[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 107 (Tuesday, June 4, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38514-38516]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-13888]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of the Secretary


Central Arizona Project, Arizona; Water Allocations

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, Interior.

[[Page 38515]]


ACTION: Notice of proposed modification to the Secretary of the 
Interior's record of decision

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Department proposes to modify the 1983 Central Arizona 
Project (CAP) Water Allocation Decision to delete the mandatory 
effluent pooling provision. The Department now views that provision as 
an impediment to effluent exchanges and effective water management in 
central Arizona.
    If the proposed decision is implemented, the Department would amend 
water service subcontracts for the cities of Chandler and Mesa to 
remove the mandatory effluent pooling provision. The mandatory effluent 
pooling provision would be deleted from other M&I water service 
subcontracts upon request.

DATES: All comments and material relevant to this proposed decision 
that are received by July 5, 2002 will be considered.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments concerning the proposed decision to 
Paul Nelson, Bureau of Reclamation, PO Box 81169, Phoenix, Arizona, 
85069-1169.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Nelson at (602) 216-3878.
    Proposed Decision: The following sentence is proposed for deletion 
from the 1983 CAP Water Allocation Decision (see page 12447 of the 1983 
CAP Water Allocation Decision): ``This allocation is subject to the 
adoption of a pooling concept whereby all M&I allottees share in the 
benefits of effluent exchanges.''


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Previous Notices Related to CAP Water
II. Background
III. Rational for Proposed Decision
IV. Compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 
(NEPA)

I. Previous Notices Related to CAP Water

    Previous notices related to CAP water were published in the Federal 
Register (FR) at 37 FR 28082, December 20, 1972; 40 FR 17297, April 18, 
1975; 41 FR 45883, October 18, 1976; 45 FR 52938, August 8, 1980; 45 FR 
81265, December 10, 1980; 48 FR 12446, March 24, 1983; 56 FR 29704, 
June 28, 1991; 57 FR 4470, February 5, 1992; and 57 FR 48388, October 
23, 1992. These notices and decisions were made pursuant to the 
authority vested in the Secretary by the Reclamation Act of 1902 as 
amended and supplemented (32 Stat. 388, 43 U.S.C. 391), the Boulder 
Canyon Project Act of December 21, 1928 (45 Stat. 1057), the Colorado 
River Basin Project Act of September 30, 1968 (82 Stat. 885, 43 U.S.C. 
1501) and in recognition of the Secretary's trust responsibility to 
Indian tribes.

II. Background

    Following the 1983 CAP Water Allocation Decision, the Bureau of 
Reclamation, the Central Arizona Water Conservation District (CAWCD), 
and each of the non-Indian CAP water allottees desiring CAP water 
entered into three-party water service subcontracts providing for the 
delivery of CAP water. In order to ensure implementation of the 
mandatory effluent pooling provision, M&I water service subcontractors 
who choose to circumvent the effluent pooling provision and directly 
exchange their effluent with Indian tribes are subject to a reduction 
in their entitlement to CAP water under their subcontracts by the 
amount of CAP water received from the effluent exchange.
    The Department indicated in the 1983 CAP Water Allocation Decision 
that CAP M&I water allocations could be made more firm by execution of 
feasible non-potable effluent exchanges with Indian tribes. The 1983 
CAP Water Allocation Decision also implemented a pooling provision 
whereby all M&I water service subcontractors share in the benefits of 
effluent exchanges. In a time of shortage of CAP water under the 
effluent pooling provision, the additional CAP water made available as 
a result of any effluent exchanges with Indian tribes would be shared 
by all M&I subcontractors, thereby reducing the amount of shortage for 
each subcontractor. The pooling provision was included in the CAP M&I 
water service subcontracts.
    The 1983 CAP Water Allocation Decision also provided that the 
Department could require Indian tribes located in close proximity to 
metropolitan areas to take delivery of effluent in lieu of CAP water. 
This requirement was eliminated by a Secretarial decision published in 
the Federal Register on October 23, 1992, so that any effluent 
exchanges involving Indian tribes would occur on a voluntary basis.
    The major cities in Maricopa County, which are the sources of most 
of the exchangeable effluent, prefer to exchange effluent on their own, 
incur all related treatment and transportation expenses, and receive 
any benefits from the exchange.

III. Rationale for Proposed Decision

    The Department favors elimination of the mandatory effluent pooling 
provision from the 1983 CAP Water Allocation Decision for the following 
reasons:
    (1) In response to public comments submitted by the City of Phoenix 
in 1992 concerning the mandatory effluent pooling provision, the 
Department committed to re-evaluate this provision at a later date 
after consultation with the Arizona Department of Water Resources 
(ADWR) (see 57 FR 48389). In pertinent part, the City of Phoenix stated 
``* * * The City of Phoenix agrees with the reasons for deleting the 
mandatory substitute water provision from the Indian CAP Contracts and 
believes that it is equally important to remove the provision from CAP 
M&I subcontracts that would penalize a subcontractor for entering into 
a direct effluent exchange with an Indian Community for CAP water.'' 
The Department acknowledged the City of Phoenix's concerns that the 
provisions of the effluent exchange article in the CAP M&I water 
service subcontracts may no longer be critical to the management of 
water supplies in central Arizona.
    (2) The mandatory effluent pooling provision removes any incentive 
for a municipality to exchange effluent with an Indian tribe. The 
Department believes that effluent producing entities, Indian Tribes, 
the State of Arizona, and other local organizations should be free to 
pursue local water management decisions that are in the best interest 
of the local economies, and that they should not be constrained in such 
water management decisions by the mandatory effluent pooling provision.
    (3) ADWR now supports removing the mandatory effluent pooling 
provision from the 1983 CAP Water Allocation Decision and the CAP M&I 
water service subcontracts.
    (4) CAWCD, as a party to the CAP M&I water service subcontracts, 
does not object to deletion of the mandatory effluent pooling provision 
from the subcontracts.
    (5) The Department is aware of two pending effluent exchange 
agreements that require Departmental approval. The cities of Chandler 
and Mesa each have a proposed effluent exchange agreement with the 
GRIC. The benefits resulting from the proposed exchanges to the cities 
and GRIC will not occur unless and until the mandatory effluent 
provision is removed from the Cities' CAP water service subcontracts.

IV. Compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 
(NEPA)

    The Department has prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) on the 
impact of modifying the 1983 CAP Water Allocation Decision to delete 
the

[[Page 38516]]

mandatory effluent pooling provision. The draft EA and notice of 
availability are being published and disseminated to CAP water 
contractors and subcontractors and other interested parties concurrent 
with publication of this notice.
    Our practice is to make comments, including names and home 
addresses of respondents, available for public review. Individual 
respondents may request that we withhold their home address from public 
disclosure, which we will honor to the extent allowable by law. There 
also may be circumstances in which we would withhold a respondent's 
identity from public disclosure, as allowable by law. If you wish us to 
withhold your name and/or address, you must state this prominently at 
the beginning of your comment. We will make all submissions from 
organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying 
themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or 
businesses, available for public disclosure in their entirety.

    Dated: May 24, 2002.
Gale A. Norton,
Secretary of the Interior.
[FR Doc. 02-13888 Filed 6-3-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-MN-P