Navajo-Gallup Water project faces an uphill battle
Opponents cite nearly $1 billion cost as excessive

By Kathy Helms
Dine Bureau

WINDOW ROCK — Navajo Nation President Joe Shirley Jr. returned to Washington, Tuesday urging passage of the Northwestern New Mexico Rural Water Projects Act and the Navajo-Gallup water pipeline legislation to meet the growing water needs of Navajo families.

The bill, H.R. 1970, was introduced by Rep. Tom Udall, D-N.M., in April and amends the original law known as the Colorado River Storage Project Act. It would authorize construction and rehabilitation of water infrastructure in northwestern New Mexico and also provide a funding mechanism.

Testifying before the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water and Power, Shirley said he understands that the administration is concerned that the project is "too expensive," but said that assertion may be based on an overly restrictive interpretation of the criteria and procedures for participating in Indian water rights settlements.

Robert Johnson, commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation, said the Department of the Interior's support for negotiated settlements as an approach to resolving Indian water rights remains strong, however, "the administration opposes the cost and cannot support the legislation as written."

Among concerns are the bill would increase mandatory spending, delay the full cost of the legislation beyond the 10 year congressional scorekeeping window, and not provide for adequate cost sharing by nonfederal interests.

Consistency
Johnson said the administration is committed to ensuring consistency with the criteria and procedures.

"The settlement of the Navajo claims to the San Juan River proposed in this bill has a high federal cost without appropriate safeguards that carrying out the authorized activities would accomplish the goals and objectives of the proposed settlement.

"It is especially troubling that this bill does not address the distribution systems that must be constructed before any water will actually reach the homes of those who need it," Johnson said.

Escalating costs
The administration also opposes the nearly $1 billion financial commitment and the large number of authorizations the bill contains, including the indefinite amount authorized for construction of the Navajo-Gallup Pipeline.

Johnson said that in 2005, BOR estimated the Navajo-Gallup Pipeline cost at approximately $716 million. That figure is being re-estimated to reflect current construction costs. He said BOR "expects an upward adjustment to nearly $1 billion for this feature alone."

In addition, H.R. 1970 would authorize federal expenditures of $30 million for groundwater wells, $23 million for rehabilitation of Fruitland-Cambridge and Hogback-Cudei irrigation projects, $11 million for other irrigation projects, $5 million for hydrographic surveys, and $50 million to be placed in a Navajo Nation Water Resources Development Trust Fund.

Title II of the bill would establish a "Reclamation Water Settlements Fund" within the U.S. Treasury and provide revenues of up to $100 million a year for fiscal years 2018 through 2028, another concern, Johnson said.

Gerald Zimmerman, executive director of the Colorado River Board of California said CRB does not oppose the Navajo-Gallup Project but is concerned that completion of the project would be given priority from the Reclamation Fund, for up to as much as $500 million, if the federal share has not been provided by Jan. 1, 2018.

"Since the Reclamation Fund is made viable through the repayment of reclamation projects from around the West, many of which are in the state of California, the CRB questions the fairness of providing to the Navajo-Gallup project a priority position to receive up to one-half of all funds designated for deposit into the new settlements fund," Zimmerman said.

CRB and Arizona also want to ensure the bill is consistent with the Colorado River Compact of 1922. "One concern is the clear provision of authority to use water in the lower basin even though that water will be diverted in the territory of the upper basin," Zimmerman said.

CRB is recommending that section of the bill be amended or that authorization for the construction of facilities that move water from the upper basin to the lower basin be eliminated.

Dismiss lawsuit?
Both Arizona and CRB say the settlement legislation should not be enacted unless a 2003 lawsuit filed by the Navajo Nation against the Interior over the Nation's Colorado River claims is dismissed.

Shirley said the Nation does not believe that a "comprehensive" settlement of all of the Navajo Nation's water rights claims is necessary to protect Arizona's interests.

"The Navajo Nation has been actively attempting to quantify its Lower Basin claims through negotiations with Arizona water interests, but no negotiations concerning Upper Basin claims have been attempted.

"We have advised the Arizona water interests that we are willing to pursue a negotiated settlement of the Lower Basin claims, but we are not willing to jeopardize the authorization of our settlement with the state of New Mexico to accommodate the Arizona interests.

"Moreover, we have serious doubts whether a settlement of the Arizona claims can be achieved. It appears that after passage of the Arizona Water Settlements Act, there is very little Colorado River water remaining for purposes of a settlement with the Navajo Nation," Shirley said.