5. Projected Water Management Strategies (checklist item9) from the 2017 Texas State Water Plan (SWP) Part 2 of the 2-part package is the groundwater availability model (GAM) repoft for the District (checklist items 3 through 5). The District should have received, or will receive, this repoft from the Groundwater Availability Modeling Section. Questions about the GAM can be directed to Dr. Shirley Wade, shirley.wade@twdb.texas.gov, (512) 936-0883. DTSCMTMER; The data presented in this report represents the most up-to-date WUS and 2017 SWP data available as of 8115/2019. Although it does not happen frequently, either of these datasets are subject to change pending the availability of more accurate WUS data or an amendment to the 2017 SWP. District personnel must review these datasets and correct any discrepancies in order to ensure approval of their groundwater management plan. The WUS dataset can be verified at this web address: h ttp ://www. twdb. texas. gou/wa te rpl a n n i n g/wa te ruses u ruey/es tim a tes/ The 2017 SWP dataset can be verified by contacting Sabrina Anderson (sabrina. anderson@twdb.texas. gov or 5 1 2-936-0886). The values presented in the data tables of this report are county-based. In cases where groundwater conservation districts cover only a portion of one or more counties the data values are modified with an apportioning multiplier to create new values that more accurately represent conditions within district boundaries. The multiplier used in the following formula is a land area ratio: (datavaluex(landareaof districtincounty llandareaof county)). Fortwoof thefourSWP tables (Projected Sudace Water Supplies and Projected Water Demands) only the county-wide water user group (WUG) data values (county other, manufacturing, steam electric power, irrigation, mining and livestock) are modified using the multiplier. WUG values for municipalities, water supply corporations, and utility districts are not apportioned; instead, their full values are retained when they are located within the districf and eliminated when they are located outside (we ask each district to identify these entity locations). The remaining SWP tables (Projected Water Supply Needs and Projected Water Management Strategies) are not modified because district-specific values are not statutorily required. Each district needs only "consider" the county values in these tables. In the WUS table every category of water use (including municipal) is apportioned. Staff determined that breaking down the annual municipal values into individual WUGs was too complex. TWDB recognizes that the apportioning formula used is not perfect but it is the best available process with respect to time and staffing constrainb. If a district believes it has data that is more accurate it can add those data to the plan with an explanation of how the data were derived. Apportioning percentages that the TWDB used are listed above each applicable table. For additional questions regarding thi

Bastiat Liberty & Property Rights Analysis

This docket item is classified as NEUTRAL (0.0 Score Impact). Routine administrative reports, monthly accounts payable/disbursement registers, minutes approvals, and procedural motions are logged for public transparency but carry zero weight in calculating an official's Roll-Call Freedom Score.