State of Arizona Project S.L.I.M. report on the Department of Water Resources

              I GV80,2: W17
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
STATE OF ARIZONA
PROJECT S. LtM. REPORT ON THE
DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES
J~ y 2, 1992
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I,
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES
PROJECfSUM
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXEClJTtVE SUMMARY 1
RECOMMENDATIONS
0Ifice c# Engineering
Safety of Dams Inspections 15
Modeling Section 17
DWR - DEQ Coordination of Groundwater Quality Work 22
Regulating Fewer Water Rights ( AMA) 28
Planning and Compliance Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Water Management Support DMslon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Management Information System 56
Legal [) Ivision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
EXHIBrTS
1. SUM Interview Ust - DWR 9
2. Current Organization Chart : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3. Summary of Tides & Savings ( DWR) 11
4. Summary of Positions Savings ( DWR) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5. Proposed Orgarllzation Cha.' 1 _ 13
6. DWR Implementation Schedule 14
I
I
I
I
I
I
j
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ii
July 2,1992
Ms. Elizabeth Rieke
Director
Department Of Water Resources
15 South 15th. Avenue
Phoenix, Arizona 85007
Dear Ms. Rieke:
The Governor's Project SUM review of your agency has been completed, and the project team
Is pleased to present you with this summary of our findings and recommendations. The study was initiated
on Feb. 12, 1992 and the field work was completed approximately March 27, 1992.
The summary restates the objectives of the review, the approach which was used, and highlights
the major changes recommended as a result of the study. It quantifies the potential benefits for your agency
and the public at large and summarizes the key implementation actions and legislative support needed to
convert the potential into actual benefits. The summary is followed by the detailed findings and
recommendations.
In total, the recommendations identify approximately $ 801,664 in benefits for your agency.
OBJECI1VES & GOALS
The overall objective of this study was to find ways to improve the delivery of services in the
Arizona Department of Water Resources ( DWR). The goals were to improve the process of delivering public
services and reduce the cost of government whenever and wherever possible. Impediments to prompt and
effective services were to be identified and removed where possible, and structures established which
support the long term goal of continuous improvement using total quality management concepts throughout
the agency.
Ms. Elizabeth Rieke, Director
Department of Water Resources
Page 2
APPROACH
We reviewed the shelf data from the Department to understand the mission, responsibilities, and
workloads. Interviews were conducted with all levels of supervision and selected technical and clerical
positions. We observed work activities. computer system use and obtained either actual or estimated work
measurement standards for the processes which were reviewed. We discussed procedural findings with
work center managers and supervisors.
exhibit 1, SUM Interview Ust - DWR, lists the 37 individuals we contacted during the review.
Many of these Individuals were contacted more than once to confirm our understanding of their areas of
responsibility and to discuss the feasibility of proposed process changes and structures. Because of their
cooperation and participation, the study team and your managers have been involved together interacting
and interfacing on the information that has led to these recommendations.
Exhibit 2, Current Organization Chart, shows the structure of each division as it was presented
to us at the time of the review. Though changes have occurred during and since Project SUM, this chart
is included to provide the reader a frame of reference and a benchmark against which all changes can be
measured.
SUMMARY ANDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS
Part of the savings come from eliminating duplication of the same or similar activities between
agencies and within the agency. Other savings come from eliminating some regulation as well as the
development and implementation of standards.
Analyses of the organizational structure Indicates over- organization with extremely limited spans
of control for managers and supervisors. This span of control ranges from 1: 1 to 1: 6. Managers and
supervisors make up 34.3% of DWR's staff.
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
, I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\ 1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ms. Elizabeth Rieke, Director
Department of Water Resources
Page 3
The majority of units are staffed with seven or less persons. Personal Interviews related that a
possible reason for the current organization structure Is for the purpose of employee pay. Under the present
personnel classification system an employee Is designated a supervisor In order to Justify a higher grade
and resuttlng pay. This Is not based on sound business principles.
Office of Engineering
In the Office of Engineering, we recommend that standard operating procedures currently In draft,
in the Dam Safety Section, be finalized and implemented as early as possible. Other standards for functions
In Dam Safety need to be developed. Based on estimates of time required for work activity, authorized
positions In this section can be reduced from five to four.
Standardizing the process of design review and other guidelines will provide a training tool for
new employees and Improve performance of all personnel.
In the Hydrology DMslon, we recommend that a cooperative agreement be established between
DWR and DEO allowing DEO the mandate on water quality Issues but DWR supplying the manpower
through their network of indexed wells In the 50 water basins of the state. This will prevent DEO from having
to develop a dUplicate program to expand their " Ambient" water monitoring program that Is presently in Its
Infancy.
In the Modeling Section of Hydrology, we recommend transferring two FTEs to Planning Support
for Active Management Area ( AMA) actMtles whUe eliminating all modeling that Is EPA and DEO oriented.
This action supports DWR In Its need to continue modeling work within the four AMAs but discontinues
activity that should be handled by an emerging DEO with their own mandates on water, air and soli
contamination sites. This recommendation results In a reduction of five FTEs. This wUl benefit the State of
ArIzona by eliminating duplication of similar functions crossing over agency lines.
Ms. Elizabeth Rieke, Director
Department of Water Resources
Page 4
Office of Water Management and Planning
In the Water Management Support DMslon of the OffIce of Water Management and Planning, we
recommend transferring two FTEs In the Conservation Section to the Planning Support Division, two FTEs
In the Water Quality Section to the Operations Division, and reducing the staff by five FTEs. This will result
In the elimination of the entire Water Management Support Division. The Planning Support Division and the
four AMAs will benefit from consolidating central planning Issues. Work activity is Insufficient to maintain
the Water Quality Section when the recommended options in the report are implemented. The Operations
Division will benefit from the addition of the two FTEs being transferred into their Division for open well work
activity or handling surface water diversion protests which are actMties not receiving enough attention.
In the AMAs, we recommend that the number of water rights regulated be reduced by
approximately 50%. This will benefit all of the AMAs by reducing administration of rights and compliance
Issues. The four AMAs can still control 95% of groundwater use. Based on reduced activity as stated, two
FTEs in the Tucson AMA and one FTE in the Pinal AMA will be reduced.
We recommend transferring the Phoenix and Tucson AMA Planning Supervisors to the Planning
Support Division in Phoenix and eliminating the three WR Manager I positions in the AMA Area Director
offices. This will result in the following:
• Maximize the Area Directors span of control in the AMA
• Allow special assignments to be transferred to the Planning Support Division, and
• Provide staff to allow planning and compliance Issues to be developed In the Planning
Support Division with Input from the local AMA areas.
Office of Administrative Services
In the Management Information Systems Division of the Office of Administrative Services, we
recommend that DWR review Its MIS strategic plan and reach agreement on priorities and performance
I
I
, I
I
, I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Legal DMsion
SUMMARY OF SAVINGS
The Team's recommendations, and the accompanying exhibits which describe them, are based
on the situation as It existed at the time of the Interviews and analyses.
Based on the workload calculations and considering that most other agencies operate without
services of its own legal staff, we recommend eliminating the currently vacant Attorney III positions.
$ 891,664
$ 282,289
$ 519,375
Cost Avoidance
Cost Reduction
Total:
requirements for each user group. We also recommend that this review be conducted with the users' input
as well as the input of MIS. In addition, the proposal submitted by the Adjudications staff to the Deputy
Director of Engineering should be a part of the review.
Ms. Elizabeth Rieke, Director
Department of Water Resources
Page 5
Exhibit 3, DWR Summary of Titles and Savings, shows the impact of each of the
Recommendations, and includes avoidance of future costs and reduction of present costs. The magnitude
of each is:
The Improved services and benefits outlined above are achieved through the eight
Recommendations discussed in this report. The recommendations apply to several areas such as
organization restructuring, management controls, functional realignment, work measurement, and staffing
requirements.
I'
" I
I
I
I
Ii
I
' i I
I
I
1\
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ms. Elizabeth Rieke, Director
Department of Water Resources
Page 6
exhibit 4, Summary of Position Savings, shows how the recommendations would impact the
various dMsions and major sections of DWR. As indicated In the exhibits, the staffing recommended for
the DWR totals 214.7 against the current 232.7 In DWR for a savings and cost avoidance of 18 positions.
At the time of our review. seven of these positions were vacant
exhibit 5, Proposed Organization Chart. shows the proposed structure of DWR following the
implementation of these recommendations. These structures are consistent with the recommendations, but
are not the only possible structures which can achieve the improved service and benefits. Actual structures
will be finalized as the recommendations are implemented.
IMPlEMENTATION
Implementation is the critical step in the process of achieving savings. Potential savings are often
Identified but not achieved when the implementation process Is distracted by day to day actMties and
managers shy away from the necessary reduction in staff. Successful implementations are marked by two
things: a strong commitment from senior management to achieve as much of the savings as proves
possible; and designation of Implementation team leaders with the requisite mental toughness to see the
task through to completion. Implementation leadership will determine if the maximum savings are achieved
by putting in place the concepts proposed in this document, and resolving any differences which exist due
to Interim changes In the organization.
The implementation process Is best carried on soon after the review process. This maintains
momentum whUe the topics are fresh In people's minds.
We estimate that most of the recommendations contained In the report can be Implemented within
a period of six months. Some of the recommendations wUl require legislative action and therefore may
require 18 months to Implement. Reducing the number of regulated water rights Is an example.
I
, I
I
I
I
I
, I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ms. Elizabeth Rieke. Director
Department of Water Resources
Page 7
Our recommended Implementation Plan In exhibit 6 shows an Implementation sequence and
approximate duration for each recommendation. Individual recommendation Implementation requirements
are shown with the recommendation In the detail section of this report.
There are three major components of cost associated with Implementation. These are typically
one- time costs and represent a reduction in first year benefits. They Include the costs of current employee
time dUring Implementation, outside assistance, and employee redeployment. Outside Implementation
assistance can significantly Improve the total value of benefits achieved, and can reduce the total time
necessary to achieve implementation through the use of focused, dedicated resources. These costs depend
on the total scope of the assistance requested. and are not Included In this Individual report.
* * * * *
Ms. Elizabeth Rieke. Director
Department of Water Resources
Page 8
We wish to thank you as the Director of DWR and your entire staff for their complete cooperation.
participation. suggestions and comments. and support of our efforts during this study.
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to the Governor and the SUM Steering Committee
in this endeavor. Should you have any questions regarding this report please feel free to contact the
Project Executive or any member of your Project SUM Team.
• Ken Boyd, Department of Agriculture
• Amjad Huda. Coopers & Lybrand
The Agency Director's comments follow this signature page.
\ 9fZ~
David St. John
Executive Director
Project SUM
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\ 1
I
I,
I
I
I
I
I
I
DWR - SA
Highlights of the Department's counterproposal are as follows:
The Department has prepared a detailed counterproposal indicating
where we believe savings can be achieved. Even that counter­proposal
is betting on the come -- assuming savings can be
achieved in areas where we are not sure it is possible. However,
the counterproposal has been developed in the spirit of
constructive participation in the SLIM process. We support the
objective of Project SLIM which is to achieve savings without
reducing service levels.
FIFE SYMINGTON
Governor
ELIZABETH ANN RIEKE
Director
15 South 15th Avenue. Phoenix, Arizona 85007
Telephone ( 602) 542 · 1553
Fax ( 602) 256 · 0506
June 10, 1992
* DWR's Modeling Section should be retained as a separate
section within the Hydrology Division. The Modeling
Section plays a critical role 1) in developing models to
test water management " what ifs" in the Active Management
Areas; 2) in providing technical support for the Gila River
and Little Colorado River general stream adjudications; and
3) in preparing hydrologic data in a useful form for other
users within and outside the Department. Staffing for that
unit could be reduced from nine to five but no further.
With five staff members, some of the section's activities
that support mandatory statutory functions of the
Department would be significantly delayed. SLIM proposes
elimination of the section. reduction of the staff from
nine to two and transfer of the two remaining positions
outside the Hydrology Division.
The Department of Water Resources ( Department or DWR) appreciates
the opportunity to respond to the recommendations of Project
SLIM. We have prepared two longer response documents that
identify those areas where we agree with the SLIM recommendations
and those areas where we disagree. It is critical to note that
the Department believes the FTE reductions proposed by SLIM go
beyond elimination of waste and duplication, and instead cut into
programs and reverse major policy decisions in existing law.
Since the Department reduced its FTEs by approximately 10% in
early summer 1991 and still has significant backlogs in various
permitting and regulatory programs, there simply is not much fat
left to cut.
David R. St. John
Project Executive
for Project SLIM
Third Floor
1700 West Washington
Phoenix, AZ 85007
Dear Mr. St. John:
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES
I
I
I,
I ­I
I
I
I,
I
I
I
I
I
J
I,
I
I
David St. John
June 10, 1992
Page - 2-
* The Active Management Area ( AMA) staffs should continue to
playa significant role in conservation planning, and
staffing levels should remain adequate to eliminate the
significant backlogs in AMA work. The AMA offices were
established in order to recognize the major differences
among the AMAs and to give the water users and communities
affected by the Groundwater Code a vital role in water
conservation planning for their area. The Project SLIM
recommendations to move the Tucson and Phoenix AMA Planning
Supervisors to the central office and to reduce the AMA
staffs by a total of eight additional positions would
significantly weaken the AMAs and centralize the
conservation planning activities of DWR.
* A proposal developed by DWR and endorsed by SLIM to
deregulate small water rights -- through statutory changes
-- should be implemented. However, SLIM has overestimated
the level of savings that can be achieved through statutory
deregulation because DWR has already administratively
deregulated the small rights. Any savings from the small
rights proposal should be devoted to elimination of the
existing backlogs in water management work, such as open
well enforcement, surface water applications and
applications for administrative review of conservation
requirements.
* As SLIM recommends, the Department's Planning Support
Division should become a more vital unit. Two of the AMA
Deputy Director positions should be downgraded and moved to
the Planning Support Division. The remaining AMA Deputy
Director position should be eliminated. This would
eliminate three middle level managers and strengthen the
planning support unit.
* DWR should retain adequate staff to fulfill its independent
statutory responsibilities in the water quality area.
Those responsibilities include: preparation, in cooperation
with DEQ, of a water quality assessment in each Active
Management Area for each Management Plan; assurance that
the water supplies used to demonstrate an adequate or
assured water supply are of suitable quality; issuance of
poor quality withdrawal permits, which are a type of
groundwater right; assessment of water quality impacts for
other DWR groundwater permitting programs; and assurance
that the large quantities of contaminated groundwater that
must be withdrawn and treated are put to use whenever
possible. DWR should retain that independent role but
should not perform functions also assigned to DEQ.
OWR - 88
I
, I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
· 1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I;
I
I
I
I
I,
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
David St. John
June 11, 1992
Page - 3-
Accordingly, DWR's Water Management Support Division and
four of the seven positions in the division should be
eliminated. The remaining three positions should be
transferred to the Planning Support Division. The SLIM
recommendations would leave DWR with no personnel to
fulfill its independent statutory water quality
responsibilities.
* In implementation of SLIM, an attempt should be made to
eliminate one position in the Dam Safety Section and one
position in the Legal Division, as proposed by SLIM.
However, those positions should not be eliminated if it
would compromise service levels.
* All the SLIM recommendations that do not involve PTE
reductions should be implemented. DWR has already
initiated implementation of most of the recommendations.
DWR's counterproposal would result in the elimination of up to
eleven positions and a projected savings of approximately
$ 500,000.
Let me thank you again for the opportunity to have the
Department's views included in the Project SLIM report on DWR.
Sincerely,
E~~~~ e
Director
EAR/ meh
OWR - BC
SLIM INTERVIEW LIST
DWR
Name Title Date
Elizabeth Rieke Director Feb. 11,92
Larry Linser Mgr.- Engrng. & Adjud. Feb. 20,92
Dan Lawrence Chief- Engrng. Div. Feb. 25,92
Steve Szyprowski Hydro IV- Supv. Feb. 25,92
Karen Modesto Hydro III Feb. 25,92
Greg Wallace WR- Mgr. 1I Feb. 26,92
Dan Holden Hydro III Feb. 26,92
Bill Jenkins Chief- Safety of Dams Feb. 26,92
Jim Morris Supv.- Flood Mgmt. Systems Feb. 26,92
Steve Erb Chief- Adjud. Section Feb. 26,92
Ann Marquez Mgr.- Admin. Support Section Feb. 26,92
Don Gross Mgr.- Investigation Section Feb. 26,92
Reg Barnes Hydro III Feb. 27,92
Frank Corkhill . Hydro III Feb. 27,92
Herb Dishlip Dep. Dir., Off. of WM Feb. 27,92
Charles Cullom Water Resource Analysis Feb. 27,92
Michael Parton Section Mgr.- Tech. Support Feb. 27,92
Eric Kamienski W. R. Supv.• Little Colorado Feb. 27, 92
Bill Remick Hydro IV- Supv. Feb. 28,92
Bruce Hammett Hydro 111- Feb. 28, 92
Frank Barrios Area Dir.- PHX AMA Mar. 3,92
Jim Hoit Supv. - PHX- AMA- Comp. lEnf. Mar. 3,92
Terri- Carrol Supv.- PHX- AMA- Spec. Stud. Mar. 4,92
Tom Carr Area Dir.- Pinal AMA Mar. 4,92
Kathy Jacobs Area Dir.- Tucson AMA Mar. 6,92
Linda Stifzer WR Supv.- Planning Tucson AMA Mar. 6,92
Dennis Kimberlin WR Mgr. J- OWM Mar. 9,92
Dennis Sundie WR Mgr. 1 Mar. 9,92
Mason Bolitho WR Supv. Mar. 9,92
Linda Stevens Training Officer I Mar. 12,92
Betsy Reike Director Mar. 17,92
Frank Secondo A. D.- Administration Mar. 18,92
Howard Billings Tech. Supp. Spec. 1I Mar. 18,92
Steve Peddy- Coart Sys. Proj. Leader Mar. 18,92
Howard Stapleton Sys. Proj. Leader Mar. 18,92
Ken Slowinski Attorney- legal Division Mar. 23, 92
Pat Schiffer Chief Counsel Asstnt. Mar. 23, 92
Chuck Cahoy Attorney JJI Mar. 23,92
DWR- 9
I EXHIBIT 1
I
I
I
, I
I
I
I
I
\ 1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
- .... .. - .. .... .. - - - - .. - .. .. .. -
~
I ....
o
CURRENT ORGANIZATION CHART
DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES
DIRECTOR 232.7 TOTAL FlEa
5
I 81.2 I 184.5 I 11 I
OFfICE OF OFFICE OF WATER OFFICE OF LEGAL DIVISION
AIlIIIN I5TRATION NANAGEMENT ENGINEERING
SERVICES 2 PLANNING 4 2 11
HUIIAN OPERATIONS ENGINEERING - RESOURCES I- - 6 21.7 16
FI5CAL PLANNING HYOROLOOY - SERVICE f- SUPPORT f-
6 4 42.5
MIS WATER AOJUDICATIONS - I- IIAIIAOEMENT I-
17 9 42
PHOENIX COLORADO
f- ANA l.- RIVER
19 MANAGEMENT 3
TUCSON
f- ANA
13
PRESCOTT
f- ANA
2.5
PINAL
l.- ANA
8
EXHIBIT 2
AH011
DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES SUMMARY OF TITLES & SAVINGS
I
Agency 1 Total - I Federal I State
Total Revenue Avoided Saved FTE Vacant evenu Avoided Saved FTE Vacant evenu Avoided saved FTE Vacant
Rec Recommendation Title Enhance Cost Cost FTE nhanc Cost Cost FTE nhanc Cost Cost FTE
I
1 Salely 01 Dams Inspections 39,559 0 39,559 0 0 1 39,559 1
2 Modeling Section 190,175 0 102,175 88,000 2 3 88,000 2 102,175 3
3 DWR- DEQ Groundwater Coordlnatl 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 Regulallng Fewer Water Rights 122,430 0 43,430 79,000 2 1 43,430 79,000 2 1
5 Planning & Compl. 174,000 0 0 174,000 3 0 174,000 3
6 Water Mgml. Support Dlv. 222.500 0 44,125 176,375 4 1 67,319 2 44.125 111.056 2 1
7 Management Information System 0 0 0 0 0 0
6 Legal DIvision 53,000 0 53,000 0 0 1 53.000 1
Water Resources Subtotal 801,6$ 4 > .0 262,289 519,375 11 ,7 01 » 0 155,319 ,4 1>"'>,. 0 n 282.289 "" 364.056 '>' 7 ',]
~
.. I....
I Other - I I OneTime Statute Rule Computer Months
~ Revenue Avoided Saved FTE Vacant Public One Time One Time Change Change Program
I Rae I Recommendation Title Enhance Cost Cost FTE Total Savings Cost
1 Safety of Dams Inspections
2 Modeling Section 1
3 DWR- DEQ Groundwater Coordlnatl
4 Regulating Fewer Water Rights X 2
5 Planning & Compl. X 12
6 Water Mgml. Support DIY. 12
7 Management ' nformatlon System
8 Legal Division 6
Water Resources Subtotal ", 0 0 .: 0 0 0 ,.,,".,' · ' 0 ,' » > 0 ,0 ,."<"," ,<,.,•.,•.•}" •• ' i,<> '> i>
- .. .. .. - - - .. .. - - - - .. - .. .. .. ~
OJ
= i
Co)-
I
I,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SUMMARYOFPOSITION SAVINGS - DWR
CURRENT RECOMMENDED REMAINING
CHANGE
Office of Engrng. 104.5 - 6 98.5
Off. of Water Mgmt. 81.2 - 11 70.2
Admin. Services 31 0 31
Legal 11 - 1 10
Director 5 0 5
1< . « .•.••..•••.•• IOtalS 232.7 .....
•••••••
.••.•• - 18 214.7
DWR - 12
EXHIBIT 4
PROPOSED ORGANIZATION CHART
DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES
EXHIBITS
DIRECTOR 214.7 TOTAL FlEa
5
I 31 I 7•• 2 I 9a. 5 I
OFFICE OF OFFICE OF WATER OFFICE OF LEGAL
At* INISTRATION MANAGEMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION
SERVICES 2 PLANNING 4 1 1.
HUNAN OPERATIONS ENGINEERING - RESOURCES - I-
6 23.7 15
FISCAL PLANNING HYDROLOGY
r- SERVICE - SUPPORT f--
6 1. 37. S
PHOENIX AD. JUDICAT IONS
"- II. I. S. - A. II. A. I-
17 15 42
1 TUCSON
· 1
COLORADO
A. M. A. '- RIVER
MANAGEMENT 3
PRESCOTT - A. M. A.
2. S
PINAL - A. M. A.
6
~
I ....
Co)
- - ....... - - -. .. - .. - • .' . - ....... AH016 -
- •.• .. ........ .. - .. ..... .... .....
DWR IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE EXHIBIT 6
( PRELIMINARY)
I MONTHS
TITLE I 1 I z I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7 I 8 I 9 I 1. 111 lIZ I 13 114 I 15 I 16 I 17 118 119 I z. I I
OFFICE 01" ENGINEEIIING
' IIE- IMPLEMENTATION '" E'AAATION .. I
1, SAFETY ~ DAN INS'ECTIONS - I
z. EUltIMATION OF IlOOEL: ING SECTION I
I I
3. DWII- DEQ COOftDINATION ~ OftOUNDWATEII QUALITY WOIIK I
~ FICE OF "' ATEII IlANAOEJlENT
I , I -, I •• _ LATING FEWEll WATf' 1I IIIGHTS I I I I I I I I
I
I I I
I. f'UNIlING AND COMPUNICE lIANAGEIIENT I
I I I I I I
•• " TEll MANAGEMENT SU'roIIT DIVISION I
OFFICE ADMIN} STIIATIVE SEIIVICES
7. MIS I
LEGAl DIVISION
8. LEGAL DIVISION I
I
--
~
......
SAFETY OF DAMS INSPECllQNS
The Safety of Dams Program Is conducted by the Safety of Dams Section In the Engineering
DMslon. As of January 1, 1992 there were five FTEs authorized and budgeted with one vacancy.
The primary functions of this section are: 1) review and approve applications to construct or
enlarge dams; 2) establish filing fees for dam construction; 3) collect annual fees on dams; 4) Investigate
the design and construction of dams; 5) review loan requests and grants for non- emergency dam repair;
6) perform periodic Inspections of existing dams and dams under construction; and 7) respond to inquiries
regarding dam safety.
The section operates under the authority of A. R. S. Title 45- 1203 through 45- 1223 as amended,
and implementing rules. All non- federal dams come under the Jurisdiction of this section.
At the present time there are approximately 200 non- federal dams in ArIzona. Approximately 50
of these are located at mining operations. Over the past several years three to four new dams have been
constructed each year.
According to a supervisor's estimate, two man- days are reqUired to annually inspect and write
a report on each of the 200 non- federal dams, including travel time. Based on this estimate, a total of 400
man- days Is required for inspections. This equates to approximately two FTEs at 1700 productive man- hours
available each year per employee. It Is estimated that review of applications, Investigation of designs,
responding to inquiries, reviewing loan requests and other miscellaneous activities require two FTEs. The
total section work activity should then require four FTEs including the supervisor as opposed to the five now
authorized.
The Section Manager was In the process of preparing Instructions to standardize the design
review process, reports, check lists, and general guidelines for the dam inspection effort. These instructions
will ensure that inspections are complete and will provide a training tool for all new employees. All
personnel will follow the same process thereby minimizing the possibilities of errors and omissions.
DWR - 15
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I,
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
We recommend that DWR:
• Finalize and Implement standard operating procedures In draft as early as possible
• Develop standard procedures for other functions performed within the Safety of Dams
Inspection Section
• Reduce authorized positions from five to four for this section.
The following benefits should accrue:
• Better utilization of personnel
• Standard procedures to ensure integrity of Inspections and use as training aids
• Savings of approximately $ 39,559 per year through cost avoidance ( one FTE including
ERE) - State budgeted
• Reduction of Inspection time, not quantifiable at the present.
Immediate decision to reduce authorized positions and not hlrlng on current vacancy.
DWR - 16
MQDEUNG SECTION
The Modeling Section Is part of the Hydrology DMslon In the OffIce of Engineering. It Is broken
Into two units, the Water Management Support Unit and the Groundwater Quality Support Unit. Exhibit 7,
OffIce of Engineering - Modeling Section, shows this Section structure.
The section has nine positions as shown on the organization chart. Six of the positions are filled
and the remainder are vacant. The three vacant positions are federally funded by the Environmental
Protection Agency ( EPA), and it Is currently not clear If these positions will receive renewed contracts.
From information provided in our interviews, we were told that modeling In DWR has been present
almost since Its Inception in 1980 and has serviced both the Active Management Areas ( AMA) and the EPA
as a support function. In recent years since the emergence of the Department of Environmental Quality
( DEQ) much of the modeling work has been coordinated with Groundwater Hydrology in DEQ, as well as
the EPA.
DWR has developed approximately eight models over the past 12 years, of which four were water
quality models in conjunction with the EPA..
One of the remaining four models was developed after 1990 for the Yuma area, but outside the
four AMAs and funding is about to expire. The model work is scheduled to be completed in June of 1992.
The remaining three models are Pima, Tucson, and Phoenix AMA oriented projects. DWR's
administrative objective with modeling is to support AMA Water Management planning in connection with
both volume and quality.
The four EPA related models that have been completed by the Modeling Section are Water Quality
Contamination Projects, clearly under the mandate of both the EPA and/ or DEQ. Most, but not all of the
work on these models was Initiated prior to the formation of DEQ, and are all part of Superfund Federal
Projects.
DWR - 17
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I,
I
It
I
I
I
I
According to our Interviews. one of these four models, the 52nd Street Motorola Project, is being
given to the EPA. According to EPA requirements, all four must be updated every 10 years to remain useful.
This presents a problem since it Is currently not known If DWR will be able to renew their contracts for the
positions previously supported with funding by the EPA.
Future funding for ArIzona on projects of this nature may well be established between the EPA
and DEC since water quality issues. especially those dealing with industrial contamination, are clearly Issues
with DEC statutory mandates. In addition to this, DEC currently has modeling capability.
While modeling itself may not be a statutory requirement. it is accepted and appears to be a
useful, if not totally conclusive, tool for developing " what tr scenarios within the scope of DWR's work
activities. This is particularly true in the areas of planning.
For these reasons we believe the Water Management Plan. particularly within the four AMAs
should include some modeling capability. There currently exists three models. two are complete and In use.
relevant to planning within the three largest AMAs. Based on interviews, the best estimates indicate that two
modelers are sufficient to do AMA- related modeling work.
We recommend that modeling within OWR focus on planning. primarily within the four AMAs, with
changes as follows:
• Retain one Hydro IV and one Hydro III, but transfer them to the Central Planning Support
Division in the office of Water Management, as shown on Exhibit 8. OWM - Planning
Support Division
• Give the EPA modelers to DEC or the EPA for possible continued use
• Eliminate the remaining vacant positions: two Hydro lis ( Federal funds), and one W/ R
Tech. II ( Federal funds)
• Eliminate the following fUled positions: one Hydro II ( Federal funds), and one Hydro 11\
.( State tunas)
DWR - 18
• Review all remaining positions for justification during the implementation phase based on
quantitative work load measurements.
The cost savings achieved would be as follows:
• Two vacant Hydro lis = $ 79,000, one vacant W/ R Tech. II = $ 23,175 for a total cost
avoidance of $ 102,175 ( All Federal funds)
• One filled Hydro II =$ 39,500 ( Federal funds), one filled Hydro III =$ 48,500 ( State funds)
for a total cost reduction of $ 88,000
• Total savings = $ 190,175 ( Federal funds $ 141,675; State funds $ 48,500).
ImcIernerqtion
Implementation requires the following steps:
• Find the appropriate agency for completing the EPA models ( e. g., EPA, DEC)
• Transfer one Hydro IV and one Hydro III to the Planning Support Section
• Eliminate positions per recommendation
• Sixty days to accomplish implementation.
DWR - 19
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.. - - - . a .. -. ........ - ... -- - - - - - 2000
OFFICE OF ENGINEERING
Deputy Dir · AWC0004AlIO Linaer
Admv Secy II AWC0310AAN (. 5) Coffman
EXHIBIT 7
FLOOD MGMT ENG SECTION
rlVREngSupvr AWC0123ME Morris I-SAFETY
OF DAMS SECTION
, VR En~ Supvr AWCOllBAAE Jenkins, W I--
, VR En~ AWC0116ME Hussain
, vn En~ AWC0120ME Cox, G tNn En~ § AWC012BAAE Vacant
~: n'~ ASBOC ., AWC02BIACN Richman
r--- I
FLOOD MGMT PROGRAM SECTION
rog & Proj Spec IIAWC0287ME Miller, M ~-
RSplcIl § AWC0151ME Helm
dmv ilsst I § AWC0251AAN Strawn
2100
I-
1-
lIi1l
Plllw( UfF)
Vacant
WATER MGMT SUPP UNIT
Hydro III AWC0292ME
Hydro III AWC0134ME
Hydro II § AWC0320AAE
MODELING SECTION
f---.-! IlIydro IV AWC0345AAE Putmlln
W/ H Tech II § 1/ AWC0267ACN Vacant
Remick
Black I- ­Martin
Vacant
2200
HYDROLOGY DIVISION
WR Mgr II AWCOlO4ME Wallace
Admv Asst II AWC0176ME Lasky
Admv Secy I AWC0350AAN Woodall
Hydro IV AWC0344AAE GolT
I
1
WATER RESOURCES SECTION I- IJ SURFACE WATER/ RECHARGE
lIydro IV AWC0130ME Szyprowski Hydro IV AWC0347ME Bushner
Hydro III • , AWC6247ADE (. 5) Mitchell
Hydro ' II AWC0145ME Erwin
Hydro III AWC031BAAE Cooley
Hydro II AWC0136ME Harbour
Hydro I AWC0171AAN Ehlers, S
BASIC DATA SECTION
Hydro IV AWC0149AAf~
WHSpeclll AWCOI52AAl~
Secy AWC0153AAN
WfH Tech II' ' I AWC0271ACN
SPECIAL STUDIES UNIT
Hydro III AWC0346MEHoiden
Y Hydro III AWC0143ME Swieczkowski
Hydro II AWC03 · 1BME Malek- Zadegan
Hydro I AWC0154AAN Mason, D
WATER SUPPLY UNIT
f- I Hydro III AWC01l3ME Modesto
Hydro III AWC0227ME Lovvik
Hydro II AWC0121ME Troisi
I--
I--
r I ENGINEERING DIVISION
~~ gMgr AWC0117AAE Lawrence
[;
ADMINISTRATIVE
SUPPORT SECTION
\ dmv flsst II AWC0332AAN Oakman
dm,.",< y I AWCOI16AAN Y••••• M. ( UiF)
o
~
~
COMP SUPPORT UNIT
Hydro III AWC0199AAE Hammett
WH Spec III AWC02 · 12ME Herther
-. wn Spec II AWC0238ME Windcr
Wit Spec II AWC0237ME Young R.
WH Spec I AWC0236AAN Sicard ( UIF)
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
SUPP UNIT
Hydro III AWC0310ME Corkhill II-Hydro
III AWC0349AAE Corell
Hydro II § AWC0319AAE Vacant
Hydro II AWC0296AAE ~~ filll. L~ b
• '~'''_ .'.:_.'~ .... .;,-;.,,,."' ._-,._,~ -~'."; 4~--:_"' i' 7""_: · ;~:::'",-.-~- C'- · ::-""" --
Revised 02/ 0 1!! J2
Barncs
Schwab
Roscona
Ovcrby
Hanus
Orom
Henleno
USGSIDWR UNIT
AWC0226M!'~
AWC0312Ml~
AWC0170AAE
AWC0155AAN
AWC0118AAN
AWC0150AAN
AWC0311MN
Hydro III
Hydro II
LI Hydro II
Hydro I
Hydro I
wn Spec I
Graph \) snr II
ENGINEERING REVIEWS
~ R Erg · ' AWC0126ME Creighton
WR Elig Spec AWC0260AAE Johnson, J
FIELD ENGINEERING
I-~ VR Io~ rg AWC0114AAE Lin. kswilcr
, VR Io~[ g Assoc AWC0139AAN Casey
# Limited
§ Federal
1 Unbudgeted
* Exempted Positilln
r 4500
4000
OFFICE OF WATER MANAGEMENT
4600
EXHIBIT 8
I 4700
PLANNING SUPPORT DIVISION WATER MANAGEMENT
SUPPORT DIVISION WRMgrl
Secy
WRSpec III
Eronomist III
AWCOlOOAAE
AWCOl90AAN
AWC0314ME
AWC0125AAE
Sundie
Bustamante
Cox, T
Jenkins, S
OPERATIONS DIVISION
WR Mgr I AWC0137AAE Kimberlin
Admv Secy I AWC0206AAN Ludwig
WRMgrl AWC0297AAE Davis
GROUNDWATER UNIT
GROUNDWATER SYSTEM
SUPPORT SECTION
WATER QUALITY SECTION
( NUllO CI:
f11l. l1{~ I1f
flnNN/ Alb 11001?/ r/\
rIMbJ/ tJ& AluDtlf ~
r-
WRSupvr Awe0205AAE Ramsey
SURFACE WATER
ADJUDICATION SECTION
WR Spec IV AWC0194AAE Stuart
SURFACE WATER UNIT
WRSupvr
WnSpec 1II
WR Spec III §
WRSpec III
WRSpec III
WR Tech II §
AWC0293AAE
Awe0295AAE
AWC0294AAE
AWC0342AAE
AWC0352AAE
AWC0253AAN
Bolitho
Berry
Annis
Gibson
Vacant
Gambrel
o
~
l\) .....
J.-. J WIR Tech Supvr
WIR Tech II
WIRTech I
WIRTech I
elk Typ II
Awe0207AAE
AweOl69AAN
AWCOI06AAN
AWC0286AAN
AWCOl66AAN
Hester
Valdez
Kane
Boggs
Vacant
WIR Tech SupvrAWC0204AAE Motlok
WIU Tech II AWC0208AAN Rocko, P
WIR Tech II AWC0331AAN Gutierrez
WIU Tech II AWeOl47AAN Sumpter- King
WIR Tech II AWCOl67AAN Hutchinson
WATER CONSERVATION SECTION
Training Officer I AWC0321AAE Stevens
Secretary / I 1 AWC0283ACN Borchers
SYSTEM SUPPORT UNIT ADJUDICATION UNIT
~ I
WRSpec II Awe0203AAE Ball I IWIU Tech II AWC0168AAN
WIH Tech I AWCOI05AAN
Logan
Martinez
ANNUAL REPORT UNIT
I---
WIRTech I AWC0285AAN Bergeman
RECORDS MANAGEMENT UNIT
# Limited
§ Federal
en Unbudgeted
* Exempted Position
~ WIRTechlI
WIR Tech I
Clk Typ III
Clk Typ II (. 7)
AWC0209AAN
AWC0328AAN
AWC0330AAN
AWCOl46AllN
Rocko, U
Stephan
E8cobedo
Vacant
Revised OVOl/ 92
~-~-~~~~~~~_.~-----
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
DWR - DEQ COORDINATION OF GROUNDWATER QUAUTY WORK
The Department of Water Resources ( DWR) was established In 1980 when the Groundwater
Management Act ( GMA) became law. There are several statutes that give DWR authority to develop Water
Quality Monitoring Programs. These statues include AR. S. 45- 10S, AR. S. 45- S76 and sn, AR. S. 45- 594,
AR. S. 45- 603, and AR. S. 45 · { H1. Many of these statutes tie certain aspects of delivering water to quality,
The Hydrology DMsion In the OffIce of Engineering, through Its Basic Data Section does a series
of actMtles relating to water discharge, and measurement as well as Quality Monitoring. This section Is
shown in bold outline on exhibit 9, OOE - Basic Data Section.
Specifically DWR does Water Quality monitoring within the four Active Management Areas ( AMA)
and have since their inception ( 12 years ago) developed a quality monitoring program in connection with
their other water work actMtles. They have developed this program outside the four AMAs as well, and last
year took over 200 water samples that were analyzed for general inorganic properties such as ph,
conductMty, dissolved oxygen, alkalinity, iron and other metals and have provided this information to the
Department of Environmental Quality ( DEQ). The annual cost of the analysis is approximately $ 60,000,
DEQ's Groundwater Quality Monitoring program ofa similar nature ( Ambient Monitoring) sampled
15- 20 wells in three of the 50 water basins statewide. DEQ also has a " targeted" groundwater monitoring
program that focuses on pollutants such as radioactive material, and agricultural pollutants such as Nitrogen
and pesticides, as well as mining pollutants. Even their " targeted" monitoring program has been limited in
comparison to the work being done by DWR.
The level of development of DWR's program Is shown on exhibit 10, Number of Annual Index
Wells ( Actual) and exhibit 11, Number of Water Levels In Basin Studies, They have large numbers of wells
Indexed ( visited annually, with historic records and location verified) In many of the state's 50 water basins
and some indexed wells in all 50 of the basins.
Siut; e OEQ'& tJlnalgaftCe iiI .986 thay hay" b& an charged with the iToeindata to play the lead role
In Water Quality matters. This Is stated In AR. S. 49- 221- 225.
DWR - 22
Since DWR has the physical Infrastructure In place, I. e. fixed monitoring stations, Indexed wells,
water basin, investigation file programs driven by well measurement or supply project work, the opportunity
exists to fulfill the mandate DEQ has in this area without the need for DEQ to expand manpower into the
future In groundwater quality work.
Measurement and quality monitoring compliment each other In groundwater programs because
quality monitoring can be done when measurement cannot and visa versa, outside AMAs during the spring
and summer months.
Inside the four AMAs, water discharge and quality monitoring can be done during the summer,
but In the fall and winter months measurement monitoring becomes the focus.
Regardless of who plays the lead role In Water Quality Issues, DWR's mandates in water delivery
constantly interface with quality Issues.
We recommend DEQ take the lead role as statutorily mandated. We believe that DWR should
facilitate and DEQ respond to an Inter- agency cooperative agreement where DWR would provide
groundwater quality monitoring services to DEQ subject to the following factors:
• Maximum use of existing and future Indexed wells within DWR's program
• DEQ should determine how many wells they want monitored, where, and how many
samples
• DEQ should agree to pay for sample analysis
• DEQ should provide any additional needed training.
• DEQ would benefit by being able to develop a comprehensive state- wide grOUndwater
quality monitoring program without additional staffing
DWR - 23
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
• DWR would benefit by continued effectiveness of existing manpower for measurement and
discharge activity
• Costs could be shared, DEQ providing sample analysis costs, DWR performing monitoring
activity within their present scope of tasks
• DEQ would benefit by being able to devote present manpower to special monitoring
projects not in the scope of DWR Basic Data Section Tasks, such as their Targeted
Monitoring Program
• DWR would benefit from DEQ paying annual sample analysis costs of Basic Data Section
of $ 60,000.
Implementation will require the following:
• Development of an Inter- agency Governmental Agreement ( IGA) between DEQ and DWR
• Approximately three to six months to accomplish.
DWR - 24
-----------------------_. 2000
OFFICE Or: ENGIHEEIlIlIG
D" rllly llir> 1\ Wcuuo · \ I\ IIO Llnnet
A, III'v Seey II 1\ WCU: II\ JI\ I\ I~ (. G) Coli 111011
EXHIBIT 9
-
Hcvi9ctl 02/ 0 V9Z
COl khlll
Co, ell
Voennl
Vnennl
lIiII
1' 101.0 ( Utf)
Vncnnl
- - ..
MGMT SUPP UBI r
AWC0292AAE
AWCOI3 · IAI\ E
AWC0320AAE
ELING SECTiON
Awe0315A!\. F. I'ulmnlt
AWC02G1ACN Vnennl
E WAlEnmECIIAnGE
AWC03HAAE UII. hI1H
AWC62HAIJE (. 5) lIli1cltcll
AWCOl1GME Etwllt
AWC0318AAE ConIcy
AWCOI3GAAF.: IInrbollr
AWCOl71MN EhlctB. S
mWATEn QUALIfY
surr UNIT
AWC0310ME
AWC03 · 19ME
l\ WC0319ME
AWC0296ME
OIl
- .. - - - - -
I
IIYDrtoLOGY DIVISION
Wit MIlt II 1\ \ VCIlIOII\ I\ I~ Wnllncc
1\, llIIv A~ nl / I AWCOI1( JAAI~ Lflsky
A, llIlv Secy I AWe03riOAAN Woodnll
IlydlO IV AWeU: JHI\ AE Golf
- W/\ l Ell nESOUnCES SECTiON SUnFAC
lIy< l, o IV AWCUI: IOMI~ S7. yptolYski - IIYll10 IV
-- lIy, lm III ' 1
_._---~----------.- IIYlhll III
W/\ lEIl SUPPLY UNI f lIydm III
- / ly, I, o III I\ WCOl13ME M", lcnlo Ilydlo 11
Ily, lm 111 AWeU221 AI\ I~ Lovvik IIYllro I
IIYllm II AWe012IAAI~ I TI1lI~ 1
-- .-_.
SPEciACsTUiJiESUHi r I
.. MOIJ
lIy, lm III AWCO: HGAI\ I~ • 11,, 1, len lIyllrlllV
lIydro III Aweo H: JAAE Swleczkowskl -- '- Will Tcch II , "
lIydlo II AWCO: J. lOAt\( o~ Mnlek- ZntlcRnlt
lIydlo I AWCOll;. JAAN r.' n90n. 1J
D/\ SIC IJAT/\ SECTIOi~
WATEn
lIytlm III
lIyllr" IV 1\ WCo I1! J1\ 1\ l'~ lIelllltk lIy, lru III
WIl Spcc III Aweu I ri: lAA1~ m" ck ,- lIydro II t
Seey Aweo Irial\ AN Mnrlln
Will Tech / I " 1 AWC021I ACN V" cnnl
--------_._- ---- COMP suppon f UNlf GnOUI
lIy, lIu III AWCIlI! J! JAt\ g lI" mmcll
wn Spec III AWC0212AAg Ilc'lhu lIytlro III
wn Spcc II AWC0230Mg Windct lIydro III
Wil Spcc 11 I\ WC02: J'/ AI\ E YUllnR H. lIytlro 11 t
wn Spcc I AWCU23GAAN Sienrd ( UtI') Ilydto II
-
USGSIIJWn UNIT
lIy, lIu III AWe022GAI\ E IInrrws
lIy, 11O II AWC0312AA g Schwnb
lIytho II AWCO I'IUI\ AI'~ lIn'lconn
lIy, lIo I 1\ weo I rir, 1\ 1\ N Ovcrl. y
" ytlr" I 1\ IV CO HIlAAN IInnll9
WIl Spcc I AWCOlriOAAN 010111
t:,,' ph 1J9nr II I\ IVCO: JllI\ I\ N Hcnlclln
... .. - _.. - ..
IWH Eng Mgt
-
AWCOII7MI'~ Ln WI(
~ ADMINISTnAlIVE J SUrrOnT SECllON
\. Imv l\ ftnlll l\ We03: J2t\ AN Oflkmflll--
\ dmv Sccy I Aweu llliMN Young. M. ( UlF)
SAFETY OF DAMS SECTION
VH Eng Supvr AWCOIIBMI~ Jenklnn, W --
VII Eng l\ WCOIIGMI~ JJu~~ nln
Vlt Eng AWCOl2MAE Cox. V
Vil Eng t AWCOI2BMr. Vncfllll
VII Eng Assoo ' 1AWC021llACN Hlchmnll
FLOOD MGMT rnOGnAM SECTION
' roR lit I'toj Spcc IIAWCOZ01AAE r. liIl~ t. M ---
. VIt Spcc 11 t AWCOI51AAI~ Ilcl'lI
\" mv Assli t AWC02lilAAN SltnwlI
FLOOD MGMT ENG SECTION
~ VIl Eng Supvr AWC0123ME Morrls 1-
FIELD ENGINEEnJNG
- VIl Eng l\ WCOII1MJ~ Linkswller
VIl Eng A9900 AWCOl: J9AAN Cnaey
ENGINEEnJNG nEVIEWS
L-- VIl Eng AWC012GAA1~ Crelghloll
VIl Eng Spec AWC02GOME Johnson, J
I 21uU
ENGINEEI1ING DIVISION : J
o~
I\)
01
-
" LimiLcd
§ Federnl
' D UnbudgcLcd
.• ExcmpLcd PosiLiol1 ..
I
I NUMt)£ R Of ANNUAL \~ t) c.' i W'E. LLS
EXHIBIT 10
( Ac..- rUAL)
Arizona Groundwater Basins and Counties
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
N
___ ,& · . l'&~'
_._._.- fl_ 4",.
Figure 1.
,
./ I ...... "';, .. .. · . 1.
(
I
DWR - 26
I I
i i
i I
i i
i i
I i
i i
i I
i i
I i ! i
I i
I
II 70; I
i i
I ~-,
i I
I r
JIItU tt\. QU" Itwtl , Ult& ll IAO, tl
I .
. I I .
. I
I . i I
i I
i I
i !
I :
I I
I I
I i
! i
r ii
I
rtJ
EXHIBIT 11 I
I
N J
{ ...." IU.
Figure 1.
!
! I
i
i
i
ii
i
i
h23\ Ii
~' l
i
I i
· I
Jsuu. to.( jlIAil .1..... ''''' t.... "-.,,
I .
I · I.
I · I.
I I
i I
i I
iI
i
i
iII
Arizona Groundwater Basins and Counties
DWR - 27
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
REGULATING FEWER WATER RIGHTS lAMA)
Arizona's four ActIve Management Areas ( AMA) were established by the Groundwater
Management Act. ( GMA) In 1980. Through the GMA, DWR has a mandate to develop and Implement water
conservation requirements for agricuituraJ, municipal and Industrial water users for four 1o- year periods.
DWR Administers state water law Inside the four AMAs through the Offlce eX Water Management.
The four AMAs are Phoenix, Tucson, Pinal and Prescott, and their organizations are shatm on exhibit 12,
Phoenix and Tucson AMAs - OWM, Water Rights Administration Section, and exhibit 13, Prescott and Pinal
AMAs - OWM, Water Rights Administration Sections. exhibit 14, Water Rights Administration, shows the
number eX water rights by the four AMAs.
The primary process for this group Is to mal report forms In January, get them back In March,
send account balances In June and July, and keep the data base up to date as water rights are conveyed
from one holder to another. The Phoenix AMA currently has a backlog of approximately 300 conveyances.
The planning function In the four AMAs Is the major driving force of water rights administration.
The GMA directed DWR to develop and Implement water conservation requirements for agricuituraJ,
municipal and Industrial water users In five consecutive periods. At this writing DWR Is operating In the
second management period 1990- 2000. The four AMAs Management Plans are summarized on exhibit 15,
Management Plans for AMAs.
Any Water Rights Holder ( WAH) may request an administrative review eX the Conservation
Requirement. The planning group Is currently dealing with 2,387 requests for administrative review which
may go as far as a hearing. Even those that do not go to a hearing must be reviewed Individually.
According to our Intervl9\ NS, the estimated time required to process all of these requests for administrative
review Is four years.
While the Phoenix AMA has the greatest difficulty dealing with the Administration of Water Rights,
they also mt. administer more water rights then the other th.. AMAs combined. more than double at
OWR · 28
8,327. All of the functions involved in administering water rights would be affected If small agricLdturai rights
and small municipal providers were no longer regliated.
Approximately 50% or 4,938 of all agricultural rights are less than 10 acres. In the Phoenix AMA
for example. these rights represent 58% of the total Irrigated Grandfather Rights OGFR) but use only 4.3%
of the total agricultural water, 46,573 Acre Feet ( AF) of the 1,075.000 AF. total. In addition nearty 50% of
all conveyances take place with IGFR that are less than 10 acres. This is one of the two areas backlogged
In the Phoenix AMA administration.
Small municipal providers colid also be eliminated from regulation since of the 332 providers In
the Phoenix and Tucson AMA approximately 150 ( 45%) provide 90- 95% of the municipal water. This general
pattern is repeated in all the AMAs.
Of 11.882 total rights administered by all four AMAs, 5.138 of these rights could be dropped from
regulation and 95% of all water used would stUl be managed out of total groundwater withdrawals. For
example. In 1990, of a total of 1,875.522 AF. 1.781,745 AFwouid stUl be regulated under DWR Managements
control.
Elimination of the workload and backlog associated with over 5.000 small users, wolid result in
a substantial reduction In the staff requlrec to administer the functions of water rights. exhibit 16, Reduction
in Activity of Proposed Rights Administration ( Estimated), shows an approximate reduction of the amount
of time spent on the activities listed. It does not list all of the activities performed by the various functions.
and It does not assign the amount of time spent In each of those aetMtles. Standards need to be developed
within the scope of aetMtles within the AMAs.
The exemption of WRHs of less than 10 acres will result In an approximate 50% reduction in
conveyances and a reduction of requests for administrative reviews. This exemption wli reduce the staffing
requirements In Tucson and Phoenix, not counting the current backlog In Phoenix. The reduction in Phoenix
wli be offset to process the backlog over the next 12 months. Best estimates equate to two FTEs In Tucson
and two in Phoenix. It is estimated that two FTEs will be required to process the backlog In Phoenix,
resulting in no Immediate savings. However. these two FTEs wli become surplus at the end of the twelfth
month due to the elimination of backlog and at that time these two FTEs wli be eliminated.
DWR - 29
I
I
, I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
We recommend the following:
• DWA limit the water rights regulation on WAH with less than 10 acres, except for limited
conveyance
• The same action be taken on municipal providers that fall below the users who combined
make up 95% of municipal water use. In general large providers serve over 500 people
and 100 AF of water per year
• Reductions In the Tucson AMA after 12 months
Elimination of two filled WR SPEC II positions: one In Planning and one in Operations
• Reduction in the Pinal AMA
Immediate elimination of the vacant WA Supervisor position in the operation section
• Standards be established within the AMAs
• Retaining the vacant WR Specialist III position In Phoenix AMA Planning and Special
Studies, and one filled WR Specialist II position In either Compliance or Water Rights
Administration to process the backlog.
• Standards will result In Improved efficiency
• The opportunity to simplify the workload thereby Improving the efficiency of administration
of water rights
• Cost avoidance of $ 43,430 one vacant WA Supervisor
• Cost reduction of $ 79,000, two filled WA SPEC II positions
DWR - 30
• Total savings of $ 122,430. all State budgeted
• Reduction in regulatory burden of small WAH and providers.
• Requires legislative action
• Time frame: 18 months.
DWR - 31
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
- - - - - .. - .. - -- - ... _- ....
4000 EXHIBIT 12
OFFICE OF WATER MANAGEMENT .
Deputy Dir ·
Adm Secy II
AWC0005AHO
AWC0210AAN
Dishlip
Coffman
WRSupvr
WU Spec III
AWC0189AAE
AWC0119AAE
Rossi
Vacant
4100
~ PHOENIX AMA
WR Area Director · AWC0167AHE Barrios
WR Mgr I AWC0186AAE Frank
I
4200
TUCSON AMA
WR Area Director4' AWC0159AHE \ Jawbs
WR Mgr I AWC0211AAE Richmond
PLANNING/ SPECI, AL STUDIES
COMPLIANCE/ ENFORCEMENT
SECTION
AWC0324AAH~ Holt
AWC0186AAIi: Andrews
AWC0300AAg Vacant
AWC0234AA~ McAnulty ( UIF)
AWC0240AAg(. 6) SWllDson ( UIF)
PLANNING SECTION
ADMINISTRATIVE
SUPPORT SECTION
Admv Becy I AWC0162AAN PeteniOn
Becy AWC0220AAN Klinller
Stitzer
Johnson, D
Caporaso
Welford
Wickham
DosSantos
Speyer
Tannler
Bodenchuk
AWC0222AAE
AWC0326AAE
AWC0181AAE
AWC0221AAE
AWC0282AAE
AWC0327AAE
AWC0303AAE
AWC0325AAE
AWC0233AAE
OPERATIONS SECTION
WRSupvr
WR Spec III
WI! Spec II
WR Spec II
WRSupvr
WI! Spec III
WUSpec III
WRSpec II
WH Spec II
ADMINISTRATIVE
SUPPORT SECTION
WATER RIGHTS
ADMINISTRATION SECTION
AdmvSecyI AWC0184AAN Myer
AdmvBecyI AWC0161AAN Fanner
WR Spec III AWC0180AAE Willman ( SD)
WR Spec II AWCOl88AAE Stewart ( UIF)
WR Spec II AWC0240AAE(. 6) Swanson ( UIF)
WR Spec f AWC0307AAN Caravella
Carroll
Vacant
Risk
Goy
Fortune
Wahl
Brown
AWC0124ME
AWC035: l~ AE
AWC018UAE
AWC0308ME
AWC0243~ AE
AWC0323~, AE
AWC0306JoAE
WRSupvr
WI! Spec III
WI! Spec III
WH Spec II
WHSpec II
WRSupvr
WR Spec III
WR Spec III
WIt Spec III
o wnspec II
: E WR Spec II
:: tJ WI! Spec II
I
~
4# Limited
§ Federal
en Unbudgeted
* Exempted Position
Revised 02l01l92
4000 EXHIBIT 13
I
PRESCOTT AMA
I OFFICE OFWATEA MANAGEMENT
I
4300
PINALAMA
4400
WR Area Director ·
WRSpecIr
Admv Seey I (, 6)
AWC0168AHE
AWC0183AAE
AWC0164AllN
Foster
Homan
Thurman
WR Area Directo~ AWCOl60AHE
WR Mgr I . AWC0224AAE
OPERATIONS SECTION
l-
Carr, T
Edmond
ADMINISTRATIVE
SUPPORT SECTION
WRSupvr
WRSpec II
WnSpec II
AWC0241AAE
AWC0235AAE
AWC0299AAE
Vacant
Benedetto
RUBscll l-
AdmvSecy I AWC0163AAN Bartels
o~
PLANNING SECTION
~
# Limited
§ Federal
CO Unbudgeted
. j< Exempted Position
WRSpec III
l- I WR Spec II
AWC0223AAE Galusha
AWC0302AAE Jackson, P.
Revised 02101192 - ... - .. _ l1li_ -_ .. _-- .. -
I
I EXHIBIT 14
I
I
I
NUMBER OF WATER RIGHTS ADMINISTRATION PER FTE
~ ArER RIGHTS ADMINISTRATION
1,568 RIGHTS + 9 FTE = 175/ 1
1 1 ,
I, ,
: : ACTIVE MANAGEMENT AREA :
: :------------:------------ i----------:-----------:
: TYPE OF RIGHT : PHOENIX : PHIAL : PRESCOTT: TUCSON :
1 , , ' 1 ,
I I I I I I
I I 1 1 I I
I I I I I I
: IRRIGATION : 7348 : 1548 : 186 : 876 :
1 1 1 1 , I
I I I 1 I I
: NON- IRRIGAnON: 530 : 132 : 21 : 43& :
I I I I I I
I I I I 1 I
: PROVIDER : 164 : 36 : 19 I 168 :
I 1 I I I
I I " ,
~ USE~ : 174 i 10 : 0 43 :
I I I 1
I I I I
~: PE~ MIT : 111 : 26 : 9 45 :
I I ' I I
I I I I I
I , , , ,
I I 1 I I I
I I , I , I
I I I I I I
: TOTAL : 8327 : 1752 : 235 : 1568 :
I I ' I f' I tI II II
i-:~:-::~------ i-- l--:::::-\------:::::- i----:::::- i---"-:::::-:
:-----------------!-- If--------:------- ---:.---------:---~~----:
8.327 RIGHTS + 13 FTE = 640/ 1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I 1,752 RIGHTS + 5 FTE = 350/ 1
I
I
I DWR - 34
I
~
& l
EXHIBIT 15
MANAGEMENT PLAl\ IS FOf~ 1\ 1\ 111\ 5
To reach the goal established for each AMA, the Code directs DWR to develop
and implement water conservation rerllJirements for agriculLural, municipal and
industrial water users in five consecutive periods:
First tvlanagement Period: 1! 1nO- 1990
Second Management Period: H) 90-- 2000
Third Management Period: 2000- 2010
Fourth Management Period: 2010- 2020
Fifth Management Period: 2020- 2025
With each consecutive period, the management plans will contain more rigorous
water conservation and management requirements.
DWR works closely with groundwater users to develop conservation programs
that meet the Code's goals and Arizona's water needs. The Code established a
five- member Groundwater Users Advisory Council for each AMA. Members are
appointed by the governor to represent groundwater users. They are chosen on
the basis of their knowledge, interest and experience with water management
problems. The Councils moet with AMA officials monthly to discuss the progress
of plans and conservation options under consideralion. The meetings are open to
the public.
Conservation programs have been developed for agricultural, municipal and
industrial waleI' uscs in the AtviAs. These are summarized below. Detailed
descriptions of the conservation requirements are contained in the management
plan for each AMA.
- - - .. --_ .. - .. - --_._-- .. -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
EXHIBIT 16
REDUCTION IN ACTIVITY OF PROPOSED RIGHTS ADMINISTRATION ( ESTIMATED)
FUNCTIQN ACTIVITY APPROXIMATE # REDUCTION
ADMIN JANUARY MAIL- OUT REPORT FORMS 50%
ADMIN NUMBER REPORTS TO INPUT 50%
MARCH 31
ADMIN FLEXIBIUTY ACCOUNT ACTIVITY 50%
COMPUANCE NO CONSERVATION REQUIREMENT 50%
ADMIN UMITED CONVEYANCE ( SPUTIING ) 75%
COMPUANCE FAILURE TO FILE REPORT 95%
PLANNING AUDIT ANNUAL REPORTS 50%
PLANNING FUTURE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW 20%
ADMIN DATA MAINTENANCE ( REGISTRY) 50%
PLANNING EDUCATION WORKSHOPS 30%
COMPLETION OF ANNUAL REPORT
* NOTE: PINAL AMA WOULD BE LESS
DWR · 36
PlANNING AND COMPlIANCE MANAGEMENT
This discussion concerns the organization of the four AMAs and the Planning Support DMslon
which are under the Deputy Director In the OffIce of Water Management and Planning.
There are currently 14 positions In planning and eight positions In compliance Invotved In
plannlng- compllance within the four AMAs. exhibits 17, OWM - Planning/ Compliance - Phoenix & Tucson
AMAs - Present, and 18, OWM - Planning/ Compliance - Prescott & Pinal AMAs - Present, shows this
organization. In the Pinal and Tucson AMAs, compliance Is a part of the operations sections.
Also at the present time ( Including recommendations from various points In the report) there are
eight FTEs in the planning support dMslon, as is shown on exhibit 19, OWM - Planning Support DMsion.
The positions that have already been recommended earlier In this report are noted on the organization chart.
At the present time each AMA writes It's own management plan, and there are three more
revisions to research and write for each AMA between nem and the year 2020. Each plan ranges from 225­350
pages. We have been advised that research will begin in 1994 for the third plan, due In the year 2000.
exhibit 20, Management Plans for AMAs, generally describes the plans and plan years. Each AMA develops
Its own formats and Instructions to users to complete annual report addendum.
Special studies are assigned to Planning Sections In each AMA by the Deputy Director of the
OffIce of Water Management and Planning ( OWMP). These studies are often generated by the Legislature.
Each AMA operates within Its own section In dealing with compliance Issues and priorities, and
varlabilty exists on these Issues. There are no standard guidelines for compliance In the agency.
On occasslon, eachAMA Is assigned a special dataY project. A special project may last from six
months to two years, Is generally handled by the area directors, and may utMlze 40% or more of their time.
The two present projects are policy development programs affecting DWR statewide both Inside the four
AMAs and outside.
DWR - 37
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
At the present time the Planning Support DMsion does demographics ( population) work with an
economist. It also does work on new water supply methodology as it Is associated with weather
modification and watershed management, and act as a general resource Information center for the four
AMAs.
Unless a committed effort Is made to change the planning and compliance role of the Planning
Support DMsion, both staffing and corresponding budget requirements will escalate.
Total existing staffing, particularly In the area of planning, could be reduced or redistributed to
other areas of the agency beyond the recommendations in this report if changes were made.
The Planning Support DMslon ( PSD) could playa significant role In the elimination of separate
preparation of generic parts of the four management plan books and consider the least effective cost
approaches to researching the management plans. Evaluation of an alternative method of measurement
to the gallons per capita per day concept. for example, gallons per day per service connection would result
In less requirement of manpower. Other work activity areas where PSD could efficiently assist are the
preparation of annual report addendums, water conservation and annual report education workshop
preparation.
If two positions in each AMA were really required to administer the Groundwater Code ( an Area
Director and a WR Manager I), it would not be possible to give Area Directors special assignments to
statewide programs requiring up to and even exceeding 40% of their time.
The Position Description Questionnaires ( PDQ) of both the area Directors and the WR Manager
I positions indicate duplication and slmUarity In job responsibilities, supervision, authority, skUls, Input and
work processes, as weli as expertise required for the positions.
Using the mid- point of a Grade 23 ( WR Manger I), and the mid- point of a Grade 24 ( Area
Director), $ 121,750 Is required annually to manage and administer the Groundwater Code in each AMA This
Is substantially more than agency directors are paid to administer dozens of programs with far more
responsibility, personnel and budget.
DWR - 38
The PSD could assume this activity of special assignment because these statewide issue
assignments are not germane to a specific AMA
The PSD should also Implement statewide policy on compliance issues which are clearly state- wide
In nature. Examples that demonstrate this are shown on Exhibit 21, Statewide Planning/ Compliance Issues.
The role surface water plays In the Groundwater Code and the lack of a surface water statutory
mandate Is also an Issue which could be reviewed by the PSD.
The local community does not and should not have to give up Input or Influence on water issues
affecting their management areas. Four Independent AMA's cannot form effective, efficient statewide
policies.
We believe that the PSD should become more vital to DWR, the four AMAs, and the Operations
Division of the OWMP. We recommend the following changes:
• Eliminate the three WR Manager I positions in the Pinal, Tucson and Phoenix AMA. shown
on Exhibits 22, OWM - Planning/ Compliance - Phoenix & Tucson AMAs - Proposed. and
Exhibit 23, OWM - Planning/ Compliance - Prescott & Pinal AMAs - Proposed
• Transfer the Phoenix AMA and the Tucson AMA WR Supervisor planning positions to the
PSD as shown on Exhibit 22
• Assign the new PSD the following tasks:
Eliminate duplication with cost reduction a major focus
Develop Integrated policy both Inside the four AMAs and outside, covering both
planning and compliance
Assume special assignment work currently being ~ ndled by the AMA Directors.
DWR - 39
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Implementing these recommendations will provide the following benefits:
• Cost reduction savings - three WR Manger I Positions $ 174,000 ( State funds)
• Streamlined Management structure in four AMAs with work activity related to each specific
AMA
• Elimination of AMA dUpl: catlon
• Development cohesive state- wide policy on planning and compliance ( maintaining local
Input from the AMA community)
Implementation will require the following steps:
• Reassign WR Supervisor I Planning positions in Phoenix AMA and Tucson AMAs to
Planning Support Division
• Eliminate WR I Manager position In Phoenix, Tucson and Pinal AMAs
• Reassign statewide assured water special assignments and all other future special
assignments to Planning Support
• Planning Support assume all planning activities that avoid duplication and reduce cost of
the planning function
• Implementation time: One year In duration.
DWR - 40
~ OOO
EXHIBIT 17
-- ICE OF WATER MANAGEMENT
Dir · AWCO()() GAIIO \) inhlip Wit Supvr AWC0189ME HORAI
cy II AWC0210AAN Colhnnn Wit Spec III AWC01l9M. E Vncnnl
,
OF
Depuly
Adlll Sc
4100 I 4200
PIIOENIX AMA
TUCSON AMA
Wit AreR IJIrcclor · AWC0167AIII~
. WltMgl'- l AWC'Ol86AAIL
IInrrio~
ICrl> nk · Wit Aren IJIrcclor · AWCOlli9AIIE' Jnrob!
WltMRrl AW. coUlAAE- iilehmornl- ·
PLANNING/ SPECIAL STUDIES OPERATIONS SECTION
Wit Supvr
Wit Spec III
Wit Spec III
Wit Spl'C 111
Wit Spec II
5! IWIt Spec II
:;; Wit Spl'C II
AWC0121AAE
AWC0353AAE
AWC0187ME
AWC030BAAE
AWC02~ 3ME
AWC0323ME
AWC030GME
CRrroll
VRCRnl
Hi~ k
Goy
Forlune
Wnhl
Drown
ADMINISTRATIVE
SUPPORT SECTION
AdrnvSecyl AWCOI8~ AAN
Adrnv Seey I A\ VCO 16 IAAN
Myer
Fnnner
Wit Supvr
WII SI'(' c III
WII Spcc II
WIl Spcc II
AWC0222AA F,
AWC032GAAF.
AWCOl81AAE
AWC0221ME
lJoASnnloll
Speyer
' rnnnler . ­Dodenchuk
ADMINISTRATIVE
SUPPORT SECTION
Adrnv Secy I AWCOIG2AAN
Secy AWC0220AAN
l'elerwlJI
Klinger
COMPLIANCE/ ENFORCEMENT
SECTION
PLANNING SECTiON .. ....
Wit SUpVT
Wit Spec III
Wit Spec 111
Wit Spec II
Wit Spec II
AWC032~ ME lIoll
AWCOl86AAE Andrews
AWC0300ME Vncnnl
AWC02: J~ ME McAnully ( UlF)
AWC02~ OME(. 6) Swnn80n ( UlF)
WATER nlGIITS
ADMINISTRATION SECTION
Wit Spec 111 AWCO ! nOAAE Willrnnn ( Sm
Wit Spec II AWCOlflflI\ AF, Slcwnll ( UIF)
Wit Bpcc II AWC02 · 101\ 1\ I';(. 6) Swnnnon ( UIF)
Wit Spec I AWC0307AAN Cnrnvelln
Wit Supvr
Wit Spec III
Wit Spcc 111
Wll Spcc II
Wll Spec II
AWC0282AAE
AWC0: J27AAE
AWC030: JAAF,
AWCO: J2GAAF.
AWC0233ME
SUller
Johnoon, lJ
Cnporn~ o
Welford
Wlckhnm
" Limiled
§ Federnl
' D Unbudgeled
. * gxc/ I1pled Position
Hevjscd OVOV92 - - - - - - - .. - ... - - - - - - - .. -
- - - - - -
r
PRESCOTT AMA
- .. - --, 1000
Or- r- ICE OJ: WAlEn MANAGEMENT
- I
4300
- _.. -
4100
PINALAMA
- _..
EXHIBIT 18
-,
" In Aren IJlreclor ·
mSpedl
,. dmv Secy I (. 6)
AWC0168AtJE
AWCOJ83AAF.
AWC0161AIIN
Fosler
Ilomnn
111Ulmnn
Wit AI!! n Direclor · AWCOJ60AIIE Corr, T
Wit MgI 1 AWC022.1AAE Edmond.
OPEnATIONS SECTION ADMINISTRATIVE
SUPPORT SECTION
Wit Supvr
Wit Spec II
Wit Spcc II
AWC021JAAE
AWC023riAAI · ;
AWC02! l! JMI~
Vncnnt
Ilcnc. lello
HUDnell ._
AdmvSccy I AWCOJ63AAN Dorlch
I
~ PLANNING SECTION
I
it; Wit Spec 11/
l- I Wit Spec 1/
AWC0223AAE Gnlushn
AWC0302AAE JockllOn. 1'.
# I Limiled
§ Federnl
1 Unbudgeled
. '" Excmpled l'osilioll
HcviBCd OVO 11! J2
" 000
" liOO
PLAInm IG SUPPOIIT DIVISiON
PLANNING troEI. ER
PLANNIOO M:: DE!. ER
TRAINI1- KJ
EXHIBIT 19
[- orFiCE or WJllEn MJlNJlGEMElll
--= 1 " GOO
OPEnJ\ 110US UIVISlorl WATEn MJ\ UAGEMEflT
Wit Mllr I AWCOI: J1Mr. J{ JmhcrJlII supponT DIVISIOII
Admv Seey I AWC020liMN Ludwlll -
I Wit Mllr I AWC0291ME Ilnvift
r I , I
!
GnOUrmWAIEn SYSTEM sunFACE WAlEn WATEn QUALITY SECTIOU
SUPPOI1T SECTlOr,. ADJUUICAllON SECTiON
Wit Supyr AWC0293ME lIolilho
WIl SIIPvr AWCU20liAAE IInll1ney Wit Spec IV AweOIlHMr. Slunrt wn Spec III AWC02! J6ME Berty
- WII Spec III , AWC0291AAE Annh
WIl Spec III AWCO: Ji2ME Gih'\ IJn
GnOUrmWJ\ TEn UNIT SUnFACE WJ\ TEIl UWT WII Spec III AWe03! i2AAP. Vncnnt
Wit Tech II , AWC021i3AAU GnmlJlcI
\ VlIt Teclt Supvr AWC0201 AAI~ JJr~ lrr Will Tech f: llpYrAWC020IAAr. MoUok
. Will Tech II AWCO !( iDAA'" Vnl, lrr. Will Tech II AWC020nAIIN Hacko, I'
-
Will Tedl I AWCOIOGAAN I( nne Wilt ' l'rch II AWeO: J: JIAA'" 111111erl' 1lz
Will Tech I AWC02! lGAAN JlollflR Wilt ' l'ech II AW(; OI11AIIN Sumpler- IUnll WATEn CONSEnVJ\ TIOII SECTIOU
(; Ik ' l'yp II Aweo IIjliAAU Vncllnl Wilt ' l'rcll II AWCO 10111AN Ilutcll111001l
TtnllllnH ornccr I ,\\ VC032 IAAP. Stcvcn~
Secretory' 1 Awe028: JACH Borchers
SYSTEM SUPPOnT UlIIT J\ UJUlJICJ\ TIOII UlIIT
Wit Spcc 11 AWC020: JAA~ II nil Wilt Trd. 11 AWCOlliOl\ A", Logn" '~
Wilt Trch I AWCOIIJ/ iAAN 1IInltlllrr.
J
Snnille
lJuIlnnlnnle
Cox, T
Jenklll". B
AWCOIOOMR
AWCoI! JoMN
AWCO: JHMR
AWCOl2liMI~
WII Mllr I
Sl'cy
IV II ~ prc III
1'; l" OIIOllli~ l I II
, HYDRO ITl
HYDRO IV
OFFICER I
SECRETARY
~,
f)
ANNUAL nEPOnT UNIT
Will Tech I IIWC02nlillllN lJelRclIlllll
nEconus M" IM, GEMEIH mil r
" Limiled
§ Fellernl
11 UIlIJutlp, cled
.. gxempletl Position - - - -- lIevhrd OVO 1/! 12 - - - -
Will Tech 11
Will Tech I
elk 1' yp III
Clk 1)' p II (. 1)
- -
AWCO:! O! 1I1AN
AWCIJ: J2l1I1AN
AW(; O: J: IOAIIN
AW(; O 11GAIIN
1I0dlO. U
Hlcpltnn
II~ nnJhe( ln
Vllcllnt
-- .. _--- -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
EXHIBIT 20
/' v1f\ 1\ 1)\ GE1VlENT PLfWS FOR AJ'JIAs
To reach the goal established for each AMA. the Code directs DvVR to develop
and implement water conservation requirements for agricultural, municipal and
industrial water users in five consecutive periods:
First Management Period: 1980- 1990
Second Management Period: 1990- 2000
Third Management Period: 2000- 2010
Fourth Management Period: 2010- 2020
Fifth Management Period: 2020- 2025
With each consecutive period, the management plans will contain more rigorous
water conservation and management requirements.
D'VVR works closely with groundwater users to develop conservation programs
that meet the Code's goals and Arizona's water needs. The Code established a
five- member Groundwater Users Advisorv Council for each AMA. Members are
appointed by the governor to represent groundwater users. They are chosen on
the basis of their knowledge, interest and experience with water management
problems. The Councils meet with AMA officials monthly to discuss the progress
of plans and conservation options under consideration. The meetings are open to
the public.
Conservation programs have been developed for agricultural. municipal and
industrial water uses in the AMAs. These are summarized below. Detailed
descriptions of the conservation requirements are contained in the management
plan for each AMA.
DWR - 44
STATEWIDE PlANNING & CQMPUANCE ISSUES
STATEWIDE CQMPUANCE ISSUES
Exceeding Umlt of Water Withdrawal
Illegal Irrigation
Well Activity
Open Well Enforcement
STATEWIDE PlANNING AND CQMPUANCE ISSUES
Surface Water Rights Administration
Incorporation Surface Water - Groundwater Code
Who Should be Allowed to Negotiate Conservation Requirement
What Enforcement Options is DWR Going to Employ When Provlclers Exceed Water Use.
DWR - 45
EXHIBIT 21
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
OWM -- PLANNING/ COMPLIANCE
PHOENIX AND TUCSON AMA'S
PROPOSED ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE EXHIBIT 22
OFFICE OF WATER
MANAGEIIENT
DEPUTY DIRECTOR •
ADMIN. SEC. II
WR SUPERVISOR
WR SPEC III
~,&
PHOENIX AlIA
WR AREA DIRECTOR •
TUCSON AliA
WR AREA DIRECTOR •
PlANllIIlG/ SPECIAI.
STOOIES
WR snc III
WR SPEC III
lift SPEC II
WR SPEC II
IR SPEC II
CONPlIANCEIENFORCEIlENT
SECTION
WR SUPERVISOR
WR SPEC III
1IIR SPEC III
\ IIR SPEC 11
ADIlINISTRATIVE
SUPPORT SECTIOII
ADMIN. SECRETARY 1
ADMIN. SECRETARY I
WATER RIGHTS
1--- 1 ADIlINISTRATION SECTION
WR SPEC III
~ IWR SPEC II
WR SPEC I
OPERATIONS SECTION
WR SUPERVISOR
WR SPEC III
WR SPEC II
PLANNING SECTION
WR SPEC III
WR SPEC III
WR SPEC II
t--
ADIlINISTRATIVE
SUPPORT SECTION
ADMIN. SECRETARY I
SECRETARY
• EXENPTED POSITION
~
~
• EJCEII'TBl POSITIlJI
OWM -- PLANNING/ COMPLIANCE
PRESCOTT AND PINAL AMA'S
PROPOSED ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
< JTICElJ
WATER
fWil[£ l£ NT
PRESCOTT w.. PIN. iJ. w..
III NIE. A OlREC1Ill •
III SPEC II III NIE. A DUI! C1lIl •
AIltlIN. 5I: CY. I <' 5)
( J'ERAT! Clfi SECTION AI) IINISTRAIM
Slf'P( JH SECTION
III SPEC II
If! SPEC II AIltlIH. 5I: C. I
PLAIIHt « i SECTION
If! SPEC III
III SPEC II
EXHIBIT 23
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .. - -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
WATER MANAGEMENT SUPPORT DIVISION
The Water Management Support DMslon which Is In the OffIce of Water Management has two
sections. One section Is the Water Quality Section and the other is the Water Conservation Section. The
Water Quality Section has one WR Supervisor, four WR Spec. Ills, of which one Is vacant, and one WR
Tech II.
The Water Conservation Section has one Training OffIcer I and one secretary. The organization
is shown In exhibit 24, OWM - Water Management - Support DMslon.
The Water Quality Section has authority to operate under A. R. S. 45- 105, A. R. S. 45- 565, A. R. S. 45­576,5n,
and these statutes are tied in various ways to Water Quality. There is statutory authority regulating
work associated with well construction, well spacing, regulation of groundwater recharge operations, and
activities permitting water withdrawal.
The Water Quality Section processes approximately 10 - 15 permits for Poor Quality Groundwater
Withdrawal annually. A Poor Quality Groundwater Permit can be issued to a non- irrigation user to withdraw
poor quality groundwater if the grOUndwater to be withdrawn, because of Its quality, has no other beneficial
use at the present time. Permits are generally written by the Water Quality Section within the four AMAs,
which permits outside the four AMAs are written by the Groundwater System Support Section In DWR's
Operations DMslon.
The Water Quality Section also reviews approximately 73 permit applications for the Groundwater
System Support Section and 75 - 100 DEQ permit applications annually. The DES permit applications are
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES) Permits, Aquifer Protection Permits ( APP), and
Wastewater Reuse Permits ( WRP). These are reviewed to Insure compliance with Title 45.
Most of DEQ's permit applications are In Water Quality Assurance Revolving Fund ( WQARF) and
federal EPA contamination sites, many of which are hazardous waste sites and or landfills.
DWR - 48
House BUI ( HB) 2073, presently before the legislature, seeks exemption from any other permit
process, other than what DEQ requires for on- slte remedial action of contaminated sites. Passage of the
bll will mean that the Water Quality Division and superfund sites, most of which are located within the four
AMAs, would be exempt from Poor Quality Groundwater Permits. Water Quality Section In the Water
Management Support Division.
If the Bill passes, It Is not clear what this may mean for Poor Quality Groundwater WIthdrawal
permitting. A part of HB 2073 Is shown on Exhibits 25, WQD Site Assignments, and exhibit 26, House
Amendments to HB 2073.
The permits reviewed by the DWR Water Quality Section are already reviewed by DEQ personnel.
Sending the applications to DWR is a duplication of the review process. Since both DEQ and DWR are
state agencies, this review process should not be duplicated. DEQ has a mandate In AR. S. 49- 303 that
supersedes DWR on Water Quality Contamination issues. If the Poor Quality Groundwater Withdrawal
Permit continues to be a viable instrument in " on- site" or " near- on- slte" locations, DEQ personnel who play
the lead role should review and issue these permits Instead of DWR.
The permit applications ( 75) that the Water Quality Section In DWR review are Poor Quality
( outside the four AMAs), General Industrial, Well Construction, and Well Spacing Dewatering, which are all
Issued by the Groundwater System Support Section In the Operations Division of DWR. This section in DWR
could take over the review of the permits they issue.
According to our Interviews the average review requires approximately 30 minutes.
• 75 reviews X .5 hours = 37.5 hours required to review permit applications for the
Operations Division
• Reviewing DEQ permit applications for Title 45 compliance; 100 reviews X 1 hour = 100
hours
• Writing 15 permits ( poor Quality Groundwater WIthdrawal) X 24 hours each = 360 hours
DWR - 49
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
DWR - 50
• Eliminate one vacant WR Specialist III position
Ira Surface Wata, adjudications for surface ' water d~ i8rslon protest work aet~. it: J
hours per FTE In Field/ meetings
hours per FTE In permitting
hours per FTE in review of DEQ permits
hours per FTE in review of Operation
permits
hours per FTE Total ( of 1,675 total
productive hours).
168.0
72.0
20.0
1&
838.0 hours/ five FTE =
360.0 hours/ five FTE =
100.0 hours/ five FTE =
~ hours/ five FTE =
1,335.5 hours/ five FTEs =
• Eliminate one WR Technician II, one WR Specialist III ( both federally funded), one WR
supervisor and one WR Manager position ( all filled)
• 10 - 15 % of five FTE in the field and at meetings = five FTE X 1,675 productive hours =
8,375 total hours X .10 = 838 hours spent in field and meetings
• Transfer two WR Specialist III positions to Operations Division to be used in the
Groundwater System Support Section for permit review, Open Well Enforcement, and or
• Totals are:
• Negotiations be tied to the Hydrology Division Cooperative Agreement recommended
earlier in Point " DEQ- DWR Water Quality Monitoring Coordination," and that the reporting
also be tied to the Hydrology Division
We recommend the following activities:
• Negotiate with DEQ to handle Poor Quality Groundwater Permitting ( PQGP) in and around
Superfund and Water Quality Contamination sites, and all sites inside the four AMA. if
HB 2073 passes. If the bill does not pass, then the Operation's Division could handle
PQGP
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
• Transfer one Training OffIcer I and secretary In the Water Conservation Section to the
Planning Support DMslon. See exhibit 27, OWM - Planning Support DMsion, for
recommendations on the Planning Support DMslon.
The following benefits will be gained from this Recommendation:
• Eliminate duplication, ( typf\ of work activity)
Review of DEC Permits
Two different agencies issuing permits In water and superfund sites
• Reduce the backlog of Surface Water rights protests going back to 1979
• Eliminate one vacant WR Specialist III, with cost avoidance of $ 44,125
• Eliminate one WR Technician II, one WR Specialist III, one WR Supervisor, and one WR
Manager I, with cost reduction of $ 178,375
• Total savings of $ 44,125 + $ 178,375 = $ 222,550 ( State funds $ 155,181; Federal funds
$ 67,319).
• Transfer two FTEs - and train ( Operations DMsion)
• Cooperative agreement DEC
• Transfer two FTEs ( planning Support)
• TIme frame: six months.
DWR - 51
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
- - - - - .. - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1000
EXHIBIT
orr- ICE or- WATEn MA/ lAGEMEtH
4liOO 1GOO I
anT DIVISiON OPEnATIONS DIVISION WATEn MANAGEMEIIT
WI! Mgr I I\ WCOI: J"/ M, I': J{ lmbcrlin SUPPonT DIVISION MAE Sundle Adlllv Secy I 1\ WC020GAAN Ludwig
OAAN DUlllnmnnlc
1AAE COli, T Wit Mgr I 1\ we02! J7 AAF: DnviA
6AAE Jenkins, S
\
GnOUNDWATEnSYSTEM SUHFACE WATEn WATER QUALITY SECTlOtI
SUPPOnT SECllON ADJUDICATION SECTiON
- Wit Supvr Awe0293AAE OCllilho
Wit Supvr I\ We020( jAAI~ ItnlOn" y Wit Rpec IV Aweol! H AAr: Sluorl Wit Spcc III I\ WC0295AAE Berry
WltSp~ 1111 AWC0291AAE I\ nnlll
Wit Spec III AWC0312AAF: G ib'lOn
GROUNDWATEn UNIT SUnFACE WATER UNIT Wit Spec III AWC0352AAF: Vllennl
Wit Tech III I\ WC0263MN Gambrel
- wm Tech Supvr AWC0207AAI~ II" Rlr'r wm Tech SlIpvrAWe0204AAF: Mollok Will Tech II AWCOIG9AAN Vllldez Wilt Tech II AWe020RAAN Hocko, P
-
Wilt Tech I I\ WCOIOGAAN Rllne Wilt Tech II I\ We03: JIAAN Gullerre7.
-
Wilt Tech I 1\ WC028GAAN BOIlRR Will Tech II AWeOlHAAN Sumpter- ICIng WATEn CONSERVATIOll SECTlOll
Clk Typ II I\ WCOI6GAAN Vncnnl Will Tech II AWeOlG7MN JIlIlchinRon
Trolnlng Officer I Awcon I AAF: Steven.,
Secrelory • 1 AWC0283ACN BOlchers
SYSTEM SUPPOnT UNIT ADJUDICATION UNI r -
-
wn Spec II AWC020: JAAE Bnll wm Tech II AWeOl6BAAN Lognn
Will Tech I AWCOI06AAN Mnltine7.
ANNUAL nEPOnT UNIT
-
WIH Tech I AWC0286AAN Bel'!! emnll
RECORDS MANAGEMENT UNIT
~. Wilt Teell II AWC020lJAAN Hocko, U
Wilt Tech I AWC032l1AAN Stephnll
elk 1' YI' III / lWCO: l: JOAAN I~ Rml"' llo
elk ' I'ypll (. 7) 1\ weo 146/ 1111' 1 VlleRnl
I\ WeOll
I\ weOl! 1
I\ We031
AwelH:,
~
I
~
PLANNING SUPP
" Limited
§ Federnl
') Unbudgeled
.": t~ xelll pled l'osilion
WItt. lgr I
Secy
WIlSpcclll
l~ conoml9l III
-[
lteviRed O?/ O 1/" 2
MASON GRANT
WQD SITE ASSIGNMENTS
INDIAN BEND WASH- NORTH L
PHOEUIX- GOODYEAR AIRPORT S
TUCSON AIRPORT AREA L
HASSAYAMPA LANDFILL
MOTOROLA 52ND ST
MOTOROLA MESA
APACHE POWDER COMPANY
WILLIAMS AFB
LUKE AFB
YUMA MARINE CORPS AIR STATION
HONEYWELL DVCP
HONEYWELL PEORIA
A. A. NG - TUCSON L
DAVIS- MONTHAN AFB
FT. HUACHUCA
GTE TEMPE
19TH AVENUE LANDFILL S
NORTHWEST SERVICE CENTER
27TH AVENUE LANDFILL S
16TH STREET LANDFILL S
INDIAN BEND WASH - SOUTH
CASA GRANDE PESTICIDE
WEST CENTRAL PHOENIX
ESTES LANDFILL
SOUTH MESA WQARF
NAVAJO ARMY DEPOT
YUMA PROVING GROUND
161ST AIR REFUELING GROUP
NORTHEAST MESA WQARF
MIDDLE GILA- PAINTED ROCK STATE PARK
HEXCEL WASTE DUMP S
WEST VAN BUREN WQARF S
MIRACLE MILE WQARF L
EAST WASHINGTON WQ~~ F S
( EASTLAKE PARK)
EAST CENTRAL PHOENIX WQARF
TRI- CITIES LANDFILL
EAST BROADWAY LANDFILL WQARF S
LOS REALES LANDFILL WQARF S
PIMA COUNTY LANDFILLS S
GABRIELLI PROPERTY S
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
S
S
L
S
S
SS
S
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
S
S
S
S
S
S
LL
L
S
EXHIBIT 25
KAREN
L
L
L
L
L
S
S
S
L
L
L
L
S
S
S
L
L
L
12/ 7/ 90
DAVE
S
S
S
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
S
L
L
S
S
S
L
S
L
L = LEAD DWR - 53
S = SUPPORT I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
House Amendments to H. B. 2073
EXHIBIT 26
- 1 unreasonably fails to comply with an order issued pursuant to subsection E
2 of this section. The attorney general, at the request of the director,
3 may commence an action in superior court to recover civil penalties
4 provided for in th. is subsection. In determining the amount of a civi 1
5 penalty under this subsection, the court shall consider:
6 1. The seriousness of the act of noncompliance under this section.
7 2. As an aggravating factor only, the economic benefit, if any,
8 resulting from the act of noncompliance under this section.
9 3. Any history of such violation.
10 4. Any good faith efforts to comply with the order.
11 5. The econ~ mic impact of the penalty on the person.
12 6. Such other factors as the court deems relevant.
13 H. Nothing in this section shall prec~~ de the director from
14 securing access or obtaining information in any other lawful manner.
IS Sec. 8. TitTe 49. chapter 2. article S, Arizona Revised Statutes,
16 is amended · by adding sections 49- 290, 49- 291. 49- 292. 49- 293, 49- 294,
17 49- 295 and 49~ 296, to read:
18 49- 290. Exemotion from oernit reauirements; definition
19 A. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER STATUTE, A PERSON WHO CONDUCTS ANY
20 PORTION OF AREMEDIAL ACTION THAT IS APPROVED BY THE DEPARTMENT AND THAT
21 IS CONDUCTED ENTIRELY ON SITE AND IN COMPLIANCE WITH THIS ARTICLE IS
22 EXEHPT FROM ANY REQUIREMENT TO OBTAIN ANY STATE OR LOCAL PERMIT, " APPROVAL
23 9R OTHER FORM OF AUTHORIZATION THAT WOULD OTHERWISE 8E REQUIRED FOR THE
24 ON- SITE REMEDIAL ACTION. TO QUALIFY FOR AN EXEMPTION PURSUANT TO THIS
DWR - 54
· 1000
EXHIBIT 27
orr- ICE or- WAlEn MANAGEMENT
4600
PLAIIIIII IG SUPPORT DIVISION
- I
41iOO 4100
orEAMIOfIS IJIVISIOlI ~ WATER MANAGEMEIIT
l Mgr I AWelll: l7 / It,,~ mmberlill SUPPORT DIVISIOfI
IIlV SI! Cy I AWCII20liAAH Ludwig -
I I
Wit Mgr I AWC0291AAF: nnvl"
,
ER SYSTEM SlJllr- ACE WATER WAlER QUALITY SECTlotl
SECTION ADJUDICATION SECTiON wn SUpYT AWC029: JME noUll1O
IznliAA P, Itnlllnl'y Wit flpec IV AWC: OJ! J. IAAF. Slunrl Wit Spec III AWC0295ME lJe rry
- wn Spec 1111 AWC029 · IME Annl,
WIISpee1l1 AWC0312AAE fJi),! Vln
ATER UUlT SURr- ACE WAlEn UNIT WII Spce III AWC03! i2AAg Vocolll
wn Tech II' AWC0263AAH Gnlllurd
J201AAI~ lIe9lf! r Wilt Tech SllpvrA~ Ve0204AIH; MotJok
JIG91\ AN Vnltll! 1. Will Teeh II AWe020llMH ! locka, I'
) JOGI\ AN I{ nne Will Tedl II Aweo: J: 11 AI\ N Gulierrc1.
J21lGAAN lIur- flR Will Tetllll Aweo IH I\ AN Sumpler- I{ 11l1l WATER CONSERVATIOlI SEeliOII]
HGliAAN Vllcnlll Will Tech II Aweo Ill? AI\ N IlulehlnRoll
Trolnlng Officer I AWCOnl/ lAg SIp. ven,
Secrelory' , AWC021l3ACII lIorchers
(' Porn UNIT ADJUDICATION UNIT
-
' 020: 1AA I~ 11011 Will Tel'h II Aweo IGMI\ N tOlln"
Will Ted. I Aweo IOliAAN Mnrtinez
Awe
Awe
Awe
Awe
Awe
GROUIlDW
wn Spee 1\ AW(
r:. ~
SYSTEM SU
WnSupvr AWe
.-,---- c=
GROUllDWAl
SUPPOflT
wm Tech Rllpvr
-' Wllt Tech 1\
Will Ted, I
Will Tech I
elk Typ II
hlDLER
~' roLER
Bundle
lIuelnlllnnle
Cox, ' J'
Jel\ klll~, S
AMA> T;
AMA
AWCOlOOMF.
AWeOl90MH
AWC031 · IMF.
AWeOl26AAE
PLANi, H; G
PLANNING
TRAINING
PHOENIX
TUCOON
HYDRO III
HYDRO IV
OFFICER I
SEn'
WR SUPR
WR SUPR
WII Mgr I
' I flecy
\\' 11 flpre III
Econolllinl III
~
I
8l
ANNUAL nEPOllT UfIIT
Wilt Tech I 1\ WC02Brit\ AN lIelgcl1Inn
RECOflDS MANAGEMENT UNIT
-
Will Tedl 1\
Will Tech I
elk Typ III
elk ' 1)' 1' II (. 7)
IIncko, 1I
Rle!'), 1I1I
1~" l'oIH'(' O
VIH, i1l1l
AWC0209t\ t\ N
AWCn: 1211t\ i\ N
Awcn: l: lot\ I\ N
AWCO I1lil\ llN
- IIcvhc, l 01) 0 IIn2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
If I) IIIi1cll
§ FCllernl
1 Unbuclgr. lcd
* gxclIIlllcll l'osiLion -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM
In 1980 the Groundwater Management Act created the Department of Water Resources ( DWR).
An outside consultant was brought into DWR to evaluate the requirements of a Management Information
System ( MIS).
The consultant concluded that DWR needed their own Data Center. DWR secured appropriate
justification through the Department of Administration ( DOA). SUbsequently, MIS ended up with three
hardware systems, IBM, Prime, and NBI.
The data essential to DWR is gathered from the following divisions: Adjudications, Hydrology,
the Active Management Areas ( AMA) and Operations. The MIS portion of the Administrative Services
Division contains 17 FTEs as shown on exhibit 28, OffIce of Administrative Services - Management
Information Services ( MIS) Division.
Staffing includes programmers, software maintenance, PC maintenance, geographic Information
system ( GIS), and technical support.
ApprOXimately one year ago DWR's MIS Section acted on a decision to purchase new software
( DB- II) for the IBM 4381. One reason was because the old software ( CICS) was not user friendly. DWR has
large volumes of data on CICS software. They also have approximately 80 PC's which have difficulty
retrieving data from the IBM mainframe with CICS software.
Data conversion from the old CICS software to the new DB- II, programming will be required. With
the current FTEs and assistance from outside consultants, ' It is estimated this will take three years.
Estimated costs, including the programming fees and outside consultants, will be nearly $ 500,000.
in another interview we were toid that 80% of tha tlma Gi the programming staff would be spent
over the next 1 1/ 2 years using the DB- II software in the development of an electronic docket program for
DWR - 56
Adjudications. Therefore while the estimate of cost isn't different for converting to DB- II from CICS. It would
actually be 4 1/ 2 yearS before the huge volume of data could physically be converted. rather than three as
stated eartler.
The MIS plan also calls for linking Prime which has GIS to the Prime which haS GIS at the State
Land Department. and providing PC work stations and PC networking, along with linking the network of PCs
to DB- II on the IBM.
There are a substantial number of different DMslon and Section Managers, as well as other
program people within DWR. who believe the work with DB- II should be suspended untO a feasibility study
Is conducted. They also believe emphasis on work stations for Hydrology, Basic Data. Operations,
Adjudications and Administration should become a priority. They would like to see LAN- connected work
stations.
This group argues they cannot walt 18 months. let alone three or four years, to see these things
come about They also argue that PCs are more than capable of storing much of the data from the
mainframe.
There are other issues. Adjudications would rather see existing effort and monies put Into the
networking ( discussed above), and computer assisted drafting rCADj. The Adjudications DMslon has also
developed a proposal for a change in direction of the MIS program in DWR.
We recommend the following:
• Review DWR's MIS strategic plan, and reach agreement on priorities and performance
requirements for each user group
• Review to be conducted with users Input as well as the input of MIS
Review the proposal submitted by the Adjudications staff to the Deputy Director of
Finance
DWR - 57
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
• An MIS program within DWR which Is responsive to the user's needs, and a program which
can access outside sources as well
• Quantifications on benefits could be achieved through an MIS study, with costs/ profits
analysis.
Implementation should be achieved by:
• Conducting the above referenced study
Time frame: Two months
• Presenting the study to effected users
• Accomplish buy- In with users
• Obtain feedback of the users.
DWR - 58
J300 EXHIBIT 28
Allclilmy Service. SecUoll
1300
.--- Fiscal Services Division
Fis SYS Spcc V AWCOl6GME CrelYs
Accounllng SeCUOIl
AcelR Supp
UnllSupv AWCOl91MH Gnun - Acdll Tcch II AWC0171MH f> IcAulcy
Acell! Tech II AWC02"" AAN Tholll""_ B
AcdR Tcch II AWCO: J22AAN Foley
- Purchasing Section -
lJu}' cr 11 hWCOI03MN SurfllcQ
l IIUIJIOIl rlcsourcc lJivlsloll
I\ SO I AWC02fi7AI\ r; Trill
Per!! Tech AWeU; JUfiAAl1 U'l.. ouRhlln
~ OHICE or:
AlJMINISHI/\ liVE SEnVICES
A' 1" lllll1~ clor · AWCU: Jfi" AIIJ;; SecolHlo
Admv Seey II AWCU212AAN Huckley
~ iiiiollllniiOilljirocessillY ,
A, ll1Iv A9" lll Aweo1: l3AI\ N YnlY
Info I'roc Spcc II AWCU213MN felix
1100
MANAGEMENr INFOnMA11011
SYSTEM OIVISIOI~
EUl' MRr II I\ WCOIB2MR Vocnnl
r- Admv Secy I hWCOI02MH leWD
Sys\ enfSuPPolt Proces sing
Imp Sur ' fech Srcc II AWCO I" MAE Posl
- 1mI' Sup ' l'l'cll Spcc II 1\ WC02: J IAI\ F, / llIIlnR'
Rill' l'rog'Anlyal II I\ WC02IliMU Smith, II
I~ Ul' 1' lnB Allnlyall AWC032! JME Ynnkoylch
Operallon Section
-
EIJI' Comp OprSupyr IAWC021MAJo: LnUundr
EUl' COlOr Opr III AWC03G: JI\ AH Vocnnl
Atlmlnls\ rallve Sys\ em Sec\ lol1
Iml' Sya I'roJ Ldr AWCU21Gf1AE l'cclcly · Conrl
_ Iml' I'roglAnlyal III AWeO) 3 I I\ I\ R Vol I'
I~ IJI' l'r~ R'Anlyalll AWeOI73i\ AII / l~ drnon, 1
BUl'I'/ UglAnlyalll Awe0230AAH Helmcr
Geographic Inlo/ Sclenllllc Seclion
- I~/} J' Sya 1', tlJ lAIr 1\ WCO: lO · 1 MF: Rlnrldon
BUl'l'rogtAnlyslll AWCOllliAAN Mnnugn
nemote Sensing
"-
IWI'l'roglAnlyallJl AWC03JGME Elcler
--. I
Aweu 172MI~ Wc(, er
DutlycllJlvlsloll [ SUII
J'nrkln9011
llIyns
SchlYnrlr. (. Ii)
Vncnnl
Aellllv SUI'P SupYIAWC017" MN
Glk Tn 11111 AWC02G9AeH
Urlycrs AWeOJ29l\ AH
hWCOJ2! JUAN
~
I m
1/ Limilcd
§ Fcdcrnl
' 8 U\ lbuLlI~ clcd
• Exclllplcd l'osilioll
/ leyhccl 02101/ 92 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
LEGAL DIVISION
In the Department of Water Resources ( DWR), A. R. S. 45- 104. G authorizes the Director to employ
legal counsel to represent the Department with legal matters before other departments and agencies of
ArIzona.
Currently the DWR Legal Division Is composed of 11 positions: one Chief LegaJ Counsel, one
Assistant Chief LegaJ Counsel, three Attorney IVs, three Attorney Ills, and three Legal Secretary lis as shown
In exhibit 29, DWR - Legal Division, Present Organizational Structure.
The Chief Legal Counsel advises with the Director and writes decisions on the results of legal
hearings conducted on DWR Issues.
The Assistant Chief LegaJ Counsel Is the lead attorney at the Internal " In process review" meetings
to review permit applications, and also assists In supervision of the legal staff. The balance of time for this
position Is spent writing Rules, and working with another attorney on groundwater recharge issues.
Activities of the other attorneys Include enforcement, annual report, auditing of annual reports,
litigation, review of internal agency matters, writing legislative packages, and drafting Rules.
exhibit 30, DWR - Legal Staff Annual Work Activity, shows the hours of work and the work
activity conducted by the LegaJ Division. Drafting Rules is an activity that In nearly all other agencies
originates within the programs. Rules may or may not be reviewed by a " legal" person before they enter
the formal rule making process. The Rules drafting could be more decentralized to the programs within
DWR, reducing the workload on the legal staff.
Some of the work activities listed on exhibit 30, DWR - LegaJ Staff Annual Work AetIvIty Estimate,
have asterisks beside them. These activities, In addition to those already rnentloned ( Rules), will not require
the sarne effort In the future as they are currently noted. For example. the 418 hours of conservation rewrite
has been compl~ ed.
DWR - 60
By combining these marked hours with the calculated sUrplus hours on the same Exhibit, there
Is a showing of approximately 2,181 hours of non- essentlal work activity, which translates to 1.3 FTE.
We recommend the following:
• Eliminate the vacant Attorney III position ( see exhibit 31, DWR - Legal DMsion ­Proposed).
The benefits to be realized from this recommendation include:
• Cost avoidance of one vacant Grade 22 Attorney III at $ 53,000 ( State funds).
IRJ] Iernt! qriun:
Implementation time frame can be accomplished in three months through the following steps:
• Action required to initiate termination
• Assignment of work actMtles.
DWR - 61
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES
DWR -- LEGAL DIVISION
PRESENT ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
OIRECllJl •
BCWlD C() lIfISSllli I I I ljR
EXECllTM
CIl4I_ •
YICf-< HAI_ • SECRETAIlY •
llOARIl IEItlER •
llOARIl_ •
llOARIl t1EIIlER •
llOARIl t1EIIlER •
llOARIl I£ MllfR • I I I llOARIl IEItlER • Nll. JC
llOARIl_ •
llOARIl_ • JIf'alIlATJ( JI
llOARIl_ •
llOARIl IEItlER • IJ'FICfR m
llOARIl t1EIIlER •
llOARIl IEItlER •
llOARIl IEItlER • ,
I i
ljR SP£ C .\ SSISTAHT
ro OJlECllJl
tEW DIVlSllli , I , ljR LJIlRARUII ..
~ LEGAL CXUlSEL •
CHIef CXUlSEL .\ SST. • mgm l~: Ul
, ATTCIlNEY IY • ATTmNEY IY •
~ ATTmNEY 111 •
ATTCIlNEY 111 •
ATTCIlNEY 111 •
LEGAL SECRETAllY n
LEGAL SECRETAllY 11
LEGAL SECRETAllY 11
EXHIBIT 29
,
EXEI'PTED POSlTIQl
LIMITED
lNlUlGETED
( ffICE ( f EtfJlNEERltfJ
& MlJilllCATIIliS
DEI'IITY OIRECTCll •
AOI4JH. SECRETAllY 11
( fFICE ( f WATER IlAN, I(£ IENT
& Pt~ II « j
DEPUTY OIRECllJl •
AOI4IN. SECRETAllY II
( fFICE ( f . AJJM[ NISTRATI~
SERVICES
DEPUTY OIRECTClI •
AOI4IN. SECRETAllY n
EXHIBIT 30
DWR LEGAL STAFF ANNUAL WORK ACTIVITY ESTIMATE
( Excludes Chief and Assistant Chief Counsel)
Position Status Work Activity Hours Req'd Surplus Hours
Attorney IV .5 Enforcement Hrngs 192 hours
Audits 84 hours
Stipulation Consent
Orders 324 hours
Total: 600 hours 837.5 - 600
= 237.5 surplus
Attorney IV • 5 Written decisions 270 hours
Amended RuJes 84 hours
Litigation 415 hours
Total: 773 hours 837.5 - 773
= 74.5 surplus
Att'orney IV 1.0 * Conservation rewrite 418 hours
Administra. tive . review 565 hours
Drafting legislation 251 hours
Surface water cases 167 hours
• Rule making 251 hours
Total: 1,652 hours 1675 - 1652
= 23.0 surplus
Attorney IV 1.0 Chief, Enforcement 1,600 hours 1675 - 1600
= 75.0 surplus
Attorney III 1.0 Surface Water enforce. 72 hours
Groundwater enforce. 500 hours
RF? chargF? issues 335 hours
Legislat ion, draft 251 hours
* Rule package draft 251 hours
Total: 1,407 hours J1t.:.' U:"/ 7- c.:.: J. - 1404
= 266.0 surplus
AttornF? Y III 1.0 Assured water supply 251 hours
* Rules, legal questions 335 hours
Review intern. Agency 251 hours
Enforcement 502 hours
* Environmental ( PWQ) 335 hours
Total: 1,675 hours no surplus
Attorney III 1.0 Vacant [ Hours not counted]
TOTALS:
* Additional potential savings = 1,255;
{ 5 FTES X 1675 annual hours = 8,375 hours)
DWR - 63
7,709 hours 666 surplus hI'S
combined surplus: 1,921 hours
[ C:\ SLIM\ DWR\ DWRWRKHR. KB1J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
ARIZONA DEPARTNENT OF WATER RESOURCES
DWR -- LEGAL DIVISION
PROPOSED ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
DIRECllIl •
InIJlIl C( JIlISSI~ I I I llR
ElIECUTI'Il!
IWlOAtR1D-_' 8: IR.- • SECRETARY •
IlOARD_.
IlOARD_.
IlOARD_.
IlOARD_. I ~
IlOARD_.
IlOARD_. PlaIC
IlOARD_. IhRJlItATIaI
1IlOlAORDA_ RD_.• lJ'FICBl III ==: IlOARD_.
, I • III SPEC ASSISTANT
lODIAECltIl
LE(# i orVISI~
, I , Ill LIIIRARIAN r
~ L~ L.
A IY • 1.5)
ATllJIEY IY. .5)
ATllJIEY IV •
I
An( Jll£'( IY •
ATllR£ Y III •
~
An( Jll£'( III •
LEGAL SECRETARY II
LEGAL SECRETARY II
LEGAl SECRETARY II
EXHIBIT 31
• EXfIf'TED POSITIaI
•• IlHINlWlTGEDfTED
( fFiCE ( f £ r « iItfERIr « i
& WOOrCAll( lfi
OEPUTY DIRECTal •
ADIIIN. SECRETARY II
( fFICE ( f WATER IWWfIEHT
& PLN'Hr « i
OEPUTY DlRECllIl •
ADIIIN. SECRETARY II
OEPUTY DIRECTal •
fOl litIS
IlY
Y DIRECTal
JWlCATIaI
OOlF
IPlANNING
( fFKE ( f AOIlIHISTRATIVE
SERVICES
OEPUTY DIRECllIl •
ADIIIN • SECRETARY II