By Damien Brockmann
Last week, Kevin Patteson, the executive administrator for the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB), issued his long-awaited recommendation on the proposed construction of the Marvin Nichols reservoir, deciding to keep the controversial proposal within the 2011 Region C water plan. The reservoir, proposed to be developed along the Sulphur River in East Texas (TWDB Region D), would potentially serve as a source of water for the growing Dallas-Ft. Worth Metroplex.
Ken Kramer, the Water Resources Chair for the Sierra Club Lone Star Chapter, disagreed with the decision, stating that the project would prove to be too costly:
“The proposed Marvin Nichols reservoir will never be built. The environmental, financial, and social costs of pursuing this grandiose project are simply too huge to ever make it viable. Mandating that the proposed reservoir be in an already outdated regional water plan for the Dallas-Fort Worth area and requiring the Northeast Texas water planning group to drop its objections to the reservoir makes no sense. It will only continue the controversy between the two regions, including likely additional litigation. Moreover, the continued focus on the Marvin Nichols reservoir detracts from the work needed to meet future water demands in the Dallas-Fort Worth area through more innovative water management strategies, including dramatically expanded conservation efforts.
"While we appreciate the executive administrator's directive to Region C to accelerate consideration of some alternative water supply options, keeping Marvin Nichols on the table in effect will hamper any efforts to do so."
In the 2011 Region C Water Plan, the total cost of the reservoir, the pipelines to distribute its water, the pump stations, and the interest on funds borrowed to finance the project is estimated to be about $3.4 billion. (This does not include the annual operating costs which are projected to be about $331 million). Many consider that cost to be an underestimate, given its low-balling of land prices in the area and its assumption that only the minimum amount of mitigation land will be required despite the much larger acreage that some federal agencies say will be needed to offset habitat that would be destroyed or affected by the reservoir. The tremendous expense of this water supply project comes at a time when per capita water use in the region is dropping. Coupled with the intense opposition that will complicate any efforts to obtain state and federal permits for the reservoir, pursuit of the controversial reservoir is seen by many to be a dubious enterprise.
On the issue of the inter-region dispute between Region C (Dallas) and Region D (Northeast Texas), Kramer added, "the final recommendation from the Executive Administrator - while claiming on the one hand to resolve the conflict between Region C and Region D over the Marvin Nichols reservoir - also asserts once again that no conflict between the regional water plans actually exists because only one of the regions wants the water supply from that reservoir. The state courts clearly repudiated TWDB's very narrow interpretation of what constitutes an interregional conflict. That means this issue is likely to wind up back in court - if the Board agrees with its Executive Administrator - and the original plaintiffs from Region D will stress that TWDB is attempting to ignore the court finding that a true conflict between the plans exists. Thus this whole controversy is just going to continue."
The recommendation by the Executive Administrator will next go to the newly-appointed, three-member TWDB for a final decision later this summer.