State Water Resources Plan October 28, 2015

Active monitoring and reporting of water resources Active SWCB Planning Efforts – Watershed plans – Watershed plans – Program largely eliminated due to budget cuts Rise of Water Quality Water Planning History

Active planning effort reconstituted after Drought – Grassroots response – Commonwealth needed better planning and response to drought – Multi-year stakeholder committee

Current Water Supply Planning Local/Regional Plans submitted by Nov All reviewed and approved with conditions by end of 2013 Cumulative Impact Evaluations and State Plan issuance Oct Planning/StateWaterPlan.aspx

Some Caveats on the State Plan Treading new ground – first attempt to look at impact to beneficial uses Not yet a “conclusion” of water availability Doesn’t lead to a regulatory outcome

Identifies Potential Risks to Beneficial Uses Off stream uses from upstream demand (2040) Maximum water available during drought of record Assimilative capacity Fish and wildlife habitat

“Conclusions” Future management may call for new tools Impacts to off-stream, water quality, and aquatic life uses in high use watersheds will require coordination and different management during periods of low flow

Challenges and Recommendations Understanding the impact of water withdrawals not requiring a permit Quantifying current and future risks to groundwater availability outside of current Groundwater Management Areas

Challenges and Recommendations Plan identifies more water withdrawals than were reported to us Understanding the impact of consumptive use on water supply Promoting increased water efficiency to reduce long-term and short-term demand

Challenges and Recommendations Infrastructure deficiencies Sea level rise, changes in precipitation patterns, and land subsidence Source water protection Conflict resolution Public education and outreach

State Plan Public comment period closed May 8, comments received Comments generally supportive but reflect the uncertainties associated with doing something new Concerns are not unexpected

Summary of Comments Recognition of the large complex task Acknowledgement that it is an important tool Uncertainty regarding roles and intent Concerns about data and metrics: population and demand, instream metrics Concern that it is not a “true” plan Concern about “resources” v. “supply” Need for state financial support

Roles in Providing Water Supply Localities have the lead role in projecting need and developing water supplies for their citizens (Ex , , , ) State (VDH, DEQ) provides support and ensures public health, water quality standards are met, and instream flow and groundwater are available over the long term

14 Water demands Projected Water Demands

16 Critical Indicators in Potential Beneficial Use Conflicts

Next Steps Prioritize compliance conditions and institutionalization of data systems including selection of pilot(s) for Virtual Plan testing Target outreach efforts to localities and withdrawers in high risk watersheds Work with localities/water withdrawers to improve Cumulative Impact Analysis and coordination during critical periods Keep the plan updated over time

Groundwater Advisory Committee 2015 Session (HB1924) Requires Broad Representation Convened Aug GroundwaterManagementAdvisoryCommittee.aspx

JLARC Water Resources Study 2015 Session (HJ595/623) Requires Broad Review of Water Resources Complete by Nov 2016

Questions? Scott Kudlas Office of Water Supply