Laserfiche WebLink
<br />001190 <br /> <br />Indian communities that hold entitlements to Colorado River water to participate in water <br />banking with the Arizona Water Banking Authority," Arizona Laws 1996, ch. 308, ~ 27. The <br />Department encourages Arizona and the other Lower Division states to implement programs <br />within the existing Law of the River that will allow the Tribes to more fully benefit from their <br />water rights. <br /> <br />LC Reg;on DEAl I <br /> <br />19 <br /> <br />12/97 <br /> <br /> <br />In addition, the Department will be mindful of the need to protect local tribal water resources <br />when fulfilling its role as set forth in these interstate water banking rules. Tribes as well as other <br />water rights holders may, for example, have concerns regarding the potential impacts offuture <br />groundwater withdrawals from a water bank on their water rights. The Department wants to <br />work with Lower division States banking Colorado River water to ensure that water stored and <br />recovered pursuant to this rule does not adversely impact those local tribal water resources. <br />Under the Preferred Alternative the Secretary will, when determining whether to approve a <br />proposed interstate transaction, take into account, among other things, the potential impacts of a <br />proposed transaction on water rights holders, including Indian Tribes. See g 414.3 (b). <br /> <br />Finally, the Preferred Alternative and the proposed rule do not address, and are not intended to <br />govern, the exercise of whatever authority the Secretary of the Interior has to consider and <br />implement, in appropriate situations, tribal storage and water banking activities. <br /> <br />No Action Alternative <br /> <br />Under the No Action Alternative, without the proposed rule, A WBA would be unable to <br />implement the interstate component of the Act and enter into interstate agreements. The A WBA <br />would not be able to store Colorado River water for a State-authorized entity in California or <br />Nevada. Arizona would continue to divert and store its unused Colorado River water off stream <br />in existing facilities for its own use through the CA WCD and A WBA. Arizona tribes may <br />continue to have issues with the operation of existing ground water storage facilities near tribal <br />lands. It is possible that off stream storage credits could be developed between California and <br />Nevada for interstate redemption purposes without the rule. Reclamation would complete the <br />appropriate level ofNEP A documentation for such actions on a case specific basis. <br /> <br />2. Social Economic. Financial. and Re~latory Impacts <br /> <br />Reclamation has prepared an economic, financial, and regulatory impact study which analyzes <br />potential impacts of the proposed rule. This document, known as a Determination of Effects <br />(DOE), satisfies the requirements of Executive Order (EO) 12866 pertaining to regulatory <br />planning and review that requires agencies to undertake a benefit-cost analysis for regulatory <br />actions. Reclamation has placed a copy of the DOE and Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis <br />on file in the Reclamation Administrative Record which is available for review upon request. <br />The DOE examines the following areas relating to the Preferred Alternative which are discussed <br />below: Regulatory Planing and Review; Paperwork Reduction Act; The Regulatory Flexibility <br />Act; Unfunded Mandates Reform Act; Federalism Assessment; and Takings Implications. <br /> <br />