Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
LCRA updates board on Water Supply Resource Report; sets 60,000‑acre‑foot planning goal by 2040
Loading...
Summary
LCRA staff presented the Water Supply Resource Report (WSRR), which sets a planning goal of bringing 60,000 acre‑feet of new firm water supplies online by 2040, evaluates 17 potential supply strategies across conservation, off‑channel reservoirs and non‑Colorado River supplies, and recommends maintaining a 10,000 AF upper‑basin board reserve and establishing a 20,000 AF lower‑basin reserve.
Monica, LCRA staff, presented the Water Supply Resource Report (WSRR) to the Operations Committee on Nov. 12, framing it as a planning document that summarizes study results and public comments but does not direct LCRA to build any particular project.
Monica told the committee the report evaluates firm customer needs through 2080 and establishes a goal "of bringing 60,000 acre feet of new firm supplies online by 2040." She said staff screened more than 60 possible strategies and evaluated 17 candidate strategies against eight performance criteria including supply, cost, environmental and regulatory considerations.
The strategies fall into three categories: conservation and reuse measures that can extend existing supplies; upper‑basin system optimizations and new Colorado River supplies such as off‑channel reservoirs (OCRs) that would require new pipelines; and new non‑Colorado River supplies, including wholesale groundwater, East Texas surface water, and seawater desalination. Monica told the board OCRs vary in size and cost and that many infrastructure options have multi‑decade implementation timelines and costs that can run into the billions.
Staff summarized public comments received during the Aug. 25–Sept. 19 comment window (35 written responses were posted online) and grouped them around themes such as one‑day‑per‑week watering restrictions and enforcement, distinctions between demand and contractual commitments, uncertainty cushions, modeling of firm yields, requests for more detailed project cost breakdowns, and funding sources. Staff said it met individually with major respondents (for example, the City of Austin and several customer cooperatives) to discuss concerns and posted summary responses online.
Given the long timelines and high costs for many supply options, staff emphasized conservation as the most cost‑effective near‑term tool and said it will continue to study, vet and develop shovel‑ready strategies to pursue funding. Monica said multiple funding sources will likely be required, including grants, possible state financing and use of rate base to help offset debt service when projects advance.
On board reservation accounting, staff recommended maintaining an upper‑basin board reservation at 10,000 acre‑feet per year and establishing a lower‑basin reserve at 20,000 acre‑feet per year; staff presented a condensed accounting showing about 590,000 acre‑feet of total representation in the system and an estimated ~74,000 acre‑feet remaining available to contract after existing MAQs and the board reserve are applied. Staff said the committee would be asked to approve the board reserve later that day.
Monica and other staff said next steps include further study work on individual strategies, identification of funding pathways, continued coordination with customers and federal/state/local stakeholders, and regular updates to the WSRR so planning can adapt to changing population and demand projections.
The committee discussed modeling assumptions, the limits of moving water long distances (energy and cost intensity), the role conservation can play, and the challenges of relying on third‑party groundwater or speculative water sources because of permit uncertainty and changing groundwater‑district rules.
