TCEQ

1
TCEQ Environmental Flows and Water Rights
Permitting

• Bruce Moulton
• Policy Regulations
• Texas Commission on Environmental Quality

2
5.013 General Jurisdiction of Commission

• (a) The commission has general jurisdiction over
• (l) water and water rights including the issuance
  of water rights permits, water rights
  adjudication, cancellation of water rights, and
  enforcement of water rights

3
Acquisition of Right to use State Water

• The right to the use of state water may be
  acquired by appropriation in the manner and for
  the purposes provided in this chapter (11.022)

4
Purposes for Which Water May be
Appropriated-11.023

• (a) State water may be appropriated, stored or
  diverted for
• Domestic/Livestock, Municipal, Agricultural
  Industrial, Mining, Hydroelectric, Navigation,
  Recreation Pleasure, Public Parks, Game
  Preserves
• (b)State water also may be appropriated, stored,
  or diverted for any other beneficial use.

5
11.0235 Policy Regarding Waters of the State

• (a) The waters of the state are held in trust for
  the public, and the right to use state water may
  be appropriated only as expressly authorized by
  law.
• (b) Maintaining the biological soundness of the
  states rivers, lakes, bays, and estuaries is of
  great importance to the publics economic health
  and general well being.

6
11.0235 Cont.

• (c) The legislature has expressly required the
  commission while balancing all other interests to
  consider and provide for the freshwater inflows
  necessary to maintain the viability of the
  states bay and estuary systems in the
  commissions regular granting of permits for the
  use of state waters.

7
11.0235 Cont.

• (d) The legislature has not expressly authorized
  granting water rights exclusively for
• Instream flows dedicated to environmental needs
  or inflows to the states bay and estuary system
  or
• (2) Other similar beneficial uses.

8
11.0235 Cont.

• (e) The fact that greater pressures and demands
  are being placed on the water resources of the
  state makes it of paramount importance to
  reexamine the process for ensuring that these
  important priorities are effectively addressed in
  clear delegations of authority to the commission.

9
Granting a Water Right

• In its consideration of an application for a new
  or amended water right, the Commission shall
  assess the effects, if any, on the issuance of
  the permit or amendment on
• 1. Bays and Estuaries --11.147(b)
• 2. Existing Instream Uses-- 11.147(d)
• 3. Fish Wildlife Habitats-- 11.147(e), 11.152
• 4. Water Quality-- 11.150
• 5. Groundwater or Groundwater Recharge--11.151

10
Applications Subject to an Environmental
Assessment

• Increase the total appropriative amount
• Significant change in point of diversion (e.g.,
  moving the diversion point a considerable
  distance upstream where streamflows are
  significantly less, moving the diversion point to
  a tributary, or moving the diversion point into
  habitat of threatened or endangered species)
• Change in diversion rate
• Significant change in place of use

11
Instream Flow Recommendations

• Site specific studies When available, site
  specific information is used.
• In the absence of site specific information,
  staff apply the Lyons Method (Bounds and Lyons,
  1979). This methodology uses 60 of the median
  flow during the warm months (March-September) and
  40 of median during cool months (October
  February).
• In instances where the 7Q2 value (two year, seven
  day low flow) is greater than Lyons, 7Q2 is used.

12
Freshwater Inflows

• For permits issued within an area that is within
  200 river miles of the coast the Commission
  shall include in the permit, to the extent
  practicable when considering public interests,
  those conditions necessary to maintain beneficial
  inflows to any effected bay and estuary system.

13
Freshwater Inflows

• Freshwater Inflow studies have been conducted for
  the seven major estuaries. Studies on the minor
  estuarine systems are scheduled to be completed
  by 2008.
• Recommendations for the Lavaca-Colorado Estuary
  were developed by the Lower Colorado River
  Authority.
• Inflow recommendations for three estuaries have
  been completed by the TPWD in consultation with
  the TWDB.

14
Bays Estuaries Data

• For purposes of determining conditions necessary
  to maintain beneficial inflows, the commission
  shall consider among other factors studies and
  plans specified in Section 11.1491 of this code
  and other studies considered by the commission to
  be reliable

15
Case Studies

• Matagorda Bay (Colorado-Lavaca Estuary) Results
  of the freshwater inflow study incorporated into
  LCRAs Water Management Plan for the Lower
  Colorado River.
• Nueces Estuary Freshwater inflows for Nueces
  Bay are specified in the Agreed Order for the
  operation of the Choke Canyon - Lake Corpus
  Christi system.
• Lavaca Bay Freshwater inflow release schedule
  was developed as part of the LNVAs Lake Texana
  water right amendment in 1996.

16
Lower Colorado River Authority

• Water Rights for Highland Lakes adjudicated in
  1988
• Required a Water Management Plan
• Included maintenance of instream flows and
  freshwater inflows for the Matagorda Bay system
• In 1992, Instream Flow Study completed

17
Water Management Plan-Process

• Review of policies and programs
• Series of public meetings to solicit input
• Issues inventory briefing papers prepared for
  each meeting
• Summaries of meetings prepared for public review

18
Instream Flow Needs (LCRA)

• MOU with TPWD w/goal of maintaining FW
  resources in lower basin
• Established to sets of flow needs (1) critical
  flows and (2) target flows
• CriticalDaily minimum flows to maintain a
  viable aquatic habitat
• TargetDaily flows which maximize available
  aquatic habitat

19
Bay Estuary Needs (LCRA)

• Cooperative agreement w/TWDB,TPWD, and TNRCC to
  perform study
• Established two levels of inflow needs (1)
  Target and (2) Critical

20
BE Needs (LCRA) Cont.

• CriticalMinimum total annual inflow to keep
  salinity at 25ppt or below at mouth of rivers.
  Provide sanctuary during droughts

21
LCRA Environmental Flow Recommendations

• Incorporated into the LCRA Water Management Plan
• Dynamic document
• Freshwater inflow restudy

22
Instream Flow Targets (cfs)
Month Sub/Cri Sub/Cri Target Target Target
Austin Bastrop Bastrop Eagle Lake Egypt
January 46 120 370 300 240
February 46 120 430 340 280
March 46 500 560 500 360
April 46 500 600 500 390
May 46 500 1030 820 670
June 46 120 830 660 540
July 46 120 370 300 240
August 46 120 240 200 160
September 46 120 400 320 260
October 46 120 470 380 310
November 46 120 370 290 240
December 46 120 340 270 220
23
Target Critical Freshwater Inflow Needs
Month Target Needs (1000 AcFt) Critical Needs (1000 AcFt)
January 44.1 14.26
February 45.3 14.26
March 129.1 14.26
April 150.7 14.26
May 162.2 14.26
June 159.3 14.26
July 107.0 14.26
August 59.4 14.26
September 38.8 14.26
October 47.4 14.26
November 44.4 14.26
December 45.2 14.26
TOTAL 1,033.1 171.1
24
Nueces Estuary Advisory Council

• Letter submitted to the TWC in December 1989
  alleging non-compliance with special conditions
  contained in a water right permit held by the
  City of Corpus Christi and the Nueces River
  Authority

25
SPECIAL CONDITION 5.B.

• Following completion and filling of Choke Canyon
  Dam and Reservoir, scheduled releases shall be
  made from the reservoir system at Lake Corpus
  Christi Dam together with return flows to the
  estuaries for the proper ecological environment
  and health of related living marine resources
  therein. Water provided to the estuaries from
  the reservoir system under this paragraph shall
  be released in such quantities and in accordance
  with such operational procedures as may be
  ordered by the Commission.

26
5.B. (Cont.)

• Permittees shall provide not less than 151,000
  acre-feet of water per annum for the estuaries by
  a combination of releases and spills from the
  reservoir system at Lake Corpus Christi Dam and
  return flows to Nueces and Corpus Christi Bays
  and other receiving estuaries.

27
Commission Actions

• Established Technical Advisory Committee
• Acting on TAC recommendations, established
  interim inflow targets and created Nueces Estuary
  Advisory Council to develop operational
  procedures to meet the purposes of the Special
  Condition
• Issued an Interim Agreed Order

28
Agreed Order

• 1992Interim Agreed Order Issued
• 1995Final Agreed Order Issued
• 1997,2001, and 2002Agreed Order Amended

29
Agreed Order

• The City of Corpus Christi, as Operator of the
  Reservoir System, shall provide not less than
  151, 000 acft of water per annum for the
  estuaries
• gt70 storage capacity138,000 acft target
• gt40 but less than 70--97,000 acft target
• gt30 but less than 40-- 1,200 acft target
• lt30-- Total suspension of Pass-thrus
• Implementation of Drought Contingency
  Provisions

30
Target f.w. Inflow Needs(in acft) for the Nueces
Estuary
MONTH gt70 gt40-lt70 gt30-lt40 lt30
January 2,500 2,500 1,200 0
February 2,500 2,500 1,200 0
March 3,500 3,500 1,200 0
April 3,500 3,500 1,200 0
May 25,500 23,500 1,200 0
June 25,500 23,000 1,200 0
July 6,500 4,500 1,200 0
August 6,500 5,000 1,200 0
September 28,500 11,500 1,200 0
October 20,000 9,000 1,200 0
November 9,000 4,000 1,200 0
December 4,500 4,500 1,200 0
TOTAL 138,000 97,000 14,400 0
31
Rincon Overflow Channel
Nueces Overflow Channel
32
Lake Texana (Palmetto Bend)

• Water Right Permit issued in September 1972
• Contained provision Until the TWDB has provided
  for the sale and/or use of all waters authorized
  to be diverted from this project in the manner
  prescribed, the TX Water Rights Comm. May, upon
  application and proper order,

33
Provision (Cont.)

• authorize and order the release of State water
  for any beneficial purpose, including releases of
  water for research purposes in the
  Lavaca-Matagorda Bay and Estuary System.

34
Adjudication of Water Rights

• Certificate of Adjudication issued in 1981
• Amended in 1985Provision This certificate is
  issued subject to all senior and superior water
  rights and, as may be determined by the
  Commission, to the release of water for the
  maintenance of the Lavaca-Matagorda Bay and
  Estuary System

35
Environmental Studies

• Joint effort by LNRA, TWDB, TPWD, and Sierra Club
• Certificate amended in 1994 to add Bay and
  Estuary release schedule
• 2-tiered approach based on reservoir capacity
• Pass thrus based on historical monthly medians
  and/or means

36
Target Inflows (in cfs)-Pass up to
Month gt78.18 Res. Cap. lt78.18
January 84.5 5
February 142.4 5
March 86.8 5
April 806.8 5
May 1169.3 5
June 1191.4 5
July 126.5 5
August 265.7 5
September 1027.3 5
October 708.3 5
November 68.3 5
December 79.3 5
-Median, -Mean Median For DoR
37
Galveston Bay Freshwater Inflows Group

• Convened in 1996 through the efforts of the
  Galveston Bay Foundation, City of Houston, and
  Trinity River Authority
• GOAL Develop a process that will lead to
  resolution of concerns about freshwater inflows
  to Galveston Bay

38
Mission Statement

• To reach consensus among stakeholders on an
  evolving process to develop a scientifically-based
  management plan and implementation strategies
  that will provide freshwater inflows to maintain
  an ecologically sound environment for the
  Galveston Bay System.

39
GBFIG Process

• Created Workgroup
• Developed Work Plan
• 1998TPWD Preliminary Freshwater Inflow Values
• TPWD Staff recommendation of Max H (5.22
  million acft) as the lowest freshwater inflow
  target value which generally fulfills the
  biological needs of the Galveston Estuary on a
  seasonal basis

40
GBFIG Process (cont.)

• In 2001 Final Recommendations Published By TPWD
• Recommended a target inflow within the range
  from Min Q (4.16 millions acft) to Max H (5.22
  million acft)
• Formed the basis for the GBFIG environmental flow
  recommendations to Region H

41
Recommendation
Inflow Scenario Quantity Acft/yr Historical Frequency Target Minimum Frequency
Max H 5.2 million 66 50
Min Q 4.2 million 70 60
Min Q-Sal 2.5 million 82 75
Min Historic 1.8 million 98 90
42
Questions Discussion