSM version, AquaLastic® Low Pressure System, and AquaLastic® CanalWrap. These products help meet the water-saving needs of the irrigation districts. The signature product for irrigation-related repair work, AquaLastic®, is the standard bearer for longterm, watertight lining and crack and joint repair. AquaLastic® started out as a high-performance polyurea elastomer used in the repair of canals, ditches, reservoirs, and flumes. It provides a flexible, industrialstrength membrane with excellent water and chemical resistance—perfect for any project where there is high abrasion and a need to be watertight. Polyurea products have come a long way from their original purpose of lining pickup truck beds. AquaLastic®, manufactured by Specialty Products, Inc., is a polyurea developed specifically for flowing and static water situations. Now in its 14th product revolution, its success in irrigation has been well documented. The newest AquaLastic®, a low-stress modulus (LSM) version, is a completely different classification of product than polyurea. It will be classified as an elastomeric polymer, stretching with very little force, like a surgical glove, but requiring a tremendous amount of force to actually break. It immediately relaxes back to its original position. It can do that

over and over again. After putting AquaLastic® LSM on a cycling machine, it went through 533,000 cycles of stretch and release before it finally broke. That’s something a polyurea cannot do. In addition, Hydro Consulting, LLC, has developed the AquaLastic® Low Pressure System. This allows irrigation districts to use their own crew to apply a low-pressure product similar to AquaLastic®. Hydro Consulting, LLC, has also developed the AquaLastic® CanalWrap, a 110-mil thick rubber canal liner for concrete and earthen canals, which is made in America from 85 percent recycled materials.

Quantifiable Savings for Irrigation Districts

AquaLastic® Canal Repair System offers substantial cost and water savings to irrigation districts. Several years ago, Roza Irrigation District came to us with a persistent leakage issue. A couple of sections of the main canal, which measures 18 feet across and 12 feet deep, had cracks caused by weather-induced expansion and contraction. Matheson Painting sand blasted a 3-to-4-inch-wide strip on each side of the cracks in the concrete and applied a lining of AquaLastic® on the strips. The results were fantastic! Estimated water loss prior to repair was 1,220 acre-feet per irrigation season. Water loss after the repair was only 14 acrefeet. The water saved from the repair of just one major crack paid for the repairs on all of the cracks in one irrigation season.

Starting by Chance

The initial development of polyurea as a fullscale canal repair system was completely accidental. Fourteen years ago, the Quincy-Columbia Basin Irrigation District called Matheson Painting to repair some corroded flow gates. Garth Gunter, assistant manager, was a pioneer, willing to try new ideas. I mentioned that we had just lined three steel flumes for Columbia Irrigation District (CID) in Kennewick in which there were thousands of baseball-sized holes. CID wanted to line it with something that would last a Irrigation Leader

Application of AquaLastic® at Quincy-Columbia Irrigation District.

couple of years in hopes of landing a grant. Gary Wetherly, CID engineer, noticed that the gel time for AquaLastic® was three seconds, so we wrapped a drop cloth with plastic, placed it over the inside of the holes, and sprayed the AquaLastic® over the holes. We then removed the plastic before it stuck to the plastic and bridged these baseball-sized holes with the AquaLastic® at 50 mils on the outside and 100 mils on the inside and lined 1,200 feet of flume. It was an outstanding achievement! In fact, after 14 years, the AquaLastic® in this high-speed flume still shows no signs of wear. It has lasted nearly as long as the steel flume itself, which was originally installed in 1981. At that time, Quincy-Columbia Irrigation District had been using a fiber-reinforced tar called “bear grease” on cracks in their canals and flumes. Garth asked whether this “goop” (as he called the AquaLastic®) could be used in Quincy. We didn’t know—I had a hundred gallons left over, so I told him if he paid direct labor costs, we would put it on and see. It worked amazingly well! When Garth retired, he gave a two-hour presentation on the annualized cost of AquaLastic® compared to other products, explaining that it is a fraction of the cost of tar per year and provides real value over time. The Quincy-Columbia board members are genuinely creative and innovative.

Saving Lives

Years ago, CID called about an interesting development at one of the same flumes that led to the development of AquaLastic®. A local boy had fired his father’s .3030 and it did not penetrate the flume; then, he fired his grandfather’s .44-magnum, and it immediately selfsealed. SPI was called to investigate the possibility that AquaLastic might mitigate ballistic damage in some cases by stopping or slowing down bullets. SPI created a stronger, higher modulus formulation the Marines named Dragonshield. It was taken to a military shooting range and withstood a wide range of firepower on high-strength hardened steel. The military immediately

Irrigation Leader

became interested and picked up a container load of the Dragonshield polyurea from SPI and shipped it to Iraq. Marines are now applying Dragonshield to Humvees in the field to enhance the integrity of the Humvee’s steel armor. Dragonshield absorbs the blast of roadside bombs and prevents the vehicle’s metal from fragmenting and injuring soldiers. Further, the superior blast and ballistics protection goes beyond the floor of a Humvee and protects the soldiers from improvised exploding devices in Iraq and Afghanistan. A government contract was subsequently awarded to SPI to build a lightweight, low-pressure polyurea spray machine that could be transported in backpacks to be used in covert operations and war zones to make a room bullet proof. Dragonshield improves the survival rate of soldiers exposed to a blast by reducing wall deflection and overpressure caused by blast events. SPI developed the low-pressure spray equipment for the military. Hydro Consulting, LLC, has taken this military technology to irrigation districts for testing and made modifications to adjust for cold temperatures. Basically, the Hydro Consulting AquaLastic Low Pressure System (ALPS) is the same piece of equipment the military used, with modifications. It is ironic that in 14 years, SPI, the world leader in polyurea development, has taken polyurea technology from irrigation use to the military to save lives and back to irrigation to save water. The lightweight low-pressure spray equipment and Aquaseal® crack sealer developed for the military is now available as Aquaseal® for use as a lightweight, inexpensive irrigation repair system.

Finding Solutions for Irrigation Districts

We respect and admire how seriously irrigation district managers take their responsibility as water stewards. They are problem solvers by necessity. Managers continually grapple with the need to address pressing repair problems immediately, incurring short-term costs, with the desire to achieve real value from long-term solutions. We are in the business of working closely with managers to achieve that goal. We do not have to sell a product; we provide solutions. We’re profitable—don’t get me wrong—but the profit is a byproduct of solving problems. We do not try to take our product and make it fit their problem. We find out what the problem is and provide real solutions, even if it involves making new products or equipment. That’s when it gets to be fun. Tom Matheson is the founder of Mathheson Painting Contractors and Hydro Consulting, LLC. To contact Mr. Matheson please phone (800) 735-1118 or tom@mathesonpainting.com. 43

The Innovators

Low Impacts, High Returns:

Lucid Energy's In-pipe Power Generation

very water provider knows that water and energy are inexorably linked—it takes energy to deliver clean, safe water. In fact, 6 percent of the energy consumed in the United States is used to purify and deliver water. But the connection works both ways, as the production of electrical power consumes large amounts of water. According to the U.S. Geological Service, thermoelectric power withdrawals account for 49 percent of the country’s total water use and 53 percent of fresh surface-water withdrawals. Accounting for the connection between water and energy is critical to the future success of any water provider. Irrigation districts and municipal water providers are in a unique position to find and employ the efficiencies necessary to recapture energy embedded in their own operations.

An Efficient Water and Power Solution

Lucid Energy, a U.S.-based provider of renewable energy technologies, has developed a solution that addresses the opportunity to recapture valuable energy without disrupting operations and without environmental impact. The company’s LucidPipe Power System enables irrigation districts, municipal water utilities, and industrial facilities to produce clean, reliable, low-cost electricity from their gravity-fed water pipelines and effluent streams. LucidPipe utilizes a patented, lift-based turbine that integrates into large-diameter water pipes to generate power by tapping into the potential energy embedded in the flow of water. “Energy is the largest cost center for most large water infrastructure managers,” says Gregg Semler, president and CEO of Lucid Energy. “LucidPipe is designed to help offset those costs, reduce reliance on grid-based power, and even provide a new source of revenue from renewable energy. And the best part is that the electricity is generated from a resource they already have—water moving through pipelines.” Each LucidPipe turbine produces up to 100 kilowatts (kW) of renewable, zero-emissions

electricity by extracting excess head pressure without impeding water flow. Multiple LucidPipe units can be installed into a single pipeline for a system that can produce more than a megawatt (MW) of electricity. Because water delivery is mission-critical for Lucid Energy’s customers, considerable research and development has been invested in the design of the inpipe turbine to ensure that it produces reliable, low-cost electricity without disrupting water operations. In addition to producing electricity, the slight reduction in head pressure from LucidPipe provides added advantages for pipeline operations. Most gravity-fed systems utilize a pressure-reducing valve (PRV) system to reduce the amount of pressure in water pipelines before water is delivered. LucidPipe is usually placed upstream of the PRV, which helps relieve pressure on the valve, reduces wear, and helps reduce water leakage.

Field Tested

Backed by grants from the U.S. Department of Energy and a partnership with Northwest Pipe Company, Lucid Energy has been designing, testing, and perfecting the LucidPipe since 2007. The specially designed turbine is made of components that are compatible with drinking water standards and are manufactured at a facility that also produces wings for airplanes, ensuring safety and durability. Irrigation Leader

“The in-pipe environment is fast and furious, and what the turbine experiences is akin to an airplane going through turbulence,” says Semler. “LucidPipe is similar to a spherical wind turbine inside of a pipe, so the blades are designed to be very reliable and robust to tolerate the forces within the pipe.” The technology was piloted and tested at Riverside Public Utilities over a three-year period, with the latest commercial deployment this past January. The results have been very positive. The single 42-inch turbine system has generated about 60 MW of power—enough to light 6 miles of Riverside’s streetlights at night. During the day, the system is used to defray operations costs. LucidPipe also has built-in sensors that provide Riverside with information it needs to monitor many useful parameters for improved pipeline management, such as energy output, pressure, flow rate, and temperature. The system has also displayed a real flexibility in meeting the particular needs of the customer. On most days, Riverside keeps the system working at full capacity, but on days that require a heavy flow beyond the capacity of the turbine, the water utility can modulate the system as needed.

Returns on the Investment

The cost of the LucidPipe Power System is roughly the same as the per-kW costs of solar or wind energy; however, the cost of energy production is much less because water flows continuously within the pipe. This otherwise untapped source of energy is a key difference, however, which results in an overall low cost of energy production and a return on investment that is typically four to five times better than these other, intermittent sources of renewable energy. Additionally, because the system exists within the water pipeline infrastructure, it has no added environmental impact, which eliminates the need for studies and special permitting that is often required with other sources of energy. The sensors that are part and parcel of the LucidPipe system also add to the knowledge base of large water infrastructure managers by monitoring flow rates, turbidity, and temperature. The interpretation of system data helps managers balance the pressure in the pipe and manage energy intensity to optimize power and level out costs. In addition to reducing valve wear and helping to prevent leaks, the system sensors also help managers to identify leaks quickly when they do occur.

Water–Energy Solutions for Irrigation Districts

Lucid Energy has just begun reaching out to managers of irrigation districts to explore ways to employ in-pipe hydropower techniques to offset pumping costs and generate more revenue for the districts. Because permitting costs are low to nonexistent, the technology can be deployed very quickly into canals as they are being enclosed

Irrigation Leader

into pipelines. Lucid Energy has worked closely with Farmers Irrigation District in Hood River, Oregon. The district operates two run-of-river hydropower facilities with stem-wall diversions to generate the funds necessary to upgrade its infrastructure and engage in conservation measures. It sells the electricity produced to a public utility. Today, 70 percent of Farmers’ revenue comes from selling electricity. Farmers has been exploring opportunities to put its larger canals into pipe and tap into the energy potential of piped water. Farmers Project Coordinator Jerry Bryan emphasizes the value of LucidPipe as an innovative energy solution. “The [LucidPipe] is a really nice and environmentally noninvasive product, one that meshes well with the district’s long-term plan and philosophy. We like the product and the company.” Within the next year, Lucid Energy aims to work with the Hood River Basin irrigators at-large and employ its LucidPipe technology. Lucid Energy’s in-pipe turbine system comes preinstalled in large (from 24- to 96-inch) diameter water pipes. The company works with the irrigation district or municipality to deploy the system: delivering it to the construction site, putting it into place, and connecting into the pipeline. That process takes about a day or two. The subsequent work to connect with the grid and refill the pipeline takes about a week. So, within a week, a district can be up and running, delivering water and generating electricity.

Looking Ahead

Semler describes a key part of Lucid Energy’s vision as “bringing water into the smart grid.” The company is doing just that, both in the United States and abroad. Lucid Energy has signed an agreement with for a LucidPipe Power System in the San Antonio Water System in early 2013. In-pipe power generation has huge potential abroad. In general, energy outside the United States is very costly—15 or 20 cents a per kilowatt-hour—so the argument for installing renewable, low-impact technology for electricity generation is compelling. In fact, Lucid Energy is working with Israel’s National Water Company to deploy the technology in its system. “What’s so surprising to me is that water is the most energy-intensive resource on the planet, yet it is not yet an essential part of the huge investment going into smarting up our grid,” observes Semler. “With LucidPipe, we are helping to bridge that gap between the water and energy sectors, providing a way for large users of water and energy to better utilize these critical resources to ensure a growing, sustainable, and secure economy.” For more information on the LucidPipe, call (574) 217-4844 or e-mail info@lucidenergy.com. 45

CLASSIFIED LISTINGS IRRIGATION DISTRICT MANAGER The Midvale Irrigation District in Pavillion, Wyoming, is seeking a manager. Reporting to a five-member board, the manager implements the board’s directives and policies and manages the administrative and operational functions of the District. A qualified individual will have extensive knowledge of and experience in the fields of engineering and irrigation systems and water resources operations. The candidate must have excellent communication and interpersonal skills and be capable of developing productive working relationships with the Midvale Board, staff, constituents of the District, and relevant government agencies. Essential responsibilities include: • Hire, supervise and develop staff. • Develop, in conjunction with the Board, an approved annual operating budget. • Assure proper preparation of accurate O&M assessment rolls. • Oversee the administration of the Amendatory Repayment Contract. • Oversee the maintenance of District facilities and equipment. • Develop excellent relations with water users and governmental agencies. • Maintain a quality safety program. • Implement policies as directed by the Board. Salary range: $60-70k To apply please submit a resume and references to: Wyoming Department of Workforce Services Attention Burl Gies 422 E. Fremont Ave., Riverton, WY 82501 307-856-3468 (fax) burl.gies@wyo.gov (email)

Project Delivery Engineer - Mechanical Fort Collins, CO

This flexible, hands-on role will primarily be responsible for supporting the Engineering Director in project execution throughout the Americas. The successful candidate will be responsible for product selection/sizing and review of civil installation works required for all projects. They will also serve as a Project Manager, working with client’s engineers to oversee implementation of Rubicon’s hardware, software, and SCADA solutions. As needed the role will generate CAD drawings and support the field technicians in installation, commissioning, diagnostics, warehouse logistics support, product installation, and product manufacturing and assembly. Bachelor degree in Mechanical or Civil Engineering required with 2 to 6 years of experience/knowledge in agricultural irrigation or water industry preferred. Visit us at www.rubiconwater.com or contact us at 877-4406080 to learn more about Rubicon Water and current career opportunities. Send your resumes to employment@rubiconwater.com Rubicon Water is an Equal Opportunity Employer

For more information, call 307-856-9231.

Engineering Technician Yakima-Tieton Irrigation District The Yakima-Tieton Irrigation District has an opening for a full time Engineering Technician. The District delivers water to 28,000 acres in the upper Yakima Valley. An A.A. Engineering Technician degree with an emphasis on irrigation, hydraulics, construction management and GIS mapping is preferred. Familiar with ArcView GIS 3.2 and proficient in Microsoft Excel. Relevant work experience may be substituted for education. Salary and benefits are negotiable. The position includes benefits. Salary is negotiable dependent upon education and experience. Duties include: • Updating existing facility drawings via GIS as needed; • Understanding existing system operations; • Assisting in the planning, design, construction and maintenance of facilities; • Coordinating cathodic protection system upgrade; • Investigating and resolving easement access and maintenance needs;

• Coordinating facilities relocation projects, inspection, and material acquisitions; • Understanding hydropower plants and upgrade as needed; and • Evaluating and upgrade telemetry callout system. Resumes accepted until January 15, 2012 at 5:00 p.m. Submit to one of the following: Yakima-Tieton Irrigation District 470 Camp 4 Road Yakima, WA 98908 (509) 678-5730 Fax: (509) 678-5730 Email: RickDieker@yvn.com

For information on posting to the Classified Listings, please e-mail Irrigation.Leader@ waterstrategies.com. Irrigation Leader

2013 CALENDAR

Jan. 23–24 Jan. 22–24 Jan. 24–25

Jan. 29–30 Jan. 28–31 Jan. 30–Feb. 1 Feb. 4–5 Feb. 6 Feb. 21–22 Feb. 26–28 Mar. 5 Mar. 15 Mar. 18–20 Apr. 14–16

Irrigation Leader Operations and Management Workshop, Phoenix, AZ Idaho Water Users Assn., Annual Convention, Boise, ID Texas Water Conservation Assn. & Texas Rural Water Assn., Water Laws Conference, Austin, TX Nebraska Assn. of Resources Districts, NRDs 2013 Legislative Conference, Lincoln, NE Nevada Water Resources Assn., Annual Conference, Reno, NV Colorado Water Congress, Annual Convention, Denver, CO California Irrigation Institute, Annual Conference, Sacramento, CA Texas Water Conservation Assn., Texas Water Day, Washington, DC Family Farm Alliance, Annual Conference, Monte Carlo Hotel, Las Vegas, NV Assn. of California Water Agencies, DC Conference, Washington, DC Assn. of California Water Agencies, 2013 Legislative Symposium, Sacramento, CA Mountain Counties Water Resources Assn. & Assn. of California Water Agencies, Region 3, Joint Program: Drought and Climate Change, Auburn, CA Utah Water Users Assn., Utah Water Users Workshop, St. George, UT National Water Resources Assn., Federal Water Seminar, Washington DC

For more information on advertising in Irrigation Leader magazine, or if you would like a water event listed here, please phone (703) 517-3962 or e-mail Irrigation.Leader@waterstrategies.com. Submissions are due the first of each month preceding the next issue.

Past issues of Irrigation Leader are archived at