Adjustments to 1988 Operating Criteria and Procedures (OCAP) for the Newlands Irrigation Project in Nevada

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Reclamation

43 CFR Part 418

RIN 1006-AA37

Adjustments to 1988 Operating Criteria and Procedures (OCAP) for

the Newlands Irrigation Project in Nevada

AGENCY: Bureau of Reclamation, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This proposed rule adjusts the 1988 OCAP for the Newlands

Irrigation Project (Project). The 1988 OCAP anticipated that irrigated

acreage in the Project would increase to 64,850 acres. In 1995,

irrigated Project acreage was approximately 59,023 acres. Adjustments

are proposed to the Project efficiency requirements, maximum allowable

diversion calculations, and Lahontan Reservoir storage targets in the

1988 OCAP to reflect current irrigated acreage and court decrees which

have lowered the water duty applicable to certain Project lands. To

better manage diversions from the Truckee River to the Project,

additional proposed adjustments to the 1988 OCAP provide flexibility in

using snowpack and runoff forecasts and extending the time frame for

storing water in Truckee River reservoirs in lieu of diversions to the

Project from the Truckee River.

DATES: Written comments should be submitted to be received by February

7, 1997. All comments received by the close of the comment period will

be considered and addressed in the Final Rule. Comments received after

that date will be reviewed and considered as time allows.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent to: Adjusted OCAP, Truckee-Carson

Coordination Office, 1000 E. William Street, Suite 100, Carson City,

Nevada 89701-3116.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Additional copies of 1988 OCAP with proposed adjustments may be

obtained from: Lahontan Area Office, Bureau of Reclamation, P.O. Box

640, Carson City, Nevada 89702, Phone (702) 882-3436.

If you have questions or need additional information contact:

Ann Ball, Manager, Lahontan Area Office, (702) 882-3436

or

Jeffrey Zippin, Team Leader, Truckee-Carson Coordination Office, (702)

887-0640.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On April 15, 1988, the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary)

implemented new Operating Criteria and Procedures (OCAP) governing

management of water diverted to and used within the Newlands Project.

These 1988 OCAP were approved by the U.S. District Court for the

District of Nevada, subject to a hearing on objections raised by

various parties. In 1990, Congress directed in the Truckee-Carson-

Pyramid Lake Water Rights Settlement Act (Title II of Pub. L. 101-618,

Section 209(j) (104 Stat. 3294) that the 1988 OCAP remain in effect

until December 31, 1997, unless changed by the Secretary in his sole

discretion. Prior to this proposed rule, the 1988 OCAP have not been

published in the Federal Register.

These OCAP were designed to further increase the reliance of the

Project on water from the Carson River, minimize the use of water from

the Truckee River as a supplemental supply, increase efficiency of

water use in the Project, and establish a regulatory scheme to manage

deliveries to Project water users including incentives for efficiency

and penalties for inefficiency.

An environmental impact statement (EIS) was prepared on the 1988

OCAP. That EIS serves as the basis for reviewing the environmental

effects of proposed adjustments.

The Department of the Interior (Department) has prepared a draft

environmental assessment on the adjustments which tiers off of the

analysis in that EIS. Copies of the draft environmental assessment may

be obtained from the Truckee-Carson Coordination Office.

The Department is proposing at this time to make a number of

revisions to the 1988 OCAP to adjust for changes in use of water

rights, to increase flexibility, and to clarify and fine-tune the

language of the OCAP based on experience gained in administering the

1988 OCAP through eight irrigation seasons. These revisions are

proposed within the basic framework of the 1988 OCAP and its

environmental documentation. They are also proposed for codification.

The need for additional changes to the 1988 OCAP beyond those

proposed in this rule may be appropriate as well, but consideration of

such changes is

[[Page 64833]]

expected to require further examination including the preparation of an

environmental impact statement (EIS).

Description of the 1988 OCAP

The 1988 OCAP provisions were preceded by a preamble and

introduction which are equally applicable to the Adjusted OCAP

proposed. The 1988 OCAP preamble and introduction are here reproduced

with minor grammatical editing. The following two headings, 1988 OCAP

Preamble and 1988 OCAP Introduction are taken from the 1988 OCAP.

1988 OCAP Preamble

The development of Operating Criteria and Procedures (OCAP) for the

Newlands Project (Project) in western Nevada was initiated in the late

1960's and has proven to be a divisive, contentious issue for the

people in Nevada who rely on the waters of the Carson and Truckee

Rivers. Competition for the water in the Project's desert environment

is intense and growing. The conflicts among uses are clearly apparent

in the effects forecast on various areas where the Department of the

Interior (Department) has program responsibilities. The issue is

complicated further by the requirements of the Endangered Species Act

and the listing of the Cui-ui, a fish inhabiting the lower Truckee

River and Pyramid Lake.

In order to proceed effectively and fairly, the Department had to

have guiding principles for the OCAP. These are to:

--Provide water deliveries sufficient to meet the water right

entitlements of Project water users;

--Meet the requirements of the Endangered Species Act as they

specifically relate to the Truckee River/Pyramid Lake Cui-ui;

--Fulfill Federal trust responsibilities to the Pyramid Lake Paiute

Indian Tribe;

--Conserve wetland and wildlife values in both the Truckee and Carson

River basins;

--Give cognizance to the State laws affecting water rights and uses;

--Provide for stable economies and improve quality of life in the

region to the extent it is influenced by the Department-managed

resources and facilities;

--Allow local control and initiative to the maximum extent possible;

and

--Provide stability and predictability through straightforward

operation based on actual versus forecast conditions.

The Department believes that the proposed OCAP best satisfy these

principles within the limits of the Department's legal authority.

Each of the competing uses for the water is critical in its own

right. They are all essentially separable for decision making purposes

even though they clearly impact upon each other since the available

supply is far less than the demand.

The OCAP deal with the operation and use of Federal facilities

related to the Newlands Project. Therefore, their primary

responsibility is supplying the water rights to the Project water

users. To the extent this can be done effectively and efficiently, then

the remaining water supply is available for other competing uses. The

secondary impacts of the OCAP must, however, act to support or

encourage results which benefit the other competing uses.

The basic structure of the OCAP relies on both rules and incentives

which we believe will ensure reasonable, efficient water management

through reliance on local control and initiatives. The direct

consequences of the OCAP will be delivery of full water entitlements

within the Newlands Project, protection of endangered species,

fulfillment of trust responsibilities, and encouragement for the

protection of other environmental and quality of life values.

1988 OCAP Introduction

The OCAP shall govern the operation and use of federal facilities

on the Project.

When approved by the United States District Court for the District

of Nevada (Court), the OCAP will supersede all OCAP previously issued

by the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) and the 1973 OCAP

previously issued by the Court in Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe of Indians

v. Morton, 354 F. Supp. 252 (D.D.C. 1973). The OCAP are believed to be

consistent with the decrees in United States v. Alpine Land and

Reservoir Co., 503 F. Supp. 877 (D. Nev. 1980), substantially affirmed,

697 F. 2d 851 (9th Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 863 (1983) and

United States v. Orr Water Ditch Co., Equity No. A-3 (D. Nev.) (Orr

Ditch and Alpine decrees, respectively). Implementation of the OCAP

will ensure that the Secretary: (i) supplies the Project with water to

meet all valid water rights; (ii) fulfills the federal trust

responsibility to the Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe of Indians; (iii)

fulfills the federal trust responsibility to the Fallon Paiute-Shoshone

Tribes of Indians; (iv) meets the requirements of the Endangered

Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.); and (v) provides a framework for

local decision making which can contribute to the protection of

wetlands, recreation, economic, and other regional values. Procedures

are included to monitor water use and Project operations and to enforce

these OCAP.

Fundamentally the OCAP are predicated on water being used on the

water-righted land in a manner similar to the past coupled with the

Project operating at a reasonable efficiency. The Department believes

that the OCAP efficiency targets are reasonable because they are at a

level that can be shown to be achievable, can be obtained without

significant capital expenditures and are within the range of

efficiencies achieved in comparable systems.

The OCAP are designed to operate in a manner to produce a long term

average effect recognizing that each year will necessarily be different

as weather and actions by individual water users vary. It is also

critical that OCAP compliance be measured based on facts which can be

readily determined and reviewed, rather than on forecasts, theories, or

models. In combination, the use of a factual base and a long-term

average project efficiency yield a methodology which will operate in a

predictable fashion that minimizes disputes and allows the landowners

and others to make knowing, rational decisions for themselves.

The OCAP assure proper water use and a reasonable efficiency by

establishing a methodology consisting of three basic elements. First,

it requires monitoring headgate deliveries against the acreage eligible

to receive Project water multiplied by the court set water duty.

Second, the OCAP establish efficiency targets for the Project

distribution system. The efficiency target varies with the actual valid

headgate deliveries. Since many of the system losses are relatively

constant, the system efficiency declines with smaller headgate

deliveries and increases with larger deliveries. This also allows an

automatic adjustment in efficiency for drought conditions. The OCAP

provide for incentives if the District's operation is more efficient

and for disincentives if it is less efficient than the OCAP target

efficiency. Thus, through use of the incentive provisions, the District

can offset deficiencies in time of drought or use the water saved for

its desired purposes (e.g., wetlands, recreation, power, etc.)

consistent with Nevada and Federal Law.

Third, as a protection against the first two elements allowing the

operation to become excessively out of balance, the OCAP establish a

maximum allowable diversion (MAD) limit for irrigation and a maximum

efficiency deficit (MED). No

[[Page 64834]]

limit has been placed on the ability of the District to gain through

the incentive feature.

The MAD and MED limits are set to provide an operating cushion

approximately 26,000 acre-feet above and below, respectively, the

expected irrigation diversions, assuming the District's operation is at

an average annual efficiency at the OCAP target level. Neither limit is

expected to ever be encountered in actual operation.

The operating cushion size was chosen in relation to historic

operations. Historically, not all water users have used their full

entitlements in a given year. Either the season doesn't require it, the

crops planted need less, or the land cannot productively accommodate

the full amount. Whatever the reason, the Project uses about 26,000

acre-feet less every year on average than its entitlement for actual

irrigated acres. This provides a reasonable cushion, or insurance

protection, above the normal expected use, yet does not in any way

limit or impact on the water users' rights. It is also an important

protection for other uses. Therefore, rather than trying to forecast

the expected actual use each year and adding the operating cushion to

get the MAD, it is more direct and predictable to simply determine the

anticipated acreage to be irrigated at its full water duty for the MAD.

The MED is a fixed number set equal to the operating cushion. It is

the limit on how much accumulated storage can be borrowed from the

future to satisfy a less efficient operation. The MED is for the

protection of the water users against too severe an impact in the case

of a low water year. Only the MAD can affect current operations within

an irrigation season. The MED operates on the subsequent year only.

These OCAP will be enforced in cooperation with the Federal Water

Master and the Nevada State Engineer and will govern delivery of all

Project water. The OCAP are applicable to the Truckee-Carson Irrigation

District or any other Project operating entity.

1996 Revisions to the OCAP in General

1. Changes in Water Demand: The 1988 OCAP envisioned and provided

for increasing irrigated acreage. It was assumed the project would grow

from about 60,900 irrigated acres and a headgate entitlement of 226,450

acre feet of water on average beginning in 1988 to as much as 64,850

irrigated acres and a headgate entitlement of 237,485 acre feet on

average by 1992 and thereafter with certain efficiency targets and

assumptions about water duties and use of entitlements. The annual

calculations of the maximum allowable diversion (MAD) to the Project

and efficiency requirements in use today are based, in part, on this

assumed projected growth to 64,850 irrigated acres and the other 1992

project water demand assumptions. In practice, this growth has not

occurred. Actual acreage served in 1995 and assumed for 1996 and

thereafter for at least several years, and other key parameters in

determining project water use are displayed in Table A below along with

the comparable assumptions made in the 1988 OCAP.

Table A.--Comparison of Project Water Balance Assumptions

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1988 OCAP assumptions Current assumptions

---------------------------------------------------

1988 1992 1995 Proposed

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Acres....................................................... 61,630 64,850 59,023 59,023

Average duty in acre-feet per acre (af/a) \1\............... 3.67 3.66 3.49 3.49

Headgate entitlements in acre-feet.......................... 226,555 237,485 206,230 206,230

Estimated percent use of entitlement........................ 90 90 90 93.2

Resulting demand............................................ 203,900 213,740 185,555 192,206

Percent target efficiency \2\............................... 59.3 66.7 66.7 65.7

Expected diversion in acre-feet............................. 343,845 320,450 278,193 292,627

Maximum allowable diversion in acre-feet.................... 371,055 346,985 301,506 308,319

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\ Average duty includes bench lands at 4.5 af/a, bottom lands at 3.5 af/a, pasture lands at 1.5 af/a, and

deliveries to wetlands of less than full entitlement.

\2\ The target efficiencies for 1988, 1992, and 1995 are as prescribed in the 1988 OCAP; the Proposed target

efficiency is calculated.

The differences between 1992 and 1995 stem from the following:

Acreage: The anticipated increase in acreage has not

materialized; actual irrigated acreage in 1995 was 59,023 acres. This

amount reflects the efforts of the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) to limit

irrigation to water-righted lands and that, on average, irregators have

not increased the acreage of lands in production.

Average Water Duty: The average water duty for the project

has been reduced as a result of the so-called ``bench/bottom

litigation'' (1995 Order of Judge McKibben, in U.S. v. Alpine, United

States District Court for the District of Nevada No. D-185). This

bench/bottom court ruling approved a change in the designation of some

Project lands from bench lands to bottom lands. Bench lands have a

maximum water duty of 4.5 acre-feet/acre; bottom lands have a maximum

water duty of 3.5 acre-feet/acre. (The Project includes pasture lands

with a duty of 1.5 acre-feet/acre.) The bench/bottom decision

reclassified approximately 9,000 acres of irrigated lands in the

project, reducing Project water entitlements by approximately 9,000

acre-feet. The change in demand is expected to be approximately 5,000

acre-feet of water when measured at the farm headgates. This is based

on historic use of about 90 percent of the headgate entitlement at 4.5

acre-feet/acre versus projected use of 100 percent of the 3.5 acre-

feet/acre entitlement.

Average Use of Entitlement: Actual water use as a

percentage of entitlement is usually less than 100 percent,

historically about 90 percent. The reduced percentage of entitlement

use results from on-farm practices and efficiencies, fallowing of

lands, and varying weather conditions. The current projected percent

use of entitlement is 93.4 percent. This is based on irrigation use of

91.8 percent and 95 percent for Carson and Truckee Divisions,

respectively, and 100 percent water use for pasture lands and wetlands.

Several factors will affect use of entitlement in the future:

--As noted above, irrigators whose lands were reclassified from bench

lands with a water duty of 4.5 acre-feet per acre to bottom lands with

a 3.5 acre-feet per acre duty may use more than 90 percent of their

entitlement, an increase in use.

[[Page 64835]]

--The Fallon Paiute-Shoshone Tribes reservation is within the Project

and Tribes have a cap on the water they receive. The Tribes are

expected to use their full water entitlement every irrigation season.

--The Naval Air Station Fallon, as part of an agreement with the U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), will use less of its irrigation water

and is also developing less water intensive cropping strategies

decreasing percent use of entitlement.

--The FWS and the State of Nevada are acquiring water rights within the

Newlands Project for restoration of wetlands at Stillwater National

Wildlife Refuge. The FWS and Nevada are transferring the consumptive

use portion, 2.99 acre-feet per acre, of the water rights they acquire.

This changes their entitlement to 2.99 acre-feet per acre of which they

are expected to take 100%, thus increasing percent use of entitlement.

These and other changes in water use will cause the percent use of

entitlement to vary from year to year. The percent use will be

determined based on actual experience and used in calculating the

expected irrigation diversion for each irrigation season.

Efficiency: Within the same size project, more irrigated

acreage results in greater efficiency; with less irrigated acreage

lower efficiencies are expected. Project irrigated acreage never

reached the level anticipated in the 1988 OCAP but the associated

target efficiencies have remained in effect. As water rights are

acquired for Stillwater Wildlife Refuge (Pub. L. 101-618, section 206),

the effect on Project efficiencies may vary at first, but as more water

is acquired and moves to the Refuge, efficiencies should improve

stemming from the concentration of deliveries through the system.

Specific Proposed Adjustments to 1988 OCAP

Even with the prospect of revising the OCAP in the future, there

are a number of adjustments to the 1988 OCAP that will help manage the

Project during the interim period until a revised OCAP can be

promulgated. This proposed rulemaking addresses only those adjustments

to the 1988 OCAP in the following areas:

1. Target Efficiency adjustments (Sec. 418.1(c)(3)(i)(A) and

Newlands Project Water Budget table): The 1988 OCAP envisioned and

allowed for increasing irrigated acreage, assuming the Project would

grow to over 64,850 irrigated acres by 1992 compared to a base of

approximately 60,900 acres being irrigated in 1987. The annual

calculations of the maximum allowable diversion (MAD) to the Project

and efficiency requirements currently in use are based on a Project of

64,850 or more irrigated acres and a commensurate target efficiency of

68.4 percent. However, the acreage increase has not materialized and

current irrigated acreage is approximately 59,023 acres. The Project

efficiency that can be achieved, which is the relationship between the

total annual diversion to the Project and total delivery to farm

headgates, is directly related to irrigated acreage; efficiency

generally decreases as the irrigated acreage in the Project decreases.

The 1988 OCAP does not accurately reflect the current acreage, and as a

consequence, the higher efficiency requirement remains in effect. This

may decrease the water available to the Project as calculated in the

MAD and increases the likelihood of penalties for inefficiency.

In response to less acreage and varying water demand, the

Department proposes to calculate the annual Project water budget for

each irrigation season in accordance with the elements in the Newlands

Project Water Budget table of the Adjusted OCAP. Each year the Maximum

Allowable Diversion (MAD) would be based on the projected irrigated

acreage for that year and applicable water duties. The other elements

in Newlands Project Water Budget, including appropriate Project

efficiency, would be calculated to determine the MAD and Project

efficiencies. Through this proposal, the Project water budget can

accommodate anticipated changes in Project characteristics.

Using the 1995 Actual Acres column from the Newlands Project Water

Budget, Maximum Headgate Entitlement (line 2) is the product of

Irrigated Acres (line 1) and the average water duty (calculated

annually). Variable distribution system losses of Canals/Laterals

Evaporation (line 3), Canals/Laterals Seepage (line 5), and Operational

Losses (line 7) are interpolated to determine the Total Losses (line 8)

for a given Project size. The combined Maximum Headgate Entitlement

(line 2) and the Total Losses (line 8) determines the MAD (line 9), and

the relationship of Maximum Headgate Entitlement (line 2) to Total

Losses (line 8) determines Project Efficiencies at 100 percent water

use (line 10). Actual use of entitlement, based on historic patterns,

is less than 100 percent, so the Maximum Headgate Entitlement is

adjusted by the projected percent use of entitlement (calculated

annually) to yield Expected Headgate Entitlement Unused (line 11) and

the Diversion Reduction for Unused Water (line 12). The Diversion

Reduction for Unused Water (line 12) is subtracted from the MAD (line

9) to determine Expected Irrigation Diversions (line 13). Finally, the

adjusted Project demand (calculated from line 2 minus line 11) is

divided by the Expected Irrigation Diversions (line 13) to determine

the Expected Efficiency (line 14).

The effect of this proposal is to have OCAP that more accurately

reflect the Project water demand. Reducing the annual Project

efficiency target will recognize the limitation of the present water

distribution system facilities and assist the Project in achieving

efficiency requirements. No changes are proposed for the 1988 OCAP

relative to how the MAD is calculated and administered, determination

of eligible land, reporting, or calculation of credits or debits.

2. Adjustments in Storage Targets (Sec. 418.3(e) and tables of

Monthly Values for Lahontan Storage Computations and End of Month

Storage Targets for July Through December): The 1988 OCAP prescribes

when water may be diverted from the Truckee River to supplement Carson

River inflow to Lahontan Reservoir to serve the Carson Division of the

Project. (The Truckee Division of the Project is supplied entirely by

water from the Truckee River.) The Truckee River diversion to the

Carson Division is governed by end-of-month storage target levels in

Lahontan Reservoir. Water is diverted from the Truckee to the Reservoir

only if its is forecast that the storage target will not be met by

Carson River inflow by the end of the month. In years of low flow on

the Carson River, a greater percentage of the Carson Division Project

water supply is diverted from the Truckee River. In wet years, the

Carson Division supply may come entirely from the Carson River. Thus,

storage targets are used to help maintain a steady water supply despite

the natural climatic variability and differences in annual runoff

between the two river basins.

The formula used to determine how much water may be diverted to

Lahontan Reservoir from the Truckee River in January through June

relies, in part, on the runoff forecast for the Carson River. The

imprecision inherent in such forecasting can lead to variable

consequences. Sometimes more Truckee River is diverted than is needed

to serve Project water users. This is particularly problematic when the

Carson River fills Lahontan Reservoir to the point that water spills

over Lahontan Dam or so that a precautionary spill (release) of water

must be made to avoid later

[[Page 64836]]

flooding. In either situation, spilled water that cannot be transported

to water-righted lands or Lahontan Valley wetlands flows into Carson

Sink in the desert. This situation occurred most recently in 1996 with

the consequence that Truckee River water that could have flowed into

Pyramid Lake contributed to water that was spilled.

Because of their imprecision, forecasts for Carson River runoff do

not always reflect actual conditions and the water may not materialize.

If not enough water was brought over from the Truckee River earlier in

the water year, or Truckee River flow is insufficient to make up for

the shortfall from the Carson River, then the water supply may be

inadequate to meet the annual irrigation demand. This situation

occurred in 1994 when the Carson River was forecast to have a 100

percent water year but only produced a 50 percent water supply.

Two of the objectives of OCAP are to minimize spills and moderate

shortages. It is important to note that for the 94 years of records,

the climatic/hydrologic variability of both rivers is so great that

even if there were no limits on the diversion of Truckee River water,

in some years shortages would result. Conversely, even if no Truckee

River water were diverted, in some years Lahontan Reservoir would spill

just from Carson River inflow.

The 1988 OCAP has a June end-of-month storage target of 215,000

acre feet in Lahontan Reservoir. The 215,000 acre-feet was based on

serving at least 5,000 more acres of water-righted and irrigated land

than has been irrigated in actual practice. The reclassification of

some bench lands to bottom lands further reduces water demand in the

Carson Division. The difference in headgate demand between what the

1988 OCAP projected and current Carson Division demand is approximately

21,000 acre-feet. The current storage targets permit unnecessary

diversions from the Truckee River to the Project. The proposed Adjusted

OCAP storage targets are based on the lower Carson Division demand and

reducing water loss to seepage and evaporation. Accordingly, the

proposed end-of-June storage target is adjusted to 174,000 acre-feet,

as shown in the table Monthly Values for Lahontan Storage Calculations.

The June storage target is important because it is one of the terms in

the formula used to calculate the monthly Truckee River diversion to

the Project for January through June.

A comparison of the 1988 OCAP and proposed Adjusted OCAP storage

targets for Lahontan Reservoir are shown in Table B of this preamble.

Table B.--Comparison of 1988 OCAP and Proposed Adjusted OCAP Lahontan

Reservoir Storage Targets

[In acre-feet]

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Adjusted

Month 1988 OCAP OCAP

------------------------------------------------------------------------

January-June.................................. 215,000 174,000

July.......................................... 160,000 139,000

August........................................ 140,000 95,000

September..................................... 120,000 64,000

October....................................... 80,000 52,000

November...................................... 160,000 74,000

December...................................... 210,000 101,000

------------------------------------------------------------------------

The adjusted storage targets for these months appear in the table

End of Month Storage Targets for July Through December in the proposed

rule. The adjusted storage targets would be used to calculate

diversions from the Truckee River in accordance with Sec. 418.3 of the

proposed rule.

The proposed storage targets were developed using the Truckee River

settlement negotiations water balance model. The model was used to

examine how different storage targets affected spills, inflow to

Pyramid Lake, and other parameters. Key assumptions used in modeling

were reduced Project water demand from the 1988 OCAP, lower efficiency

targets, current Truckee River operations, and Project shortages

consistent with the 1988 OCAP. The model uses the 94-year (1901-1995)

historic hydrologic record for the Truckee and Carson Rivers.

A series of modeled storage targets was evaluated based on the

degree to which a set of targets reduced spills, increased inflow to

Pyramid Lake, increased the estimated number of spawning years for cui-

ui, increased the estimated number of cui-ui, reduced Lahontan

Reservoir and Truckee Canal seepage and evaporation losses, and held

frequency and magnitude of Project shortages consistent with the 1988

OCAP. These goals are consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's

responsibilities as the District Court ruled in Tribe v. Morton.

Though not a specific feature of the Adjusted 1988 OCAP, the

modeling used in making decisions on this proposed rule took cognizance

of the 4,000 acre foot minimum pool that the Truckee-Carson Irrigation

District voluntarily has maintained in Lahontan Reservoir to protect

fish resources there. Though this action to maintain a minimum pool is

purely voluntary on the part of TCID and Newlands Project water right

holders, it provides environmental benefits, was assumed to be

continued into the future, and was credited in the modeling used to

establish new Lahontan storage targets; that is to say, the targets

would have been somewhat lower to achieve the same release shortage

percentage and Truckee River inflow volume to Lahontan Reservoir

assuming no anticipation of the 4,000 acre-foot minimum pool.

Table C compares the modeled current conditions under the 1988 OCAP

to those under the Adjusted 1988 OCAP for each of these elements.

Table C.--Modeled Results for OCAP Storage Regimes

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Parameter 1988 OCAP \1\ Proposed adjusted OCAP Difference

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Truckee Canal and Lahontan Reservoir 61,800 af \2\.......... 53,600 af.............. 8,200 af.

Losses.

Reservoir Spills..................... 42,100 af.............. 37,500 af.............. 4,600 af.

Lahontan Release Shortage............ 7,820 af............... 6,880 af............... 940 af.

Release Shortage as Percentage of 2.68%.................. 2.54%.................. 0.14%.

Demand.

Mininum Pool......................... 0...................... 4,000 af............... 4,000 af.

Number of Shortage Years............. 9 years................ 9 years................ .......................

Truckee River Inflow to Pyramid Lake. 445,500 af............. 480,700 af............. 35,200 \3\ af.

Cui-ui Spawning Years................ 69 years............... 74 years............... 5 years.

Ending Number of Adult Female Cui-ui. 40,300................. 304,300................ 264,000.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\ Modeled results based on the 1992 Newlands demand assumptions from the 1988 OCAP, the 94-year hydrologic

record (1901-1995), and 1995 Truckee River operating conditions.

\2\ af=acre-fee.

\3\ The difference in inflow to Pyramid Lake results from reduced Project acreage and reduced Truckee Canal and

Reservoir losses.

[[Page 64837]]

The values are averages for the 94-year period of record. In every

category listed above, the modeled results show improvement under the

proposed storage targets as compared with the 1988 OCAP modeled with

64,800 irrigated Project acres and current Truckee River conditions. A

reduction of water loss and spill from the Project will increase inflow

to Pyramid Lake. Shortages to the Project are reduced under the

proposed storage targets by approximately 2,500 acre-feet compared to

the current target regime using the 1988 OCAP and 1995 acreage and

water use. However, today's irrigated acreage has not matched what was

anticipated in the 1988 OCAP so Project water supply has benefited from

storage targets based on higher water demand assumptions in place.

3. Truckee River Storage in Lieu of Diversions (Sec. 418.3(e)(8)):

Project diversions from the Truckee River may be fine-tuned by

retaining water in upper Truckee River reservoirs that would otherwise

have been diverted to Lahontan Reservoir to meet storage targets.

Depending upon how much Carson River runoff reaches Lahontan Reservoir

and whether storage targets are met by the Carson River inflow, the

water retained in storage may be released later in that year and

diverted to Lahontan Reservoir for delivery to the Carson Division, or

retained for Pyramid Lake if the water is not needed for Carson

Division irrigation.

Under the 1988 OCAP, water may be stored upstream on the Truckee

River in lieu of diversion only from April to June. In 1995, this

limitation contributed to approximately 70,000 acre-feet of water being

diverted from the Truckee River to Lahontan Reservoir before March 31,

then spilling because of high Carson River runoff. None of the Truckee

River water was needed because the Carson River more than filled

Lahontan Reservoir and precautionary releases were made to avoid

spilling over the dam. While the 70,000 acre-foot-diversion from the

Truckee was controversial, it resulted from managing the diversion in

strict adherence with the 1988 OCAP targets. The proposed Adjusted OCAP

provides more flexibility to reduce such unnecessary diversions.

Consistent with managing Projects diversions from the Truckee

River, the proposed rule expands the opportunity to credit store water

for the Project in reservoirs on the upper Truckee River by allowing

storage as early as January of each year. The water would be credited

based on water actually retained in Trukee River reservoirs or, if

water was not being released for Project diversion, credited as

Newlands Project water in Stampede Reservoir adverse to other water

(fish water) stored in Stampede Reservoir. In the latter situation,

concurrence by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) will be

required. For example, a reduction of diversions in January through

March of 1995, would have required FWS approval because water was not

being released for Project diversion. Stored water could be released

for diversion to Lahontan Reservoir, if needed, as early as July 1

through the end of the irrigation season, but not thereafter. The Water

would only be used for the Carson Diversion. Water in storage could be

exchanged to other reservoirs but it will not carry over to the next

year for use in the Project. If it is not used in the year in which it

is stored, it will not be available thereafter to the project. To

protect the water users, the water held in storage on the Truckee River

would not be reduced as a result of spill or evaporation and would be

gaged at the U.S. Geological Survey gage on the Truckee Canal near

Wadsworth, Nevada, to ensure that the diversion to the Project matches

the diversion foregone earlier in the season. Water stored but not

needed for the Project would be managed to benefit endangered cui-ui in

Pyramid Lake.

The proposed adjustment provides the flexibility to reduce

excessive diversions from the Truckee River. As proposed, there is no

risk to the Project water users and there is potential benefit for

Pyramid Lake. The BOR is expected to use this proposed provision only

in years when Carson River runoff is forecast to be above average and

is intended to fine tune diversions and avoid over-diversions from the

Truckee River. Such storage in Stampede Reservoir or other Truckee

River Reservoirs is not intended to make up for shortages in drier

years. There is little advantage to foregoing diversions in below

average runoff years if the likelihood is that all the credit stored

water would need to be diverted to the Project in any event. The

changes proposed in Sec. 418.3(e)(8) of the rule include provisions for

BOR to consult with TCID, the Federal Water Master, FWS, Bureau of

Indian Affairs (BIA), and the Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe before any

credit storing is initiated.

4. Expanded Forecasting (Sec. 418.3(e)(1)): In calculating the

January to June monthly diversions from the Truckee River, the 1988

OCAP uses the monthly forecast for April through July runoff published

by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) (formerly the Soil

Conservation Service). Rather than continuing to rely on that forecast

alone, Sec. 418.3(e)(1) of the proposed Adjusted OCAP provides

flexibility to examine other forecasts and allows use of a deliberative

process to determined how to manage Truckee River diversions. The

intent of this change is to allow the BOR to take advantage of other

forecasts and the experience and knowledge of the Federal Water Master,

the TCID water master, and other parties. The desired effect of this

change is to improve precision in forecasting and managing the Truckee

River diversion to the Project to avoid spills and shortages.

5. Additional Revisions: In addition to the proposed change

identified in 1. through 4. above, a number of minor revisions have

been made to the 1988 OCAP. Most changes are editorial and do not

affect the meaning of the text. Some changes provide opportunities for

consultation with interested and effected parties before BOR makes a

decision.

A few changes add language to clarify or interpret the meaning of

the 1988 OCAP in light of experience administering the OCAP, passage of

time, or new statutory provisions. Changes to the text of the 1988 OCAP

occur at:

Section 418.1: Other Project purposes are added in accordance with

Pub. L. 101-618, 104 Stat. 3289, Sec. 209 (a)(1).

Section 418.1 (c)(3) (i) (B): Explains the use of efficiencies in

calculating the MAD.

Section 418.3 (c): Calculates terminal flow in the Truckee Canal by

averaging flows during the time when water is not being diverted to

Lahontan Reservoir.

Section 418.3 (g): Subtracts Rock Dam Ditch deliveries from Carson

Division demand and adds it to Truckee Division demand.

Section 418.3 (h) (1): Water captured in Project facilities from a

spill or precautionary draw down is used to make deliveries to eligible

lands but does not count as a Project diversion or as Lahontan

Reservoir storage.

Section 418.7(b): Deletes the reference to the February 14, 1984,

Contract for Operation and Maintenance between the United States and

the District.

Section 418.9 (f) (4): Adds new text clarifying that a natural

drought greater than or equal to the debit will eliminate the debit.

Section 418.9 (h)(2): Allows TCID to divert up to the MAD if needed

to meet headgate entitlements.

Coordination With the Public

The Department developed the proposed adjustments to the 1988 OCAP

in consultation with the BOR, FWS, BIA, and other interested and

affected

[[Page 64838]]

parties in western Nevada. Four public meetings were held in Fernley,

Nevada, to discuss the four main revisions to the 1988 OCAP described

above. Participants in the public meetings were representatives from

the State of Nevada, Churchill, County, Washoe County, Town of Fernley,

TCID, Pryamid Lake Paiute Tribe, Fallon Paiute-Shoshone Tribes,

Lahontan Valley Environmental Alliance, Newlands Water Protective

Association, The Nature Conservancy, and members of the public.

Administrative Matters

This rule is not a significant rule under Executive Order

(E.O.) 12866 and does not require review by the Office of Management

and Budget.

As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act, it is

hereby certified that this rule will not have a significant impact on

small business entities.

This rule does not include any collections of information

requiring approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act.

The Department has preliminarily determined that the

proposed rule is not a major Federal action having significant effects

on the human and natural environment. A draft environmental assessment

(EA) has been prepared on the effects of the proposed rule. The EA will

be reviewed in light of comments on the proposed rule.

The proposed rule has no substantial effects on Federalism

under the requirements of E.O. 12612.

The proposed rule does not have a significant impact on

family formulation, maintenance, and general well being under the

requirements of E.O. 12606.

The proposed rule does not represent a government action

that would interfere with constitutionally protected property rights

and does not require a Takings Implications Assessment under E.O.

12630.

The proposed rule meets the applicable standards of civil

justice reform in accordance with E.O. 12988.

The proposed rule will not result in aggregate annual

expenditures in excess of $100 million by state, local, and tribal

governments, or the private sector and is, therefore, not subject to

the requirements of Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of

1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).

The author of this rule is Jeffrey Zippin of the Department of

Interior, Truckee-Carson Coordination Office.

The proposed rule replaces the 1967 OCAP regulations at 43 CFR 418.

That regulation was superseded by subsequent U.S. District Court-

approved OCAP, including the 1988 OCAP, which are the basis for this

proposed rule.

List of Subjects in 43 CFR Part 418; Irrigation, Water supply,

Newlands Irrigation Project; Operating Criteria and Procedures.

Dated: November 27, 1996

John Garamendi,

Deputy Secretary.

For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 43 CFR part 418 is

proposed to be revised as follows:

PART 418--OPERATING CRITERIA AND PROCEDURES FOR THE NEWLANDS

RECLAMATION PROJECT, NEVADA

Sec.

418.1 Conditions of water delivery.

418.2 Monitoring diversions.

418.3 Operations management.

418.4 Water rights.

418.5 Prohibited deliveries.

418.6 Violations.

418.7 Enforcement.

418.8 Water management and conservation.

418.9 Implementation.

418.10 Fallon Paiute-Shoshone Indian Reservation.

Appendix A--Expected Project Distribution System Efficiency

Authority: 32 Stat. 388, et. seq,; 43 U.S.C. 373; 70 Stat. 775;

72 Stat. 705; 104 Stat. 3289.

Sec. 418.1 Conditions of water delivery.

Project water may be delivered only to serve valid water rights

used for maintenance of wetlands, fish and wildlife including

endangered and threatened species, recreation, domestic and other uses

and for irrigation of eligible land. Domestic and other uses of Project

water are as defined by the Orr Ditch and Alpine! decrees. Eligible

land is defined as Project land which at the time of delivery has a

valid water right and either: Is Classified as irrigable pursuant to

Bureau of Reclamation (Bureau) land classification standards

(Reclamation Instruction Series 510); or has a paid out Project water

right.

(a) Irrigation deliveries. Project irrigation water deliveries may

be only to eligible land to be irrigated. The District shall maintain

records for each individual water right holder indicating the number of

eligible acres irrigated and the amount of water ordered and delivered.

(1) Eligible land actually irrigated. During each year, the

District, in cooperation with the Bureau, shall identify and report to

the Bureau the location and number of acres of eligible land irrigated

in the Project. Possible irrigation of ineligible land will also be

identified. The Bureau will review data to assure compliance with these

OCAP. The District in cooperation with the Bureau will be responsible

for field checking potential violations and immediately stopping

delivery of Project water to any ineligible land. The Bureau may also

audit as appropriate.

(2) Eligible land with transferred water rights. The District water

rights maps dated August 1981 through January 1983 will be used as the

basis for determining lands which have a valid water right. The

original maps will be maintained by the District. The District shall

provide copies of the maps to the Bureau. The District will alter the

maps and the copies to account for water right transfer as they are

approved by the Nevada State Engineer.

(3) Other eligible land. The Bureau will also identify eligible

land that was not irrigated during the prior irrigation season.

(4) Notification and review. (i) Eligible land anticipated to be

irrigated. (A) Anticipated changes in irrigated eligible land from the

prior year will be reported to the Bureau's Lahontan Basin Projects

Office by the District by March 1 of each year. The District will

adjust the acreage of the eligible land anticipated to be irrigated to

correct for inaccuracies, water right transfer that have been finally

approved by the Nevada State Engineer, and any other action than

impacts the number of eligible acres, acres anticipated to be

irrigated, or water deliveries. As the adjustments are made, the

District will provide updated information to the Bureau for review and

approval. The District shall adjust anticipated water allocations to

individual water users accordingly.

The allocations will be based on a maximum annual entitlement of

3.5 acre-feet (AF) per acre of bottom land, 4.5 AF per acre of bench

land, and 1.5 AF per acre of pasture land that is anticipated to be

irrigate and not by the number of water-righted acres.

(B) The District will provide the individual water users with the

approved data regarding the anticipated acreage to be irrigated and

water allocations for each water user that year. Any adjustments based

on changes in lands anticipated to be irrigated during the irrigation

season must be reported by the individual water user to the District.

The District will, in turn, notify the Bureau of any changes in

irrigated acreage which must be accounted for. Each landowner's

anticipated acreage must be less than or equal to the landowner's

eligible acreage.

(C) Should a landowner believe that the number of acres of eligible

land he or she is entitled to irrigate is different from the number of

acres as approved by the Bureau, the landowner is

[[Page 64839]]

required to notify the District and present appropriate documentation

regarding the subject acreage. The District shall record the

information and present the claim to the Bureau for further

consideration. If the Bureau determines that there is sufficient

support for the landowner's claim, then adjustments will be made to

accommodate the changes requested by the landowner. If the Bureau

disallows the landowner's claim, the Bureau shall notify the District

is writing. The District will, in turn, inform the landowner of the

disposition of the claim and the reasons, therefore, and will further

instruct the landowner that he or she may seek judicial review of the

Bureau's determination pursuant to the Orr Ditch and Alpine decrees. If

the dispute affects the current year, then the Bureau and the District

will seek to expedite any court proceeding.

(ii) Changes in domestic and other uses. By March 1 of each year,

the District shall reports to the Bureau all anticipated domestic and

other uses. This notification shall include a detailed explanation of

the criteria utilized in allowing the use and sufficient documentation

on the type and amount of use by each water user to demonstrate to the

satisfaction of the Bureau that each water user is in compliance with

the criteria. With adequate documentation, the District may notify the

Bureau of any changes in domestic water requirements at any time during

the year.

(b) Water duty. (1) Eligible land may receive no more than the

amount of water in acre-feet per year established as maximum farm

headgate delivery allowances by the Orr Ditch and Alphine decrees. All

water use is limited to that amount reasonably necessary for economical

and beneficial use pursuant to the Orr Ditch and Alpien decrees.

(2) The annual water duty as assigned by the Orr Ditch and Alpine

decrees is a maximum of 4.5 AF per acre for bench lands and a maximum

of 3.5 AF per acre for bottom lands. The water duty for fields with a

mixture of bench and bottom lands shall be the water duty of the

majority acreage. Bench and bottom land designations as finally

approved by the United States District Court for the District of Nevada

will be used in determining the maximum water duty for any parcel of

eligible land. The annual water duty for pasture land established by

contract is 1.5 AF per acre.

(c) Deliveries, efficiency, and maximum limits. The OCAP will

constrain the operation of the Project on a long term average basis to

achieve the full benefits for all the region's water users through

three basis elements: valid headgate deliveries; Project efficiency

with incentives and disincentives; and maximum operating limits or

cushions.

(1) Valid headgate deliveries. The valid water deliveries at the

headgate are set by the product of eligible land actually irrigated

multiplied by the appropriate water duty in accordance with

Secs. 418.1(a) and 418.1(b). The District will regularly monitor all

water deliveries and report in accordance with Sec. 418.1(a). No amount

of water will be permitted to be delivered in excess of the individual

water user's headgate entitlement. In the event it should occur, such

amount will be automatically reflected in the efficiency deficit

adjustment to the Lahontan storage. Water delivered in excess of

entitlements shall not be considered valid for purposes of computing

project efficiency.

(2) Project efficiency. (i) The principal feature of the OCAP is to

obtain a reasonable level of efficiency in supplying water to the

headgate by the District. The efficiency targets established by these

OCAP are the cornerstone of the enforcement and the incentive

provisions and when implemented will aid other competing uses.

(ii) The efficiency approach has the advantage of being readily

calculable at the year's end, easily convertible to water appropriate

to that year, able to be compared to other systems even though there

may be many dissimilarities, appropriate for long term averaging,

adjustable to any headgate delivery level including droughts or

allocations, automatically adjusts to changes during the year, and it

accurately accounts for misappropriated water. It also can be achieved

through any number of measures from operations to changes in the

facilities and can be measured as an end product without regard to the

approach. Thus it is flexible to allow local decision making and yet is

fact based to minimize disputes.

(iii) Assuming that the headgate deliveries are valid and

enforceable, the efficiency is the only remaining variable in

determining the water needed to be supplied to the District. Efficiency

is a measure of how much water is required for system losses relative

to actual headgate deliveries. Differences in efficiency, therefore,

are directly convertible to acre-feet. The differences in efficiency,

expressed as a quantity in acre-feet, may be added to or subtracted

from the actual Lahontan Reservoir storage level before it is compared

to the monthly storage objective. Thus the diversions from the Truckee

River, operation of other facilities (e.g., Stampede Reservoir) and

decisions related to Lahontan Reservoir are made after the efficiency

storage adjustments have been made. Operating decisions are made as if

the adjusted storage reflected actual conditions.

(A) Effiency incentive credits. In any year that the District's

actual efficiency exceeds the target efficiency for the actual headgate

delivery, two-thirds of the resultant savings, in water, will be

credited to the District as storage in Lahontan. This storage amount

will remain in Lahontan as water available to the District to use at

its discretion consistent with Nevada and Federal law. Such uses may

include wetlands (directly or incidentally), power production,

recreation, a hedge against future shortages or whatever else the

district determines. The storage is credited at the end of the

irrigation season from which it was earned. This storage ``floats'' on

top of the reservoir so that if it is unused it will be spilled first

if the reservoir spills. The District may use all capacity of Lahontan

Reservoir not needed for project purposes to store credits.

(B) Efficiency disincentive debits. In any year that the District's

actual efficiency falls short of the target appropriate to the actual

headgate deliveries, then the resultant excess water that was used is

considered borrowed from the future. Thus it becomes a storage debit

adjustment to the actual Lahonthan Reservoir storage level for

determining all operational decisions. The debit may accumulate but may

not exceed a maximum as defined in Sec. 418.1(c)(3)(ii). The debit must

be offset by an existing incentive credit or, if none is available, by

a subsequent incentive at a full credit (not a 2/3 credit) or finally

by an allocation by the District to restrict actual headgate

deliveries. This would only be done prospectively (a subsequent year)

so the District and the water users can prepare accordingly. Since the

debit does not impact immediately on other competing uses or the

District (except in a real drought), it allows for planning ahead and

averaging over time.

(C) Efficiency targets. The goal is to have the District operate at

a reasonably efficient level. The OCAP establish reasonable efficiency

targets. The key to the target efficiencies, therefore, is the

application of ``reasonable''. To determine the efficiency target, the

system delivery losses were divided into categories such as seepage,

evaporation and operational losses. The ``reasonable'' level of savings

for each category was then determined by

[[Page 64840]]

starting with current operating experience and applying the added

knowledge from several possible measures researched, identified and

subjected to public comment. Not all of these measures were then

utilized nor was their full potential savings claimed. The derivation

of the efficiency targets, including the specific measures and amounts,

is identified in the following table.

Newlands Project Water Budget

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1988 OCAP,

1988 1988 OCAP, 1992 w/o Proposed

Line OCAP,\1\ 1992 additional 1995

Base assumptions acres example

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1.... Irrigated Acreage (acres)............................ 60,900 64,850 61,630 59,023

2.... Maximum Headgate Entitlement \2\..................... 226,450 237,485 226,555 206,230

Distribution System Losses

Evaporation:

3.... Canals/Laterals.................................... 6,000 6,200 6,000 5,838

4.... Regulatory Reservoirs.............................. 15,000 7,500 7,500 7,500

Seepage:

5.... Canals/Laterals.................................... 50,000 51,000 48,500 46,481

6.... Regulatory Reservoirs.............................. 7,000 4,000 4,000 4,000

7.... Operational Losses................................. 87,980 40,800 39,400 38,270

---------------------------------------------------

8.... Total Losses \3\.................................. 165,980 109,500 105,400 102,089

9.... Max. Allowable Diversion \4\ (MAD)................... 392,430 346,985 331,955 308,319

10... Projected Efficiency (%) \5\ Assuming 100% Water Use. 58.4 68.4 68.2 66.9

11... Expected Headgate Entitlement Unused \6\............. 20,930 23,700 22,700 13,611

12... Diversion Reduction for Unused Water \7\............. 25,430 26,500 25,400 15,279

13... Expected Irrigation Diversions \8\................... 367,000 320,485 306,555 293,040

14... Expected Efficiency (%)\9\........................... 56.0 66.7 66.5 \10\ 65.7

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\ All values are in acre-feet except where noted. The first 3 columns of numbers come from the 1988 OCAP,

Table 1.

\2\ Derived by multiplying the acreage by the appropriate water duty.

\3\ In deriving the 1988 OCAP water budget, it was recognized that the District had reduced losses by 7,400 acre-

feet prior to 1988.

\4\ Maximum Headgate Entitlement (line 2) plus Total Losses (line 8).

\5\ Maximum Headgate Entitlement (line 2) divided by Maximum Allowable Diversion (line 9) multiplied by 100.

\6\ Water delivery records show that, historically, lands have been irrigated with less than their full

entitlement. In the 1988 OCAP base the unused portion of the entitlement was assumed to be approximately 9%;

in the 1988 OCAP 10%; in the 1995 example 6.8%.

\7\ Unused Water (line 11) plus a proportional share of Operational Loss (line 7).

\8\ Maximum Allowable Diversion (line 9) minus Diversion Reduction (line 12).

\9\ Maximum Headgate Entitlement (line 2) minus Unused Water (line 11) divided by Expected Irrigation Diversion

(line 13) multiplied by 100.

\10\ Expected efficiency at 93.4% use of headgate entitlement; other entries based on 90%.

(1) These water conservation measures and others currently

available to the District are listed in the following table. The table

has been revised in this proposed OCAP based upon the Bureau of

Reclamation's Final Report to Congress of the Newlands Project

Efficiency Study, 1994.

Possible Water Conservation Measures for the Newlands Project

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Expected

savings in acre-

Conservation measures \1\ feet (AF) per Notes

year \2\

------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Water ordering.............. 1,000 Require 48-hour

advance notice.

2. Adjust Lahontan Dam \3\++ Match releases to

frequently. demand with daily

adjustments.

3. Increase accuracy of 16,630 Account for deliveries

delivery records. to nearest cfs and to

nearest minute.

4. Change operation of \4\?? Eliminate use of all

regulating reservoirs. or parts of

regulating

reservoirs; drain at

end of season.

5. Shorten irrigation season... 4,000 Reduced by 2 weeks.

6. Control delivery system..... ++ Eliminate spills,

better scheduling

grouping deliveries.

7. System improvements......... ?? O&M activity: repair

leaky gates, reshape

canals, improve

measuring devices.

8. Dike off 2/3 S-Line 2,720 500 ft. dike; (5'

Reservoir. evaporation, 0.75'

seepage).

9. Dike off south half of 2,130 5,000 ft. dike; large

Harmon Reservoir. savings considering

canal losses 95'

evap., 1.8' seepage).

10. Dike off west half of 2,400 6,000 ft. dike.

Sheckler Reservoir.

11. Eliminate use of Sheckler 4,000 Use for Lahontan spill

Reservoir. capture only; restore

200 ft. of E-Canal; A-

Canal is OK.

12. Line 20 miles of Truckee 20,000 Reduces O&M.

Canal.

13. Line large canals.......... 26,100-31,000 Line large net losers

first.

14. Line regulatory reservoirs. 2.3 ......................

15. Reuse drain water for 7,100 Blended irrigation

irrigation. water quality would

be adequate.

16. Ditch rider training each ?? ......................

year.

17. Canal automation........... ?? Reduced canal

fluctuations.

18. Community rotation system.. ?? Grouping deliveries by

area.

[[Page 64841]]

19. Reclamation Reform Act ?? District

water conservation plan: implementation of

water conservation

plan.

a. Weed and phreatophyte

control.

b. Fix gate leaks.

c. Water measurement.

d. Automation.

e. Communication.

20. Pumps and wells for small 400 ......................

diverters.

21. Water pricing by amount ++ Incurs administrative

used. costs to implement.

22. Incentive programs......... ?? For District personnel

and/or water users.

23. Drain canals............... 1,065 ......................

------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\ The first seven measures were considered in developing the water

budget in Table 1 for the 1988 OCAP. Additional measures could be

implemented by the District to help achieve efficiency requirements.

\2\ Water savings have been updated in accordance with Bureau of

Reclamation's Report to Congress on Newlands Project Efficiency, April

1994.

\3\ ++ indicates a positive number for savings but not quantifiable at

this time.

\4\ ?? indicates uncertainty as to savings.

(2) These measures are discretionary choices for the District. The

range of measures available to the District provides a level of

assurance that the target efficiency is reasonably achievable. The

resultant efficiency targets were also compared to the range of

efficiencies actually experienced by other irrigation systems that were

considered comparable in order to provide a further check on

``reasonable''. Most of the delivery losses are relatively constant

regardless of the amount of deliveries. The efficiency will necessarily

vary with the amount of headgate deliveries.

(D) The target efficiency for any annual valid headgate delivery

can be derived from the figure in Appendix A to this part.

(3) Maximum allowable limits. (i) Maximum allowable diversions. (A)

The water budget in the table Newlands Project Water Budget shall be

recalculated for each irrigation season to reflect anticipated water-

righted acres to be irrigated. Based on the anticipated irrigation

demand, the required target efficiency shall be recalculated each

irrigation season. The maximum allowable diversion (MAD) for each year

shall be determined based on: acres of eligible land anticipated to

actually be irrigated in that year (Sec. 418.1(a)); the water duties

for those lands (Sec. 418.1(b)); and the established efficiency of the

project water distribution system (Appendix A). The MAD will be

calculated annually to assure an adequate water supply for all water

right holders whose water use complies with their decreed entitlement

and these OCAP. The MAD is the maximum amount of water permitted to be

diverted for irrigation use on the Project in that year. It is

calculated to ensure full entitlements can be fulfilled, but is

expected to be significantly in excess of Project requirements. The MAD

will be established by the Bureau at least two weeks prior to the start

of each irrigation season. All releases of water from Lahontan

Reservoir and diversions from the Truckee Canal (including any

diversions from the Truckee Canal to Rock Dam Ditch) shall be charged

to the MAD except as provided in Secs. 418.3 and 418.9 of these OCAP

(B) On the basis of the methodology adopted herein (i.e., actual

irrigated acres multiplied by appropriate water duties divided by

established project efficiency) an example of the MAD calculated for

the projected irrigated acreage as shown in the table Newlands Project

Water Budget would be 308,319 acre-feet for Proposed 1995 Example. The

sample MAD corresponds to a system efficiency for full deliveries at

66.9% for 1995 actual acres. Appendix A shows the sliding scale for

target efficiencies which will be used over the range of water supply

condition and headgate deliveries expected in the future. Target

efficiencies shall be based on the percentage of maximum headgate

entitlement delivered and not on the percent of water supply available.

In Appendix A of this part, the sliding scale for 1995 Actual Acres

shall be used to determine that target efficiencies for all irrigation

years subsequent to 1995.

(C) Adjustments in the MAD shall be made by the Bureau each year

based on changes in irrigated eligible land from the prior year and

subsequent decisions concerning transfers of Project water rights,

using the methodology established herein.

(D) In the event the District concludes the MAD for a given year

will not meet the water delivery requirements for the eligible land to

be irrigated in that year due to weather conditions, canal breaks, or

some other unusual or unforeseen condition, the District shall submit a

written request to the Bureau for such additional water considered

necessary to make up for the specified loss and supply decreed

entitlements. The District shall set forth a full detailed, factual

statement of the reasons for the request. The Bureau shall promptly

review the request and after consultation with the Federal Water Master

and other interested parties, will determine if the request or any

portion of it should be approved. The Bureau will make reasonable

adjustments for unforeseen cause or events but will not make

adjustments to accommodate waste or Project inefficiency. The Bureau

will then notify the District of its determination. If the District

does not agree with the Bureau's decision, it may seek judicial review.

The Bureau and the District will seek to expedite the court proceeding

in order to minimize any potential adverse impacts.

(ii) Maximum Allowable Efficiency Debits (MED)--The debits in

Lahontan Reservoir storage from the District's actual efficiency

falling short of the target can accumulate over time. If these amounts

of borrowed storage get too large they may not be offset later by

increased efficiencies and may severely impact the District's water

users by an added ``drought'' on top of a real one. Therefore, a limit

was placed on how much could be borrowed or accumulated. The limit

should also be large enough to allow reasonable opportunity to average

out over time. This maximum efficiency debit cushion is 26,000 acre-

feet. However, unlike the MAD, it only applies to the subsequent year's

operation. The MED is approximately 9% of the headgate entitlements.

[[Page 64842]]

Sec. 418.2 Monitoring diversions.

(a) Operations. (1) By the end of each month, the District shall

submit to the Bureau's Lahontan Basin Projects Office reports for the

previous month which document monthly inflow and outflow in acre-feet

from the Truckee and Carson divisions of the Project for that month.

Reports shall include any data the Bureau may reasonably require to

monitor compliance with these OCAP.

(2) Accounting for farm headgate deliveries shall be based on the

amount of water actually delivered to the water user. Project

operations shall provide for the amount of water ordered and the

distribution system losses.

(3) The District shall keep records of all domestic and other uses

showing the purpose and amount of water usage for each entity. The

District shall make the records available for review by the Bureau upon

request. The Bureau shall have the right to audit all records kept by

the District.

(b) Operations monitoring. (1) The Bureau will work in cooperation

with the District to monitor the operation of the Project. The Bureau's

personnel shall perform field inspections of water distribution during

the irrigation season. Staff members of the Bureau's Lahontan Basin

Projects Office and the District will meet as often as necessary during

the irrigation season after each water distribution report has been

prepared to examine the amounts of water used to that point in the

season. On the basis of the information obtained from field

observations, water use records, and consultations with District staff,

the Bureau will determine at monthly intervals whether the rate of

diversion is consistent with the OCAP for that year. The District will

be informed in writing of suggested adjustments that may be made in

management of diversions and releases as necessary to achieve target

efficiencies and stay within the MAD.

(2) Project operations will be monitored in part by measuring flows

at key locations. Specifically, Project diversions (used in the

calculations under Sec. 418.1(c) above) will be determined by adding

flows measured at:

(i) Truckee Canal near Wadsworth--U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)

gauge number 10351300;

(ii) Carson River below Lahontan Dam--USGS gauge number 10312150;

(iii) Rock Dam Ditch near the end of the concrete lining; and

subtracting:

(iv) Flows measured at the Truckee Canal near Hazen--USGS gauge

number 10351400;

(v) The Carson River at Tarzyn Road near Fallon (below Sagouspe

Dam) for satisfying water rights outside of the Project boundaries as

described in Sec. 418.3(I), USGS gauge number 10312275;

(vi) Estimated losses in the Truckee Canal; and

(vii) Spills, precautionary drawdown, and incentive water released

at Lahontan Dam pursuant to Secs. 418.3 and 418.9.

Sec. 418.3 Operations and management.

(a) Power generation. All use of water for power generation using

Project water shall be incidental to releases charged against Project

diversions, precautionary drawdown, incentive water (Sec. 418.9(c)), or

spills.

(b) Truckee and Carson River water use. Project water shall be

managed so that maximum use will be made of Carson River water and

diversions of Truckee River water through the Truckee Canal will be

minimized in order to make available as much Truckee River water as

possible for use in the lower Truckee River and Pyramid Lake.

(c) Diversions at Derby Dam. Diversions of Truckee River water at

Derby Dam shall be managed to the maximum extent practical with the

objective of maintaining minimum terminal flow to Lahontan Reservoir or

the Carson River except where these criteria specifically permit such

diversions. Diversions to the Truckee Canal shall be managed to achieve

an average terminal flow of 20 cubic feet per second (cfs) or less

during times when diversions to Lahontan Reservoir are not allowed (the

flows shall be averaged over the total time diversions are not allowed

in that calendar year; i.e., if flows are not allowed in July and

August and then are allowed in September then not allowed in October

and November, the average flow will be averaged over the four months of

July, August, October, and November). The Bureau will work

cooperatively with the District on monitoring the flows at the USGS

gage on the USGS gage on the Truckee Canal near Hazen to determine if

and when flows are excessive and bringing the flows back into

compliance when excessive. Increases in canal diversions which would

reduce river flows below Derby Dam, by more than 20% in a 24-hour

period will not be allowed when Truckee River flow, as measured by the

gauge below Derby Dam, is less than or equal to 100 cfs. Diversions to

the Truckee Canal will be coordinated with releases from Stampede

Reservoir, in cooperation with the Federal Water Master, to minimize

fluctuations in the Truckee River below Derby Dam in order to meet

annual flow regimes established by the United States Fish and Wildlife

Service for listed species in the lower Truckee River.

(d) Diversions from the Truckee River to the Truckee Division--

Sufficient water, if available, shall be diverted from the Truckee

River through the Truckee Canal to meet the direct irrigation, domestic

and other entitlements of the Truckee Division.

(e) Criteria for Diversions from the Truckee River to Lahontan

Reservoir, January through June.

(1) Truckee River diversions through the Truckee Canal will be made

to meet Lahontan Reservoir end-of-month storage objectives for the

months of January through June. The current month storage objective

will be based in part on the monthly United States April through July

runoff forecast for the Carson River near Fort Churchill, to meet

anticipated diversion requirements for the Carson Division, and target

storage for Lahontan Reservoir. The Bureau in consultation with the

District, Federal Water Master, Fish and Wildlife Service, the Pyramid

Lake Paiute Tribe, and other affected parties will determine the

exceedance levels and predicted Carson River inflows to use, based on

the reliability of the forecast and other information such as river

forecasts available from other sources. The end-of-month storage

targets may be adjusted any time during the month as new forecasts or

other information become available.

(2) The January through June storage objective will be calculated

using the following relationship:

LSOCM=TSM/J-(C1 x AJ)+L+(C2 x CDT)

where:

LSOCM=current end-of-month storage objectives for Lahontan Reservoir.

TSM/J=current end-of-month May/June Lahontan Reservoir target storage.

C1 x AJ=forecasted Carson River inflow for the period from the end of

the current month through May or June, with AJ being the Bureau's April

through July runoff forecast for the Carson River at Fort Churchill and

C1 being an adjustment coefficient.

L=an average Lahontan Reservoir seepage and evaporation loss from the

end of the current month through May or June.

C2 x CDT=projected Carson Division demand from the end of the current

month through May or June, with CDT being the total Carson Division

diversion requirement (based on eligible acres anticipated to be

irrigated times the appropriate duty times a 95% usage rate), and C2

being the estimate of the portion of the total diversion requirement to

[[Page 64843]]

be delivered during this period. Values for TSM/J, C1, L and C2 are

defined in the following table.

Monthly Values for Lahontan Storage Computations

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

January February March April May June

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TSM/J....................... 174.0 174.0 174.0 174.0 174.0 174.0

C1/MAY...................... 0.863 0.734 0.591 0.394 ............ ...........

C1/JUNE..................... 1.190 1.061 0.918 0.721 0.327 ...........

L/MAY....................... 13.9 12.5 9.9 7.1 ............ ...........

L/JUNE...................... 18.2 16.8 14.2 11.4 4.3 ...........

C2/MAY...................... 0.30 0.30 0.28 0.18 ............ ...........

C2/JUNE..................... 0.47 0.47 0.45 0.35 0.17 ...........

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(3) For January through April, the Lahontan Reservoir storage

objective for each month will be the lowest of the May calculation, the

June calculation, or full reservoir (defined as 295,000 acre-feet using

Truckee River diversions, but can fill above 295,000 acre-feet to

317,000 acre-feet with Carson River inflow and the use of flash

boards).

(4) For May, the Lahontan Reservoir storage objective will be the

lower of the June calculation or full reservoir.

(5) For June, the Lahontan Reservoir storage objective will be the

June target storage.

(6) Once the monthly Lahontan Reservoir storage objective has been

determined, the monthly diversion to the Project from the Truckee River

will be based upon water availability and Project demand as expressed

in the following relationship:

TRD =TDD+TCL+CDD+LRL +LSOCM-ALRS-CRI

where:

TRD=current month Truckee River diversion acre-feet to the Project.

TDD=current month Truckee River Division demand.

TCL=current month Truckee Canal conveyance loss.

CDD=current month Carson Division demand.

LRL=current month Lahontan Reservoir seepage and evaporation losses.

LSOCM=current month end-of-month storage objective for Lahontan

Reservoir.

ALRS=current month beginning-of-month storage in Lahontan Reservoir.

(Includes accumulated Stampede credit described below and further

adjusted for the net efficiency penalty or efficiency credit described

in Secs. 418.1 and 418.9).

CRI=current month anticipated Carson River inflow to Lahontan Reservoir

(as determined by Reclamation in consultation with other interested

parties).

(7) The following procedure is intended to ensure that monthly

storage objectives are not exceeded. It may be implemented only if the

following conditions are met:

(i) Diversions from the Truckee River are required to achieve the

current month Lahontan Reservoir storage objective (LSOCM);

(ii) Truckee River runoff above Derby Dam is available for

diversion to Lahontan Reservoir; and

(iii) Sufficient Stampede Reservoir storage capacity is available.

(8) The Bureau, in consultation with the Federal Water Master, the

District, Fish and Wildlife Service, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and

the Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe will determine whether the calculated

current month Truckee River diversion to Lahontan Reservoir (TRD-TDD-

TCL) may be reduced during the month and the amount of reduction credit

stored in Stampede Reservoir. Reductions in diversions to Lahontan

Reservoir with credit storage in Stampede Reservoir may be implemented

to the extent that: The reduction is in lieu of a scheduled release

from Stampede Reservoir for the purpose of supplementing flows to

Pyramid Lake; and/or water is captured in Stampede Reservoir that is

scheduled to be passed through and diverted to the Truckee Canal. Any

proposal to reduce diversions to Lahontan Reservoir for Newlands

Project credit purposes without a comparable reduction in release from

Stampede Reservoir (any conversion of Stampede Reservoir project water

to Newlands Project credit water) would have to be approved by the Fish

and Wildlife Service.

(i) The diversion to Lahontan Reservoir may be adjusted any time

during the month as revised runoff forecasts become available. The

accumulated credit will be added to current Lahontan Reservoir storage

(ALRS) in calculating TRD. If the sum of accumulated credit and

Lahontan Reservoir storage exceeds 295,000 acre-feet, credit will be

reduced by the amount in excess of 295,000 acre-feet. Credit will also

be reduced by the amount of precautionary drawdown or spills in that

month. If the end-of-month storage in Lahontan Reservoir plus the

accumulated credit in Stampede Reservoir at the end of June exceeds the

end-of-month storage objective for Lahontan, the credit will be reduced

by the amount exceeding the end-of-month storage objective.

(ii) Following consultation with the District, the Federal Water

Master, and other interested parties as appropriate, the Bureau may

release credit water for Project purposes from July 1 through the end

of the irrigation season in which the credit accrues with timing

priority given to meeting current year Project irrigation demands.

Conveyance of credit water in the Truckee Canal shall be in addition to

regularly scheduled diversions for the Project and will be measured at

the USGS gauge number 10351300 near Wadsworth. Newlands credit water in

Stampede Reservoir storage will be subject to spill and will not carry

over to subsequent years. Newlands credit water in Stampede can be

exchanged to other reservoirs and retain its priority.

(iii) The Bureau, in consultation with the District, the Federal

Water Master, and other interested parties, may release Newlands

Project credit water before July 1. Prior to such release, the credit

shall be reduced to the extent that Lahontan Reservoir storage plus

accumulated credit at the end of the previous month exceeds the storage

objectives for that month. If any Newlands credit water remains in

Stampede Reservoir storage after the end of the current irrigation

season in which it accumulated, it will convert to water for cui-ui

recovery and will no longer be considered available for Newlands credit

water. Newlands credit water stored in Stampede Reservoir shall be

available for use only on the Carson Division of the Newlands Project.

(9) Subject to the provisions of Sec. 418.3(c), LSOCM may be

adjusted as frequently as necessary when new information indicates the

need and

[[Page 64844]]

diversions from the Truckee River to the Truckee Canal shall be

adjusted daily or otherwise as frequently as necessary to meet the

monthly storage objective.

(f) Criteria for Diversion of Truckee River Water to Lahontan

Reservoir, July through December. Truckee River diversions through the

Truckee Canal to Lahonton Reservoir from July through December shall be

made only in accordance with the following table.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Storage

Operating month target

(AF)

------------------------------------------------------------------------

July.......................................................... 139,000

August........................................................ 95,000

September..................................................... 64,000

October....................................................... 52,000

November...................................................... 74,000

December...................................................... 101,000

------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\ Diversions shall be started to achieve the end-of-month storage

targets listed in the table above and will be discontinued when

storage is forecast to meet or exceed the end-of-month storage targets

at the end of the month. Diversions may be adjusted any time during

the month as conditions warrant (i.e., new forecasts, information from

other forecasts becoming available, or any other new information that

may impact stream forecasts). The end-of-the-month storage targets may

be adjusted by procedures provided in Sec. 418.9.

(g) Rock Dam Ditch. Project water may be diverted directly to Rock

Dam Ditch from the Truckee Canal only when diversions cannot be made

from the outlet works of Lahontan Reservoir. Such diversions will

require the prior written approval of the Bureau and be utilized in

calculating Project diversions. During the period January through June

of such operation, the projected total delivery to Rock Dam Ditch from

the end of the current month through May or June will be subtracted

from the projected Carson Division demand (C2* CDT) in calculating the

current end-of-month storage objective for Lahontan Reservoir (LSOCM),

and added to Truckee Division demand in calculating Truckee River

diversion (TRD) in conformance with the procedures set forth in

Sec. 418.3(e).

(h) Precautionary drawdown and spills from Lahontan Reservoir. (1)

Even though flood control is not a specifically authorized purpose of

the Project, at the request of the District and in consultation with

other interested parties and the approval of the Bureau, precautionary

drawdown of Lahontan Reservoir may be made only for the purpose of

limiting potential flood damage along the Carson River. Criteria for

precautionary drawdown will be formulated by the Bureau in consultation

with the District and other interested parties. The drawdown shall be

scheduled sufficiently in advance and at such a rate of flow in order

to divert as much water as possible into the Project irrigation system

for delivery to eligible land or storage in reregulating reservoirs for

later use on eligible land. During periods of precautionary drawdown,

or when water is spilled from Lahontan Reservoir, Project diversions

will be determined by comparison with other year's data and normalized

by comparison of differences in climatological data. The Bureau will

determine the normalization in consultation with the District and other

interested parties. Spills from Lahontan Reservoir and precautionary

drawdown of the reservoir to create space for storing flood waters from

the Carson River Basin that are in excess of the normalized diversions

will not be used in calculating Project diversions. Water captured in

Project facilities as a result of a precautionary drawdown or spill

will not be counted as diversions to the Project nor will they be

counted as storage in Lahontan Reservoir for the purpose of calculating

Truckee River Diversions. The precautionary drawdown or spills that are

captured in Project facilities shall be measured, used to the maximum

extent possible, and counted as deliveries to eligible lands in the

year of the drawdown. If all the drawdown water captured in Project

facilities cannot be used in the year of capture for delivery to

eligible lands then that water shall be delivered to eligible lands in

subsequent years to the maximum extent possible and counted on the

water card of the water user.

(2) If a precautionary drawdown in one month results in a failure

to meet the Lahontan Reservoir storage objective for that month, the

storage objective in subsequent months will be reduced by one-half of

the difference between that month's storage objective and actual end-

of-month storage. The Bureau shall not be liable for any damage or

water shortage resulting from a precautionary drawdown.

(i) Water use for other than Newlands Project purposes. The

District will release sufficient water to meet the vested rights below

Sagouspe Dam as specified in the Alpine decree. These water rights are

usually met by return flows. Releases for these water rights will in no

case exceed the portion of 1,300 acre-feet per year not supplied by

return flows. This water shall be accounted for at the USGS gage number

10312275 (the Carson River at Tarzyn Road near Fallon). Releases for

this purpose will not be considered in determining Project diversions

since the lands to which the water is being delivered are not part of

the Project (See Sec. 418.2(b)). Any flow past this gage in excess of

the amount specified herein will be absorbed by the District as an

efficiency loss.

(j) Charges for water use. The District shall maintain a financing

and accounting system which produces revenue sufficient to repay its

operation and maintenance costs and to discharge its debt to the United

States. The District should give consideration to adopting a system

which provides reasonable financial incentives for the economical and

efficient use of water.

(k) Distribution system operation. The District shall permit only

its authorized employees or agents to open and close individual

turnouts and operate the distribution system facilities. After

obtaining Bureau approval, the District may appoint agents to operate

individual headgates on a specific lateral if it can be shown that the

water introduced to the lateral by a District employee is completely

scheduled and can be fully accounted for with a reasonable allowance

for seepage and evaporation losses. If agents need to adjust the

scheduled delivery of water to the lateral to accommodate variable

field conditions, weather, etc., they must immediately notify the

District so proper adjustments can be made in the distribution system.

Each agent shall keep an accurate record of start and stop times for

each delivery and the flow during delivery. This record will be given

to the District for proper accounting for water delivered. The program

of using agents to operate individual headgates will be reviewed on a

regular basis by the District and the Bureau. If it is found that

problems such as higher than normal losses, water not accounted for,

etc., have developed on an individual lateral, the program will be

suspended and the system operated by District employees until the

problems are resolved.

Sec. 418.4 Water rights

These OCAP govern water uses within existing rights. These OCAP do

not in any way change, amend, modify, abandon, diminish, or extend

existing rights. Water rights transfers will be determined by the

Nevada State Engineer pursuant to the provisions of the Alpine decree.

Sec. 418.5 Prohibited deliveries.

The District shall not deliver Project water or permit its use

except as provided in these OCAP. No Project water will be permitted to

be released in excess of the MAD or delivered to ineligible lands.

Delivery of water to land in excess of established water duties is

prohibited.

[[Page 64845]]

Sec. 418.6 Violations.

Violations of the terms and provisions of these OCAP shall be

reported immediately to the Bureau. The District or individual water

users will be responsible for any shortages to water users occasioned

by waste or excess delivery or delivery of water to ineligible land as

provided in the OCAP.

Sec. 418.7 Enforcement.

(a) Conditions of delivery. There are four basic elements for

enforcement with all necessary quantities and review determined in

accordance with the relevant sections of this OCAP

(1) Valid headgate deliveries. In the event it is determined that

water was delivered in ineligible land or in excess of the appropriate

water duty then:

(i) The District will stop such illegal delivery immediately;

(ii) The District will notify the Bureau of the particulars

including location and amounts--known or estimated;

(iii) The amount will not be included as a valid headgate for

purposes of computing the Project efficiency and resultant incentive

credit or debit to Lanhontan storage; and

(iv) If the amount applies to a prior year, then the amount will be

treated directly as a debit to Lahontan storage in the same manner as

an efficiency debit.

(2) District efficiency. To the extent that the actual District

efficiency determined for an irrigation season is greater or less than

the OCAP established target efficiency as determined for the

corresponding actual valid headgate deliveries, then the difference in

efficiency, expressed as a quantity in acre-feet, may be added to or

subtracted from the actual Lahontan Reservoir storage level before it

is compared to the monthly storage objective as follows:

(i) Greater efficiency. Credited to the District as storage in

Lahontan (subtracted) from any accumulated debit, or two-thirds as

storage in Lahontan for their discretionary use in accordance with

state law.

(ii) Less efficient. Debited (added) to Lahontan storage as an

adjustment to the actual storage level.

(3) Maximum Allowable Diversion (MAD). The MAD shall be computed

each year to deliver full entitlements at established Project

efficiencies. Project diversions shall not exceed the MAD. Within the

operating year, the Bureau will notify the District in writing of any

expected imminent violations of the MAD. The District will take prompt

action to avoid such violations. The Bureau will exercise reasonable

latitude month-to-month to accommodate the District's efforts to avoid

exceeding the MAD.

(4) Maximum Efficiency Debit (MED). If the MED exceeds 26,000 AF at

the end of any given year, the District shall prepare and submit to the

Bureau for review and approval, a plan detailing the actions the

District will take to either earn adequate incentive credits or to

restrict deliveries to reduce the MED to less than 26,000 AF by the end

of the next year. The plan shall be submitted to the Bureau in writing

prior to the date of March 1 immediately subsequent to the exceeding of

the MED. If the District fails to submit an approvable plan, Project

allocations will be reduced by an amount equal to the MED in excess of

26,000 plus 13,000 (one-half the allowable MED). Nominally this will

mean a forced reduction of approximately five percent of entitlements.

The Bureau will notify the District in writing of the specific

allocation and method of derivation in sufficient time for the District

to implement the allocation. Liabilities arising from shortages

occasioned by operation of this provision shall be the responsibility

of the District or individual water users.

(b) Project management. In addition to the provisions of

Sec. 418.7(a), in the event the District is found to be operating

Project facilities or any part thereof in substantial violation of

these OCAP, then, upon the determination by the Bureau, the Bureau may

take over from the District the care, operation, maintenance, and

management of the diversion and outlet works (Derby Dam and Lahontan

Dam/Reservoir) or any or all of the transferred works by giving written

notice to the District of such determination and the effective date

thereof. Following written notification from the Bureau, the care,

operation, and maintenance of the works may be retransferred to the

District.

(c) Future contracts. The Bureau shall provide in new, amended, or

replacement contracts for the operation and maintenance of Project

works, for the reservation by the Secretary of rights and options to

enforce these OCAP.

Sec. 418.8 Water management and conservation.

(a) Conservation measures. (1) Specific conservation actions will

be needed for the District and its members to achieve a reasonable

efficiency of operation as required by the OCAP. The District is best

able to determine the particular conservation measures that meet the

needs of its water users. This assures that the measures reflect the

priorities and collective judgment of the water users; and will be

practical, understandable and supported. The District also has the

discretion to make changes in the measures they adopt as conditions or

results dictate

(2) The District will keep the Bureau informed of the measures they

expect to utilize during each year. This will allow appropriate

monitoring for information helpful to evolving other suggestions and

for use by other Districts. The Bureau will work cooperatively in

support of the District's selection of measures and methods of

implementation.

(b) Cooperative programs. The Bureau and the District will work

cooperatively to develop a water management and conservation program to

promote efficient management of water in the Project.

(1) The Bureau will provide technical assistance to the District

and cooperatively assist the District in their obligations and efforts

to:

(i) Document and evaluate existing water delivery and measurement

practices;

(ii) Implement improvements to these practices; and

(iii) Evaluate and, where practical, implement physical changes to

Project facilities.

(2) The program will emphasize developing methods, including

computerization and automation, to improve the District's operations

and procedures for greater water delivery conservation.

Sec. 418.9 Implementation.

The intent of the implementation strategy for these OCAP is to

ensure that the Project delivers water within entitlements at a

reasonable level of efficiency as a long term average. The incentives

and disincentives provided herein are designed to encourage local

officials with responsibilities for Project operations to select and

implement through their discretionary actions, operating strategies

which achieve the principles of the OCAP. The specified efficiencies

(Appendix A of this part) were developed considering implementation of

reasonable conservation measures, historic project operations,

economics, and environmental effects. The efficiency target will be

used as a performance standard to establish at the end of each year on

the basis of actual operations, whether the District is entitled to a

performance bonus in the form of incentive water or a reduction in

storage for the amount borrowed ahead. The components of the

implementation strategy are outlined below.

(a) Valid headgate deliveries. Project water may be delivered to

headgates

[[Page 64846]]

only as provided in Sec. 418.1(a). Water delivered outside the entitled

irrigable land and/or outside the court set water duty is difficult to

quantify at best because it is not typically measured. Since it is not

likely to be a part of the total actual headgate deliveries, yet is a

part of the total deliveries to the Project it will manifest itself

directly as a lower efficiency. Thus, it will either reduce the

District's incentive credit or increase the storage debit by the amount

improperly diverted. All other users outside the Project are thereby

held harmless but the District incurs the consequence. This approach

should eliminate any potential disputes between the District and the

Bureau over quantifying the amount of water misappropriated.

(b) Efficiencies. The established target efficiencies pursuant to

these OCAP are shown in Appendix A of this part. The efficiency of the

Project will vary with the amount of entitlement water actually

delivered at the headgates. Since most of the distribution system

losses such as evaporation and seepage do not change significantly with

the amount of water delivered (i.e., these losses are principally a

function of water surface area and the wetted perimeter of the canals),

the Project efficiency requirement is higher as the percent of

entitlement water actually delivered at the headgates increases. The

actual efficiency is calculated each year after the close of the

irrigation season based on actual measured amounts. The application of

any adjustments to Lahontan Reservoir storage or Truckee River

diversions resulting from the efficiency is always prospective.

(c) Incentives for additional long term conservation. As an

incentive for the District to increase the efficiency of the delivery

system beyond the expected efficiency of 65.7% (66.9% with full

delivery) as shown in the table Newlands Project Water Budget, Proposed

1995 Example, the District will be allowed to store and use the Carson

River portion of the saved water at their discretion, in accordance

with Nevada State Law. Thus, if the District is able to operate the

Project in such a manner that the expected efficiency is exceeded, the

District may store in Lahontan Reservoir two-thirds (\2/3\) of the

additional water saved. (The remaining one-third (\1/3\) of the water

saved will remain in the Truckee River or through reduced diversions to

Lahontan Reservoir). This water will be considered incentive water

saved from the Carson River and will not be counted as storage in

determining diversions from the Truckee River on computing the target

storage levels for Lahontan Reservoir under these OCAP. For purposes of

these OCAP, incentive water is no longer considered Project water. The

District may use the water for any purpose (e.g., wetlands, storage for

recreation, power generation, shortage reduction) that is consistent

with Nevada State Law and Federal Law. The water will be managed under

the District's discretion and may be stored in Lahontan Reservoir until

needed subject to the limitations in Sec. 418.9(d).

(d) The amount of incentive water stored in Lahontan Reservoir will

be reduced under the following conditions:

(1) There is a deficit created and remaining in Lahontan Reservoir

from operations penalties in a prior year;

(2) The District releases the water from the reservoir for its

designated use;

(3) During a spill of the reservoir, the amount of incentive water

shall be reduced by the amount of spill; and

(4) At the discretion of the District, incentive water may be used

to offset the precautionary drawdown adjustment to the Lahontan storage

objective.

(5) At the end of each year, the amount of incentive water will be

reduced by the incremental amount of evaporation which occurs as a

result of the increased surface area of the reservoir due to the

additional storage. The evaporation rate used will be either the net

evaporation measured or the net historical average after precipitation

is taken into account. The method of calculation will be agreed to by

the District and the Bureau in advance of any storage credit.

(e) An example of this concept is:

Example: Incentive Operation--At the end of the 1996 irrigation

season, the Bureau and the District audit the District's water

records for 1996. The District's water delivery records show that

194,703 acre-feet of water were delivered to farm headgates. On the

basis of their irrigated acreage that year (59,075) the farm

headgate entitlement would have been 216,337 acre-feet. On the basis

of 90% deliveries for 59,075 acres (194,203 divided by 216,337 =

0.90) the established Project efficiency requirements was 65.1%. On

the basis of the established Project efficiency (66.1%), the Project

diversion required to make the headgate deliveries would be expected

to be 291,909 acre-feet (194,703 divided by 0.651 = 291,909). An

examination of Project records reveals that the District only

diverted 286,328 acre-feet which demonstrated actual Project

efficiency was 68% and exceeded requirements of these OCAP. The

5,581 acre-feet of savings (291,909 - 286,328 = 5,581) constitutes

the savings achieved through efficiency improvements and the

District would then be credited two-thirds (3,721 acre-feet = 5,581

x \2/3\) of this water (deemed to be Carson River water savings) as

incentive water. This incentive water may be stored in Lahontan

Reservoir or otherwise used by the District in its discretion

consistent with State and Federal Law (e.g., power generation,

recreation storage, wildlife, drought projection, etc.).

(f) Disincentives for lower efficiency. (1) If the District failed

to meet the efficiencies established by these OCAP, then, in effect,

the District has borrowed from a subsequent year. The amount borrowed

will be accounted for in the form of a deficit in Lahontan Reservoir

storage. This deficit amount will be added to the actual Lahontan

Reservoir storage quantity for the purpose of determining the Truckee

River diversions to meet storage objectives as well as all other

operating decisions.

(2) The amount of the deficit will be cumulative from year to year

but will not be allowed to exceed 26,000 acre-feet (the expected

variance between the MAD and actual water use). This limit is expected

to avoid increasing the severity of drought and yet still allow for

variations in efficiency over time due to weather and other factors.

This approach should allow the District to plan its operation to

correct for any deficiencies.

(3) The deficit can be reduced by crediting incentive water earned

by the District or reducing the percentage of headgate entitlement

delivered either through a natural drought or by the District and its

water users administratively limiting deliveries while maintaining an

efficiency greater than or equal to the target efficiency.

(4) In the event of a natural drought if the shortage to the

headgates is equal to or greater than the deficit then the deficit is

reduced to zero. If the shortage to headgates is less than the deficit

then the deficit is reduced by an amount to the headgate shortage.

During a natural drought, if the percentage of maximum headgate

entitlement delivered is 75% or more than the District will be subject

to the target efficiencies and resultant deficits or credits.

(5) If the District has a deficit in Lahontan Reservoir and earns

incentive water, the incentive water must be used to eliminate the

deficit before it can be used for any other purpose. The deficit shall

be credited on a 1 to 1 basis (i.e., actual efficiency savings rather

than \1/3\-\2/3\ for incentive water).

(g) An example of the penalty concept is:

Example: Penalty--In 1996 the District delivers 90% of the

maximum headgate entitlement or 194,703 acre-feet 216,337 x .90)

but they actually divert 308,000 acre-feet. The efficiency of the

Project is 63.2% (194,703 divided by 308,000). Since the

[[Page 64847]]

established efficiency of 65.1% would have required a diversion of

only 299,083 acre-feet (194,703 divided by .651) the District has

operated the system with 8,917 acre-feet of excess losses.

Therefore, 8,917 acre-feet was borrowed and must be added to the

actual storage quantities of Lahontan Reservoir for calculating

target levels and Truckee River diversions.

(h) Maximum Allowable Diversion (MAD). (1) The MAD established in

these OCAP is based on the premise that the Project should be operated

to ensure that it is capable of delivering to the headgate of each

water right holder the full water entitlement for irrigable eligible

acres and includes distribution system losses. The MAD will be

established (and is likely to vary) each year. The annual MAD will be

calculated each year based on the actual acreage to be irrigated that

year.

(2) Historically, Project water users have not ordered or used

their full entitlement. Actual deliveries at farm headgates have been

approximately 90 percent of entitlements and this practice is expected

to continue but the percentage is expected to change. This variance

between headgate deliveries and headgate entitlement will be calculated

annually under these OCAP and is allowed to be diverted if needed and

thereby provides an assurance that full headgate deliveries can be

made. The expected diversion and associated efficiency target for the

examples shown in the Newlands Project Water Budget table would be:

285,243 AF and 65.1% in 1996 and beyond. These are well below the MAD

limits; however, the District may divert up to the MAD if it is needed

to meet valid headgate entitlements.

Sec. 418.10 Fallon Paiute-Shoshone Indian Reservation.

Nothing in these OCAP shall affect the authority of the Fallon

Paiute-Shoshone Tribes to use water on Tribes' reservation which was

delivered to the Reservation in accordance with these OCAP, nor shall

these OCAP operate to restrict the Secretary's trust responsibility

with respect to the Fallon Paiute-Shoshone Tribes.

Appendix A to Part 418--Expected Project Distribution System Efficiency

BILLING CODE 4310-RK-M

[[Page 64848]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP09DE96.000

[FR Doc. 96-30769 Filed 12-6-96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-RK-C