Where I Stand: How to keep water flowing

Tuesday, Sept. 3, 1996 | 11:59 a.m.

TO THE PEOPLE of Las Vegas, the Southern Nevada Water Authority says thank you, once again, for your response and cooperation in this year's water conservation campaign. Because of your efforts, last year the community reduced its demand by almost 10 percent, and this year you are increasing that effort. Despite the tremendous heat, you have helped us avoid any shortages this summer. Nationally, even the most hardened critics of our community recognize the efforts you have put forth.

At the onset of the '90s, water was catapulted to one of the top issues of concern in our community. Given our arid climate, our vibrant economy and the fact that all supplies in the future will have to come from outside our area, water will always be of great interest. We are always asked: "How much do we have?" and "How long will it last?"

When the authority was formed in 1991, bringing together the major municipal water and wastewater agencies in Southern Nevada, we had access to about 409,500 acre-feet of groundwater, reclaimed wastewater and Colorado River water each year. We have since increased this supply more than 30 percent to 535,000 acre-feet. This firm supply is expected to meet Southern Nevada's water needs well into the next decade.

But after that, what? Last summer, the authority's board of directors adopted a comprehensive resource, facility and conservation plan that, based on today's circumstances, sought to address our water needs through the year 2050. This plan -- created over a one-year period with the help of a dedicated group of 21 members of our community, representing all its constituencies -- operates on the premise that, as we build facilities to deliver water we already have, we must work to secure the water resources our community will need in 15 or 20 years.

The major emphasis, of course, will be to secure additional Colorado River water. Great progress has already been made in this arena. Arizona has adopted legislation that provides us an opportunity to store water in their groundwater basin for use in the future when we will need it and discussions continue on ways Nevada can participate in funding conservation measures in agricultural areas and benefit from those savings.

Other areas, however, will provide Nevada with opportunities like this only to the extent we actually need the water for delivery -- not on some assumed future need -- and can afford to pay the price.

This is a delicate balancing act of accessing the supply when we really need it, yet meeting the needs of those who are planning future projects today. It is also a delicate financial balance. Nevada cannot afford to go out today and, essentially, lease a large quantity of water, particularly while we must build desperately needed facilities. The only way this is possible is to have available a smaller, temporary source of water that can provide a bridge.

The authority has a contractual right to use water today that other Colorado River basin states, which have entitlement to that supply, cannot put to use.

That supply is free and available to us upon petition to the federal government. The authority's resource plan envisions our beginning to use this bridge supply when our entitlement is exhausted; it would eventually comprise about 14 percent of our overall supply.

While we use this bridge, we will gradually, as our needs become more predictable and as we can afford it each year, be creating the replacement supply.

Our most immediate concern is expansion of our existing facilities that treat and move Colorado River water into the valley. These facilities are at their full capacity and are barely able to meet current demands, let alone projected demands past next summer. To address this problem, we began a phased major capital improvement plan several years ago. Ultimately these facilities will double our existing capacity by adding miles of pipeline and another treatment facility.

This phased approach will assure that water gets to the valley as needed, without funding facilities before they are needed. The catch is that the first phase must be completed by 1997 and the second by 1999, since that demand is already here -- hence our aggressiveness in completing these facilities on time.

We must remember that the best tool we have, not only to control the amount of additional resource we will have to buy but also to limit the pace at which facilities must be added, is to conserve the water supply we already have. The authority will remain aggressive in its outreach to residents through incentive programs, education and pricing to flatten particularly the summer demand. The largest water users in the valley are still our residents, consuming 64 percent of the overall supply. Of that, more than half is used outdoors for lawns or other activities, and half that use is unnecessary. We can still save more without affecting our quality of life.

In the end, there exists no single solution to Nevada's water challenge. By expanding facilities, we can fully utilize the water we have. By pursuing cost-effective conservation programs, we can use it more efficiently and gain the credibility needed to garner the assistance of the other basin states. By being willing to expend our financial resources to assist other areas in their groundwater banking and conservation needs, we can provide secure future supplies for our children.

And, finally, by phasing facilities and utilizing less-secure temporary supplies to bridge the gaps, we can make it affordable to the community. Some are still in search of the silver bullet that will solve our problems. To them I must unfortunately say: This is the message we have received from our citizens in community workshops, meetings and advisory committees. It is a challenge the Southern Nevada Water Authority willingly accepts and will pursue for years to come.