Other
An Audit Report on Groundwater Conservation Districts: Phase One
August 2000
Report Number 00-037
Overall Conclusion
Of the nine local groundwater conservation districts (districts) audited, six are operational. By implementing their management plans, these districts are making good-faith efforts to conserve and protect the groundwater they administer. However, two of the districts are not operational. The State has no assurances that these two districts appropriately manage their groundwater. The last district's status could not be determined because its two objectives are not auditable. Sixty-one percent of total statewide water used comes from groundwater. Most of this groundwater is administered by the 63 districts currently established in the State. The State Auditor's Office, the Water Development Board, and the Natural Resource Conservation Commission provide limited oversight of districts as mandated in Texas Water Code, Chapter 36. Local districts are the State's preferred method of groundwater management. Like the districts themselves, their management plans are unique. We have assessed only the implementation, not the quality of these plans.
Key Facts and Findings
- The six operational districts are Barton Springs/Edwards Aquifer Conservation District, Headwaters Underground Water Conservation District (UWCD), High Plains UWCD, Irion County Water Conservation District (WCD), Lipan-Kickapoo WCD, and Mesa UWCD. These districts are also in full or partial compliance with audited statutory requirements.
-
The two non-operational districts are Hudspeth County Underground Water District and Live Oak UWCD. These districts are also not in compliance with one or more of the audited statutory requirements.
-
We could not determine whether the final district, Sterling County UWCD, is operational. We did note that the district is not in compliance with one of the statutory requirements audited.
-
Across districts, the main areas of noncompliance or partial compliance with statute are development of certain policies and budget components.
- Two of the nine districts' management plans lack goals or objectives to manage the majority of their programs or activities.
Contact the SAO about this report.
Download the PDF version of this report. (.pdf) (HTML)
Please Note: The map files are large in size. If Adobe Reader has trouble opening in your browser, please save the files to your hard drive before viewing.