Oklahoma comprehensive water plan report on the Lower Arkansas Watershed Planning Region

              DRAFT
1
Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Report on the
Lower Arkansas
Watershed Planning Region
Oklahoma Water Resources Board1
Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Report on the
Lower Arkansas Watershed Planning RegionStatewide OCWP Watershed Planning Region
and Basin Delineation
Contents
Introduction 1
Regional Overview 1
Regional Summary 2
Synopsis . 2
Water Resources & Limitations . 2
Water Supply Options . 4
Water Supply . 6
Physical Water Availability 6
Surface Water Resources . 6
Groundwater Resources 9
Permit Availability . 11
Water Quality 12
Water Demand . 20
Public Water Providers . 22
OCWP Provider Survey 35
Water Supply Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Limitations Analysis 40
Primary Options 40
Demand Management . 40
Out-of-Basin Supplies 40
Reservoir Use . 40
Increasing Reliance on Surface Water 41
Increasing Reliance on Groundwater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Expanded Options . 41
Expanded Conservation Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Artificial Aquifer Recharge . 41
Marginal Quality Water Sources . 41
Potential Reservoir Development . 41
Basin Data & Analysis 45
Basin 44 45
Basin 45 55
Basin 46 65
Basin 47 75
Basin 82 85
Glossary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
Lower Arkansas Regional Report 1
Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
The Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan (OCWP) was originally developed in 1980 and last updated in 1995. With the specific objective of establishing a reliable supply of water for state users throughout at least the next 50 years, the current update represents the most ambitious and intensive water planning effort ever undertaken by the state. The 2012 OCWP Update is guided by two ultimate goals:
Provide safe and dependable water supply 1. for all Oklahomans while improving the economy and protecting the environment.
Provide information so that water 2. providers, policy makers, and water users can make informed decisions concerning the use and management of Oklahoma’s water resources.
In accordance with the goals, the 2012 OCWP Update has been developed under an innovative parallel-path approach: inclusive and dynamic public participation to build sound water policy complemented by detailed technical evaluations.
Also unique to this update are studies conducted according to specific geographic boundaries (watersheds) rather than political boundaries (counties). This new strategy involved subdividing the state into 82 surface water basins for water supply availability analysis (see the OCWP Physical Water Supply Availability Report). Existing watershed boundaries were revised to include a United States Geological Survey (USGS) stream gage at or near the basin outlet (downstream boundary), where practical. To facilitate consideration of regional supply challenges and potential solutions, basins were aggregated into 13 distinct Watershed Planning Regions.
This Watershed Planning Region Report, one of 13 such documents prepared for the 2012 OCWP Update, presents elements of technical studies pertinent to the Lower Arkansas Region. Each regional report presents information from both a regional and multiple basin perspective, including water supply/demand analysis results, forecasted water supply shortages, potential supply solutions and alternatives, and supporting technical information.
Integral to the development of these reports was the Oklahoma H2O model, a sophisticated database and geographic information system (GIS) based analysis tool created to compare projected water demand to physical supplies in each of the 82 OCWP basins statewide. Recognizing that water planning is not a static process but rather a dynamic one, this versatile tool can be updated over time as new supply and demand data become available, and can be used to evaluate a variety of “what-if” scenarios at the basin level, such as a change in supply sources, demand, new reservoirs, and various other policy management scenarios.
Introduction
The primary factors in the determination of reliable future water supplies are physical supplies, water rights, water quality, and infrastructure. Gaps and depletions occur when demand exceeds supply, and can be attributed to physical supply, water rights, infrastructure, or water quality constraints.
As a key foundation of OCWP technical work, a computer-based analysis tool, “Oklahoma H2O,” was created to compare projected demands with physical supplies for each basin to identify areas of potential water shortages.
Primary inputs to the model include demand projections for each decade through 2060, founded on widely-accepted methods and peer review of inputs and results by state and federal agency staff, industry representatives, and stakeholder groups for each demand sector. Surface water supply data for each of the 82 basins used 58 years of publicly-available daily streamflow gage data collected by the USGS. Groundwater resources were characterized using previously-developed assessments of groundwater aquifer storage and recharge rates.
Additional information gained during the development of the 2012 Update is provided in various OCWP supplemental reports. Assessments of statewide physical water availability and potential shortages are documented in the OCWP Physical Water Supply Availability Report. Statewide water demand projection methods and results are presented in the Water Demand Forecast Report. Permitting availability was evaluated based on the OWRB’s administrative protocol and documented in the Water Supply Permit Availability Report. All supporting documentation can be found on the OWRB’s website.
Regional Overview
The Lower Arkansas Watershed Planning Region includes five basins (numbered 44-47 and 82 for reference). The region encompasses 4,657 square miles in eastern Oklahoma, spanning all of Adair and Sequoyah Counties and parts of Delaware, Cherokee, Muskogee, Haskell, LeFlore, McIntosh, Pittsburg, and Latimer Counties.
The region includes portions of the Ouachita and Ozark Plateaus physiography provinces. The region’s terrain varies from the forested mountains to the rolling river basin plains of the Arkansas River and foothills of the Ozark Mountains, including the dissected plateaus of the Boston Mountains, which rise up to 800 feet above the surrounding terrain. The region is largely oak-hickory forest and cross timbers with large areas of pasture land and other agricultural land in the flatter, southern portion.
The region’s climate is mild with annual mean temperatures varying from 59°F to 61°F. Annual average precipitation ranges from 45 inches in the north and west to 54 inches in the south and east; May is the wettest month. Annual evaporation ranges from 56 to 46 inches per year along the Arkansas border in the east.
The largest cities in the region include Muskogee (2010 population 40,324), Tahlequah (17,239), Sallisaw (9,025), and Poteau (8,424).
The greatest demand is from Thermoelectric Power water use. By 2060, this region is projected to have a total demand of 319,700 acre-feet per year (AFY), an increase of approximately 118,000 AFY (58%) from 2010.2 Lower Arkansas Regional Report
Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Lower Arkansas Regional Summary
The Lower Arkansas Region accounts for about 11% of the state’s total water demand. The largest demand sectors are Thermoelectric Power (54% of the region’s overall demand), Municipal and Industrial (14%), and Crop Irrigation (10%).
Water Resources & Limitations
Surface Water
Surface water supplies are used to meet 91% of the Lower Arkansas Region’s total water demand. The region is supplied by four major rivers: the Arkansas River, Canadian River, Illinois River, and Poteau River. The rivers and creeks in the region can have infrequent periods of low flow due to seasonal and long-term trends in precipitation. Large reservoirs have been built to provide water for public water supply, flood control, power generation and recreation. Large reservoirs in the Lower Arkansas Region which were constructed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers include Tenkiller Ferry Lake and Wister Lake, which provide public water supply and other purposes, and Robert S. Kerr Reservoir and Webbers Falls Reservoir, which provide navigation, hydropower, and recreation but do not provide municipal and industrial water supplies. There are six other smaller lakes in the region that have normal pools ranging from 1,300 AF to 3,300 AF. All basins in the region are expected to have available surface water for new permits to meet local demand through 2060. Relative to other regions in the state, surface water quality in the region is considered good, except for Basin 44 which is rated poor. Multiple rivers, creeks, and lakes are impaired for Agricultural use (Crop Irrigation demand sector) and Public and Private Water Supply (Municipal and Industrial demand sector) due to high levels of total dissolved solids (TDS), sulfate, and chlorophyll-a. These impairments are scheduled to be addressed through the Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) process, but the use of these supplies may be limited in the interim. .
Alluvial Groundwater
Alluvial groundwater is used to meet 7% of the demand in the region. The majority of currently permitted alluvial groundwater withdrawals in the region are from the Arkansas River aquifer in Basins 46 and 47. Domestic users do not require permits and are assumed to be obtaining supplies from the Arkansas River aquifer, the Canadian River aquifer and minor alluvial aquifers throughout the region to meet their needs. If alluvial groundwater continues to supply a similar portion of demand in the future, storage depletions from these aquifers are likely to occur in summer, fall, and winter. Minor aquifers typically tend to have smaller yields; therefore, site-specific information should be considered before long-term or large-scale use of these sources. The availability of permits is not expected to constrain the use of alluvial
Synopsis
The Lower Arkansas Region relies primarily on surface water supplies (including   reservoirs) and to a lesser extent alluvial and bedrock groundwater.
It is anticipated that water users in the region will continue to rely on these sources to   meet future demand.
Surface water supplies may be insufficient to meet demand in basins by 2060 in   Basin 44, by 2040 in Basin 46, and by 2020 in Basin 47.
Alluvial groundwater storage depletions may occur by 2050 in Basin 45, by 2040 in   Basin 46, and by 2020 in Basin 47. Bedrock groundwater storage depletions may occur by 2060 in Basin 44 and by 2020 in Basin 45. These depletions may lead to higher pumping costs, and potential changes to well yields or water quality.
To reduce the risk of adverse impacts on water supplies, it is recommended that gaps   and storage depletions be decreased where economically feasible.
Additional conservation could reduce or eliminate surface water gaps, alluvial   groundwater storage depletions, and bedrock groundwater storage depletions.
Developing additional groundwater supplies and/or developing new reservoirs, could   mitigate surface water gaps without major impacts to groundwater storage.
No basins within the region have been identified as water availability “hot spots,”   areas where severe deficits or gaps in supply are anticipated. (See “Regional and Statewide Opportunities and Solutions” in the OCWP Executive Report.)
Current and Projected Regional Water Demand
Current Water Demand:
201,890 acre-feet/year (11% of state total)
Largest Demand Sector:
Thermoelectric Power (54% of regional total)
Current Supply Sources:
91% SW
6% Alluvial GW
2% Bedrock GW
Projected Demand (2060):
319,650 acre-feet/year
Growth (2010-2060):
117,760 acre-feet/year (58%)
Lower Arkansas Region Demand SummaryDRAFT
Lower Arkansas Regional Report 3
Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Water Supply Limitations
Lower Arkansas Region
groundwater supplies to meet local demand through 2060.
Bedrock Groundwater
Bedrock groundwater is used to meet 2% of the demand in the region. Currently permitted and projected withdrawals are primarily from the Boone minor aquifer, Kiamichi minor aquifer, and other minor aquifers. Since minor aquifers often have smaller yields, site-specific information should be considered before long-term or large-scale use. The availability of permits is not expected to constrain the use of bedrock groundwater supplies to meet local demand through 2060. There are no significant groundwater quality issues in the basin .
Water Supply Limitations
Surface water limitations were based on physical availability, water supply availability for new permits, and water quality. Groundwater limitations were based on the total size and rate of storage depletions in major aquifers. Groundwater permits are not expected to constrain the use of groundwater through 2060, and insufficient statewide groundwater quality data are available to compare basins based on groundwater quality. Basins with the most significant water supply challenges statewide are indicated by a red box. The remaining basins with surface water gaps or groundwater storage depletions were considered to have potential limitations (yellow). Basins without gaps and storage depletions were considered to have minimal limitations (green). Detailed explanations of each basin’s supplies are provided in individual basin summaries and supporting data and analysis.4 Lower Arkansas Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Effectiveness of water supply options in each basin in the Lower Arkansas Region. This evaluation was based upon results of physical water supply availability analysis, existing infrastructure, and other basin-specific factors.
Water Supply Option Effectiveness
Lower Arkansas Region
Water Supply Options
To quantify physical surface water gaps and groundwater storage depletions through 2060, use of local supplies was assumed to continue in the current (2010) proportions. Surface water supplies and reservoirs are expected to continue to supply the majority of demand in the Lower Arkansas Region. Basins and users that rely on surface water are projected to have physical surface water supply shortages (gaps) in the future, except where major reservoirs can provide adequate supply. Alluvial and bedrock groundwater storage depletions are also projected in the future. The development of the Arkansas River and Canadian alluvial groundwater supplies should be considered a short- to long-term water supply option. However, additional long-term water supplies should be considered for both surface water and groundwater users.
Water conservation could aid in reducing projected gaps and groundwater storage depletions or delaying the need for additional infrastructure. Moderately expanded conservation activities, primarily increased conservation by public water suppliers and from increased irrigation crop efficiency, could reduce gaps and storage depletions and eliminate surface water gaps in Basin 44. Further reductions could occur from substantially expanded conservation activities. These measures would require a shift from crops with high water demand (e.g., corn for grain and forage crops) to low water demand crops such as sorghum for grain or wheat for grain, along with increased irrigation efficiency and increased public water supplier conservation. Due to the low probability of low flows, temporary drought management measures may be an effective water supply option.
New reservoirs and expanded use of existing reservoirs could enhance the dependability of surface water supplies and eliminate gaps. Major reservoirs in the Lower Arkansas Region have little unpermitted yield, but may meet future demand of existing permit holders. Out-of-basin supplies from existing or potential reservoir sites could also provide additional supplies to mitigate the region’s groundwater gaps. The OCWP Reservoir Viability Study, which evaluated the potential for reservoirs throughout the state, identified four potentially viable reservoir sites in the Lower Arkansas Watershed Planning Region. However, due to the distance to dependable supplies and substantial supplies in the region, this water supply option may not be cost-effective for some users.
The projected growth in surface water could instead be supplied in part by increased use of major alluvial groundwater aquifers, which would result in minimal increases in projected groundwater storage depletions. However, these aquifers are not widespread in the region and alluvial users would still be susceptible to the adverse effects of groundwater storage depletions.Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Lower Arkansas Regional Report 5
6 Lower Arkansas Regional Report
Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Reservoirs
Lower Arkansas Region
Name
Primary Basin Number
Reservoir Owner/ Operator
Year Built
Purposes1
Normal Pool Storage
Water Supply
Irrigation
Water Quality
Permitted Withdrawals
Remaining Yield to be Permitted
Storage
Yield
Storage
Yield
Storage
Yield
AF
AF
AFY
AF
AFY
AF
AFY
AFY
AFY
Brushy
46
State of Oklahoma, Leased
1964
WS, FC, R
3,258
---
---
0
0
0
0
3,000
No Known Yield
John Wells
46
City of Stigler
1936
WS, R
1,352
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
Lloyd Church
45
City of Wilburton
1964
WS, FC, R
3,025
---
1,523
0
0
0
0
1,185
338
New Spiro
44
City of Spiro
1960
WS, R
2,160
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
Robert S Kerr
46
USACE
1970
N, HP, R
525,700
0
0
0
0
0
0
34,623
No Known Yield
Stillwell City
46
City of Stillwell
1965
WS, FC, R
3,110
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
Tenkiller Ferry
82
USACE
1953
FC, HP
654,100
25,400
29,792
0
0
0
0
156,645
0
Wayne Wallace
45
State of Oklahoma
1969
R, FC
1,746
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
Webbers Falls
47
USACE
1970
N, HP
170,100
0
0
0
0
0
0
11,202
No Known Yield
Wister
45
USACE
1949
FC, WS, LF, C
47,414
14,000
31,364
0
0
0
0
31,530
0
1 The “Purposes” represent the use(s), as authorized by the funding entity or dam owner(s), for the reservoir storage when constructed.
WS = Water Supply, R = Recreation, FC = Flood Control, IR = Irrigation, WQ = Water Quality, FW = Fish & Wildlife, LF = Low Flow Regulation, N = Navigation
No known information is annotated as “---”
Water Supply
Physical Water Availability
Surface Water Resources
Surface water has historically accounted for about 91% of the supply used to meet demand in the Lower Arkansas Region. The region’s major streams include the Poteau River, Illinois River, Canadian River, and Arkansas River. Flows in the Canadian and Arkansas Rivers are generally abundant with occasional low-flow conditions. Flows in the Illinois and Poteau Rivers are reliable but not as large, with periodic no-flow conditions in the Poteau. The Arkansas River mainstem flows to the southeast through the Lower Arkansas Region and into the state of Arkansas. The Arkansas River and tributaries occupy Basins 82, 46 and 47 in the Lower Arkansas Region. The Poteau River (100 miles long in Oklahoma) begins in Arkansas and enters Oklahoma shortly thereafter in the southern portion of the Lower Arkansas Region. It is tributary to the Arkansas River on the border of Oklahoma and Arkansas (it is not tributary to Basin 46). The Poteau River and its tributaries are located in Basins 44 and 45. The Illinois River enters Oklahoma from Arkansas in the northern portion of the region in Basin 82. It flows to the southwest to the Arkansas River. The Illinois River and its tributaries occupy Basin 82. The Canadian River (30 miles long in the eastern part of the Lower Arkansas Region) is a major tributary to the Arkansas River with its confluence in Basin 47.
Existing reservoirs in the region increase the dependability of surface water supply for many public water systems and other users. There are four major federal reservoirs in the region constructed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Tenkiller Ferry Lake in Basin 82 was constructed on the Illinois River in 1953 for the purposes of flood control and hydroelectric power. Water supply is not an authorized purpose even though the conservation pool is comprised of 25,400 AFY of water supply storage for a dependable yield of 29,800 AFY. The water is fully allocated to numerous entities whose systems extend into several counties. Wister Lake in Basin 45 was built on the Poteau River in 1945 to provide flood control, water supply, and low flow augmentation. The lake yields 31,400 AFY which is permitted primarily to AES Shady Point for power generation, City of Heavener, and Poteau Valley Improvement Authority, a regional entity that wholesales water to numerous water providers throughout LeFlore County and extending into Haskell County. Webbers Fall Reservoir in Basin 47 and Robert S. Kerr Reservoir in Basin 46 were constructed on the Arkansas River in 1970 as key components of the McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Navigation System. Both were authorized for navigation and power generation purposes, and Robert S. Kerr includes recreation purposes as well. Other significant lakes in the region include Lloyd Church, Stilwell City, John Wells, New Spiro, and Brushy, all of which include public water supply, and Wayne Wallace, which provides flood control and recreation. There are many other small Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) and municipal and privately owned lakes in the region that provide water for public water supply, agricultural water supply, flood control and recreation.
As important sources of surface water in Oklahoma, reservoirs and lakes help provide dependable water supply storage, especially when streams and rivers experience periods of low seasonal flow or drought.Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Lower Arkansas Regional Report 7
Surface Water Resources
Lower Arkansas Region
Major reservoirs in the Lower Arkansas Region include Tenkiller Ferry, Wister, Robert S. Kerr, and Webbers Falls. Reservoirs may serve multiple purposes, such as water supply, irrigation, recreation, hydropower generation, and flood control. Reservoirs designed for multiple purposes typically possess a specific volume of water storage assigned for each purpose.8 Lower Arkansas Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Water Supply Availability Analysis
For OCWP physical water supply availability analysis, water supplies were divided into three categories: surface water, alluvial aquifers, and bedrock aquifers. Physically available surface water refers to water currently in streams, rivers, lakes, and reservoirs.
The range of historical surface water availability, including droughts, is well-represented in the Oklahoma H2O tool by 58 years of monthly streamflow data (1950 to 2007) recorded by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Therefore, measured streamflow, which reflects current natural and human created conditions (runoff, diversions and use of water, and impoundments and reservoirs), is used to represent the physical water that may be available to meet projected demand.
The estimated average and minimum annual streamflow in 2060 were determined based on historic surface water flow measurements and projected baseline 2060 demand (see Water Demand section). The amount of streamflow in 2060 may vary from basin-level values, due to local variations in demands and local availability of supply sources. The estimated surface water supplies include changes in historical streamflow due to increased upstream demand, return flows, and increases in out-of-basin supplies from existing infrastructure. Permitting, water quality, infrastructure, non-consumptive demand, and potential climate change implications are considered in separate OCWP analyses. Past reservoir operations are reflected and accounted for in the measured historical streamflow downstream of a reservoir. For this analysis, streamflow was adjusted to reflect interstate compact provisions in accordance with existing administrative protocol.
The amount of water a reservoir can provide from storage is referred to as its yield. The yield is considered the maximum amount of water a reservoir can dependably supply during critical drought periods. OCWP physical availability analyses considered the unused yield of existing reservoirs. Future potential reservoir storage was considered as a water supply option.
Groundwater supplies are quantified by the amount of water that the aquifer holds (“stored” water) and the rate of aquifer recharge. In Oklahoma, recharge to aquifers is generally from precipitation that falls on the aquifer and percolates to the water table. In some cases, where the altitude of the water table is below the altitude of the stream-water surface, surface water can seep into the aquifer.
For this analysis, alluvial aquifers are defined as aquifers comprised of river alluvium and terrace deposits, occurring along rivers and streams and consisting of unconsolidated deposits of sand, silt, and clay. Alluvial aquifers are generally thinner (less than 200 feet thick) than bedrock aquifers, feature shallow water tables, and are exposed at the land surface, where precipitation can readily percolate to the water table. Alluvial aquifers are considered to be more hydrologically connected with streams than are bedrock aquifers and are therefore treated separately.
Bedrock aquifers consist of consolidated (solid) or partially consolidated rocks, such as sandstone, limestone, dolomite, and gypsum. Most bedrock aquifers in Oklahoma are exposed at land surface, either entirely or in part. Recharge from precipitation is limited in areas where bedrock aquifers are not exposed.
For both alluvial and bedrock aquifers, this analysis was used to predict potential groundwater depletions based on the difference between the groundwater demand and recharge rate. While potential storage depletions do not affect the permit availability of water, it is important to understand the extent of these depletions.
Estimated Annual Streamflow in 2060
Lower Arkansas Region
Streamflow Statistic
Basins
44
45
46
47
82
AFY
Average Annual Flow
1,261,900
1,185,100
17,952,300
15,393,700
783,000
Minimum Annual Flow
171,200
160,600
2,722,400
2,362,000
25,300
Annual streamflow in 2060 was estimated using historical gaged flow and projections of increased surface water use from 2010 to 2060.
Surface Water Flows (1950-2007)
Lower Arkansas Region
Surface water sources supply about 91% of the demand in the Lower Arkansas Region. While the region’s average physical surface water supply exceeds projected surface water demand in the region, gaps can occur due to seasonal, long-term hydrologic (drought), or localized variability in surface water flows. Several large reservoirs have been constructed to reduce the impacts of drier periods on surface water users.Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Lower Arkansas Regional Report 9
Groundwater Resources
Lower Arkansas Region
Name
Type
Class1
Portion of Region Overlaying Aquifer
Recharge
Rate
Current Groundwater Rights
Aquifer Storage in Region
Equal Proportionate Share
Groundwater Available for New Permits
Percent
Inch/Yr
AFY
AF
AFY/Acre
AFY
Arkansas River
Alluvial
Major
6%
5.0
23,100
269,000
temporary 2.0
321,200
Canadian River
Alluvial
Major
3%
2.0
2,700
57,000
temporary 2.0
159,900
Roubidoux
Bedrock
Major
42%
2.5
0
18,462,000
temporary 2.0
2,511,900
Boone
Bedrock
Minor
23%
10.5
4,100
11,912,000
temporary 2.0
1,368,400
Kiamichi
Bedrock
Minor
32%
1.1
2,600
1,279,000
temporary 2.0
1,897,000
Northeastern Oklahoma Pennsylvanian
Bedrock
Minor
23%
2.1
500
1,547,000
temporary 2.0
1,341,400
Pennsylvanian
Bedrock
Minor
13%
1.1
1,800
6,491,000
temporary 2.0
783,700
Non-Delineated Groundwater Source
Alluvial
Minor
800
Non-Delineated Groundwater Source
Bedrock
Minor
0
1 Bedrock aquifers with typical yields greater than 50 gpm and alluvial aquifers with typical yields greater than 150 gpm are considered major.underlies a portion of Basins 44, 46, 47, and 82.
The Canadian River alluvial aquifer consists of clay and silt downgrading to fine- to coarse-grained sand with lenses of basal gravel. Formation thicknesses range from 20 to 40 feet in the alluvium with a maximum of 50 feet in the terrace deposits. Yields in the alluvium range between 100 and 400 gpm and between 50 and 100 gpm in the terrace. The water is a very hard calcium bicarbonate type with TDS concentrations of approximately 1,000 mg/l. However, the water is generally suitable for most municipal and industrial uses. The aquifer underlies a portion of Basin 47.
Minor bedrock aquifers in the region include the Boone, Kiamichi, Northeastern Oklahoma Pennsylvanian, and Pennsylvanian aquifers. Minor aquifers may have a significant amount of water in storage and high recharge rates, but generally low yields of less than 50 gpm per well. Groundwater from minor aquifers is an important source of water for domestic and stock water use for individuals in outlying areas not served by rural water systems, but
Groundwater Resources
The Roubidoux major bedrock aquifer underlies the northeastern portion of the Lower Arkansas Watershed Planning Region. There are two major alluvial aquifers, the Arkansas River and Canadian River, located in the central portion of the region.
The Roubidoux aquifer consists primarily of dolomite with some interbedded sandstone. The aquifer thickness ranges from zero to greater than 2,000 feet, with average thickness estimated at 1,000 feet. Well yields vary from less than 25 gallons per minute (gpm) to more than 1,000 gpm, with shallower well yields ranging from less than 10 gpm to more than 300 gpm. Water quality in the aquifer is mixed. In some areas concentrations of chloride and naturally occurring radioactivity may exceed drinking water
Withdrawing groundwater in quantities exceeding the amount of recharge to the aquifer may result in reduced aquifer storage. Therefore, both storage and recharge were considered in determining groundwater availability.standards, and sodium chloride (salt) water is present along the western and southern edges and at depth; water in other areas is suitable for most purposes. Contaminated water from abandoned mines has the potential to degrade the water quality in the vicinity of Miami and Picher. The Roubidoux bedrock aquifer underlies Basins 46, 47, and 82.
Wells in the Arkansas River alluvium deposits range from 200 to 500 gpm while wells in the terrace deposits range from 100 to 200 gpm. Formation deposits are commonly 50 to 100 feet in depth with saturated thickness averaging 25 to 75 feet. The formation consists of clays, sand, silt, and gravels. Hardness is the major water quality problem and TDS values are usually less than 500 mg/L. The water is generally suitable for most M&I uses, although heavy pumping can cause chloride intrusion into the formation. The aquifer
Areas without delineated aquifers may have groundwater present. However, specific quantities, yields, and water quality in these areas are currently unknown.may have insufficient yields for high volume users.
Permits to withdraw groundwater from aquifers (groundwater basins) where the maximum annual yield has not been set are “temporary” permits that allocate 2 AFY/acre. The temporary permit allocation is not based on storage, discharge or recharge amounts, but on a legislative (statute) estimate of maximum needs of most landowners to ensure sufficient availability of groundwater in advance of completed and approved aquifer studies. As a result, the estimated amount of Groundwater Available for New Permits may exceed the estimated aquifer storage amount. For aquifers (groundwater basins) where the maximum annual yield has been determined (with initial storage volumes estimated), updated estimates of amounts in storage were calculated based on actual reported use of groundwater instead of simulated usage from all lands.10 Lower Arkansas Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Groundwater Resources
Lower Arkansas Region
The Roubidoux is the major bedrock aquifer in the Lower Arkansas Region. Major alluvial aquifers include the Arkansas River and Canadian River alluvium and terrace deposits. Major bedrock aquifers are defined as those that have an average water well yield of at least 50 gpm; major alluvial aquifers are those that yield, on average, at least 150 gpm.Lower Arkansas Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 11
Groundwater Permit Availability
Lower Arkansas Region
Projections indicate that the use of groundwater to meet in-basin demand is not expected to be limited by the availability of permits through 2060 in the Lower Arkansas Region.
Permit Availability
For the OCWP water availability analysis, “permit availability” pertains to the amount of water that could be made available for withdrawals under permits issued in accordance with Oklahoma water law.
Projections indicate that there will be surface water available for new permits through 2060 in all basins. Water users throughout the region need to consider the rights of existing major reservoirs. For groundwater, equal proportionate shares in the Lower Arkansas Region range from 1 acre-foot per year (AFY) per acre to 2 AFY per acre. The use of groundwater to meet in-basin demand is not expected to be limited by the availability of permits through 2060 in the Lower Arkansas Region.
If water authorized by a stream water right is not put to beneficial use within the specified time, the OWRB may reduce or cancel the unused amount and return the water to the public domain for appropriation to others.
Surface Water Permit Availability
Lower Arkansas Region
Projections indicate that there will be surface water available for new permits through 2060 in all basins in the Lower Arkansas Region.
Water Use Permitting in Oklahoma
Oklahoma stream water laws are based on riparian and prior appropriation doctrines. Riparian rights to a reasonable use of water, in addition to domestic use, are not subject to permitting or oversight by the OWRB. An appropriative right to stream water is based on the prior appropriation doctrine, which is often described as “first in time, first in right.” If a water shortage occurs, the diverter with the older appropriative water right will have first right among other appropriative right holders to divert the available water up to the authorized amount.
The permit availability of surface water is based on the average annual flow in the basin, the amount of water that flows past the proposed diversion point, and existing water uses upstream and downstream in the basin. The permit availability of surface water at the outlet of each basin in the region was estimated through OCWP technical analyses. The current allocated use for each basin is also noted to give an indication of the portion of the average annual streamflow used by existing water right holders. A site-specific analysis is conducted before issuing a permit.
Groundwater permit availability is generally based on the amount of land owned or leased that overlies a specific aquifer (groundwater basin). State law provides for the OWRB to conduct hydrologic investigations of groundwater basins and to determine amounts of water that may be withdrawn. After a hydrologic investigation has been conducted on a groundwater basin, the OWRB determines the maximum annual yield of the basin. Based on the “equal proportionate share”—defined as the portion of the maximum annual yield of water from a groundwater basin that is allocated to each acre of land overlying the basin—regular permits are issued to holders of existing temporary permits and to new permit applicants. Equal proportionate shares have yet to be determined on many aquifers in the state. For those aquifers, “temporary” permits are granted to users allocating two acre-feet of water per acre of land per year. When the equal proportionate share and maximum annual yield are approved by the OWRB, all temporary permits overlying the studied basin are converted to regular permits at the new approved allocation rate. As with stream water, a groundwater permit grants only the right to withdraw water; it does not ensure yield.12 Lower Arkansas Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Ecoregions
Lower Arkansas Region
The Lower Arkansas Planning Region is diverse, with significant influence from five major North American ecoregions. Water quality is highly influenced by both geology and land use practices and is generally good to excellent depending on drainage and location.
Water Quality
Water quality of the Lower Arkansas Watershed Planning Region is exemplified by the lower Arkansas River watershed and numerous minor/major water supply/flood control reservoirs. It is an ecologically diverse region with significant influence from five major North American ecoregions, including the Ozark Highlands (Ozarks), Boston Mountains (BMtns), Central Irregular Plains (CIP), Arkansas Valley (AV), and Ouachita Mountains (OMtns).
The Osage Cuestas of the CIP intersects along the region’s west central edge and is drained by the middle Arkansas into Webbers Falls Reservoir. The area is an irregular plain, underlain by sandstone, shale, and limestone, and dominated by rangeland/cropland, interspersed with native tall grass prairies and extensive but disconnected oak-hickory forest. Typically, turbid deep streams meander in broad, low gradient valleys with incised banks. Habitat can be good but may be choked by mud and silt. Salinity is high with mean conductivity of 850 μS/cm on the Arkansas River and range of 300-1,460 at Webbers Falls. The Arkansas is hyper-eutrophic with total phosphorus (TP) and nitrogen (TN) means of 0.15 and 1.16 ppm. Webbers Falls is eutrophic and potentially co-limited for TP and TN. Water clarity is average with a mean turbidity of 21 NTU on the Arkansas and mean Secchi depth of 37 cm at Webbers Falls. Ecological diversity varies depending on habitat degradation and sedimentation and is typically lower than ecoregions to the east but higher than the west.
The northern quarter of the region is covered by Ozark Highlands represented mostly by the Dissected Springfield Plateau-Elk River Hills (Dissected-Elk Hills), with minor Springfield Plateau influence. The Ozarks are a dissected plateau underlain by flat, cherty limestone, shale, and dolomite intersected by numerous level valleys. With much greater relief than the plains ecoregions to the west, it is much less rugged than the Boston/Ouachita Mountains to the south. Sub-surface flow is karst and numerous springs feed perennial streams. Dense oak-hickory-pine forests cover uplands while native grasslands, hay fields, and pasture land are common in the low-lying valleys. Poultry feeding operations and intense sub-urbanization have become prevalent, negatively affecting water quality. Increased bank erosion degrades streams creating gravel bars and braided systems with unstable pool habitats and extensive sub-surface flow. Despite extensive riparian disturbance, habitat degradation, and increasing nutrient loads, ecological diversity remains high with several species of fish distinctive to the Ozarks. Exemplary streams include the Illinois River and tributaries—Caney, Flint, and Sager Creeks and the Barren Fork River. Reservoirs include upper Tenkiller Ferry and Stilwell City Lake. Salinity is low to moderate with mean conductivity ranging from 195 (Barren Fork) to 445 μS/cm (Sager Creek) while lakes range from 200-400 μS/cm. Streams are typically oligotrophic to mesotrophic but contain relatively high nutrient concentrations for moderate gradient streams. The TP and TN means range from 0.07 and less than 1.50 (Barren Fork/Caney Creek) to 1.16 and over 8.00 ppm (Sager Creek). Lakes are phosphorus limited and eutrophic to nearly hyper-eutrophic. Water clarity is excellent with stream turbidity means of 1-6 NTU and lake Secchi depth means of 100-160 cm.
South of the Ozarks and west of the CIP, the Lower Boston Mountains create a significant uplift through the central portion of the planning region. Underlain by sandstone/shale are deeply dissected with moderately high, loosely defined ridges and broad valleys, along with areas covered by oak-hickory forests and
Lake Trophic Status
A lake’s trophic state, essentially a measure of its biological productivity, is a major determinant of water quality.
Oligotrophic: Low primary productivity and/or low nutrient levels.
Mesotrophic: Moderate primary productivity with moderate nutrient levels.
Eutrophic: High primary productivity and nutrient rich.
Hypereutrophic: Excessive primary productivity and excessive nutrients.Lower Arkansas Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 13
Water Quality Standards Implementation
Lower Arkansas Region
BUMP monitoring sites and streams with TMDL studies completed or underway. The Oklahoma Conservation Commission has begun watershed implementation projects on the Illinois River and Peacheater Creek. These projects address water quality impairments and demonstrate successful partnerships to improve water quality in the region. The ODEQ has completed a TMDL studies on Shell Branch. Several additional TMDLs are underway or scheduled, including an EPA Region 6 effort to complete a TMDL studies on the Illinois River.
Water Quality Standards and Implementation
The Oklahoma Water Quality Standards (OWQS) are the cornerstone of the state’s water quality management programs. The OWQS are a set of rules promulgated under the federal Clean Water Act and state statutes, designed to maintain and protect the quality of the state’s waters. The OWQS designate beneficial uses for streams, lakes and other bodies of surface water, and for groundwater that has a mean concentration of Total Dissolved Solids of 10,000 milligrams per liter or less. Beneficial uses are the activities for which a waterbody can be used based on physical, chemical, and biological characteristics as well as geographic setting, scenic quality, and economic considerations. Beneficial uses include categories such as Fish and Wildlife Propagation, Public and Private Water Supply, Primary (or Secondary) Body Contact Recreation, Agriculture, and Aesthetics.
The OWQS also contain standards for maintaining and protecting these uses. The purpose of the OWQS is to promote and protect as many beneficial uses as are attainable and to assure that degradation of existing quality of waters of the state does not occur.
The OWQS are applicable to all activities which may affect the water quality of waters of the state, and are to be utilized by all state environmental agencies in implementing their programs to protect water quality. Some examples of these implementation programs are: permits for point source (e.g. municipal and industrial) discharges into waters of the state; authorizations for waste disposal from concentrated animal feeding operations; regulation of runoff from nonpoint sources; and corrective actions to clean up polluted waters.
woodlands with native grasses, hay fields, and pasture land interspersed. Sub-surface and spring flow influence streams become a series of disconnected pools in summer. Stream habitat is diverse with cobble/gravel dominated stream beds but contain more silt and sand. Representative streams include Lee and Little Lee Creeks to the east and the Lower Neosho/Arkansas watersheds to the west as well as lakes, including Lower Tenkiller Ferry, Brushy Creek, and Greenleaf. Stream and lake salinity typically range from 85-250 μS/cm but locally can be as high as 600 μS/cm. Stream nutrient concentrations vary from moderate in the west to very low in the east but are typically lower than surrounding ecoregions. Little Lee and Lee Creeks are oligotrophic/mesotrophic with TP and TN means of 0.01-0.03 ppm and 0.27-0.31 ppm. Lakes are phosphorus limited with lower Tenkiller classified as mesotrophic and Brushy Creek and Greenleaf as eutrophic. Water clarity is excellent with stream turbidity means of 3-5 NTU and lake Secchi depth means from 100-220 cm. Though slightly less diverse than the Ozarks, the area boasts high ecological diversity with habitat degradation and sedimentation affecting some areas.
Lying below the BMtns and CIP, the Arkansas Valley covers nearly the entire southern half of the region, dominated mostly by the Arkansas Valley Plains and interspersed with the Scattered High Ridges and Mountains to the south and the Arkansas River floodplain below Webbers Falls Reservoir. As a transitional area, the AV is a diverse ecoregion with a mixture of broad valley plains, floodplains, hills, terraces, and mountains. Prairie grasslands and oak savannas, along with pasture land and croplands, dominate the valleys while the floodplains and terraces are characterized by bottomland hardwood forests. Areas of relief have a mixture of oak-hickory and oak-hickory-pine forests. Streams lie in narrow to broad meandering channels with a mixture of soft and hard substrates and varying depths. Small streams are disconnected pools during the summer but overall have exceptional habitat. Ecological diversity is extremely high with fish diversity higher than any location 14 Lower Arkansas Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Water Quality Impairments
Lower Arkansas Region
Surface waters in this region have eutrophication impacts, particularly water supply reservoirs. Aesthetic impacts to surface waters in this region have occurred due to excessive levels of nutrients.
in the state. Diversity increases on a west to east gradient. The Arkansas Valley Plain is a mixture of grassland/savanna and forest/woodland. Characteristic watersheds include the Canadian River in the west and the Poteau River to the east, as well as John Wells, New Spiro, and Wister Lakes. Salinity gradient is west (Canadian = 480 μS/cm) to east (Poteau = 140 μS/cm). Lakes are typically below 150 μS/cm. Typical streams are mesotrophic with TP and TN means less than 0.08 and 0.70 ppm. However, the Poteau River below Lake Wister is hyper-eutrophic with TP and TN means of 0.13 and 1.07 ppm. Lakes are phosphorus limited but vary in nutrient quality. John Wells is mesotrophic with low nutrient concentrations. Both TP and TN concentrations increase at New Spiro and Wister and become hyper-eutrophic. Water clarity is excellent on the upper Poteau (14 NTU) and Canadian River (7 NTU) to poor on the lower Poteau (56 NTU). Lake clarity is average (Wister = 41 cm) to excellent (John Wells = 180 cm).
The Arkansas River floodplain lies along the lower Arkansas below Webbers Falls and includes the R.S. Kerr Reservoir. Salinity is high with conductivities greater than 600 μS/cm, and clarity is good (Arkansas = 27 NTU) to poor (RS Kerr = 26 cm). The area is eutrophic with TP and TN concentrations of approximately 0.13 and 1.00 ppm. Continuous turbidity and habitat/hydrologic modification have decreased much of the natural ecological diversity. The Scattered High Ridges and Mountains lie in a disconnected area along the southern portion of the AV ecoregion. The area is more rugged than the valley plain with a mixture of upland forests and savannas characterized by Lake Wayne Wallace. Salinity is low with conductivity less than 60 μS/cm and clarity is excellent in streams while average in Wayne Wallace (76 cm). Nutrient concentrations are lower. Wayne Wallace has TP and TN values below 0.05 and 0.60 ppm and is mesotrophic.
The southern edge of the region intersects the northern edge of the Fourche Mountains ecoregion. The area has long, rugged, steep ridges with narrow to broad shale valleys.
Water Quality Impairments
A waterbody is considered to be impaired when its quality does not meet the standards prescribed for its beneficial uses. For example, impairment of the Public and Private Water Supply beneficial use means the use of the waterbody as a drinking water supply is hindered. Impairment of the Agricultural use means the use of the waterbody for livestock watering, irrigation or other agricultural uses is hindered. Impairments can exist for other uses such as Fish and Wildlife Propagation or Recreation.
The Beneficial Use Monitoring Program (BUMP), established in 1998 to document and quantify impairments of assigned beneficial uses of the state’s lakes and streams, provides information for supporting and updating the OWQS and prioritizing pollution control programs. A set of rules known as “use support assessment protocols” is also used to determine whether beneficial uses of waterbodies are being supported.
In an individual waterbody, after impairments have been identified, a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) study is conducted to establish the sources of impairments—whether from point sources (discharges) or non-point sources (runoff). The study will then determine the amount of reduction necessary to meet the applicable water quality standards in that waterbody and allocate loads among the various contributors of pollution.
For more detailed review of water quality conditions, see the most recent versions of the OWRB’s BUMP Report, and the Oklahoma Integrated Water Quality Assessment Report, a comprehensive assessment of water quality in Oklahoma’s streams and lakes required by the federal Clean Water Act and developed by the ODEQ.Lower Arkansas Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 15
Natural vegetation is mostly oak-hickory-pine forests with intervening native grasslands with pasture land/hay fields. Streams have excellent habitat with low to high gradients but may be turbid with disconnected pools during the summer. The area is characterized by Fourche-Maline Creek (more characteristic of the Arkansas Valley than the Ouachita Mountains), Lloyd Church Reservoir to the west, and Cedar Lake to the east. Salinity is low at less than 150 μS/cm, increasing on a west to east gradient. Nutrient values along the Fourche and at Wayne Wallace are low (TP < 0.08 and TN < 0.80 ppm) and are mesotrophic. Conversely, Cedar is eutrophic with TP values greater 1.0 ppm; it is possibly co-limited for TN and TP. Clarity is good on Fourche (27 NTU) and at Lloyd Church (64 cm) but excellent in Cedar Lake (162 cm). Ecological diversity is very high, indicative of Arkansas Valley influence.
The region is underlain by several major and minor aquifers. Water from the Canadian and Arkansas River alluvial and terrace deposits yield water that is generally hard and typically of a calcium magnesium or sodium/calcium bicarbonate type. In some areas, drinking water standards are exceeded. The alluvium and terrace aquifers are highly vulnerable to contamination from surface activities due to high porosities and permeability and shallow water tables. However, alluvial water is generally suitable for most purposes. The major bedrock aquifer of the region is the Roubidoux. Part of the Ozark aquifer, the Roubidoux underlies the Ozark Highlands ecoregion. Water is hard with generally low mineral content. However, in the far western portion of the aquifer, concentrations of chloride, sulfate and fluoride exceed drinking water standards as well as naturally occurring radioactivity in some areas. Large concentrations of gross-alpha radioactivity and radium-226 occur near the western edge and appear to be correlated with chloride concentrations. The aquifer is a confined aquifer and is not vulnerable to contamination from surface activities.
Surface Waters with Designated Beneficial Use for Agriculture
Lower Arkansas Region
Surface Waters with Designated Beneficial Use for Public/Private Water Supply
Lower Arkansas Region16 Lower Arkansas Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Special OWQS provisions in place to protect surface waters. Because Warner Lake, Stilwell Lake, Stigler Lake, Camp Creek Lake and Garrison Creek Lake are public water supply reservoirs and have relatively small watersheds, they could potentially benefit from SWS designations. This designation could provide protection from new or increased loading from point sources in the watershed. This additional protection would also provide limits for algae (chlorophyll-a) that can cause taste and odor problems and increased treatment costs.
Surface Water Protection Areas
Lower Arkansas Region
Surface Water Protection
The Oklahoma Water Quality Standards (OWQS) provide protection for surface waters in many ways.
Appendix B Areas are designated in the OWQS as containing waters of recreational and/or ecological significance. Discharges to waterbodies may be limited in these areas.
Source Water Protection Areas are derived from the state’s Source Water Protection Program, which analyzes existing and potential threats to the quality of public drinking water in Oklahoma.
The High Quality Waters designation in the OWQS refers to waters that exhibit water quality exceeding levels necessary to support the propagation of fishes, shellfishes, wildlife, and recreation in and on the water. This designation prohibits any new point source discharges or additional load or increased concentration of specified pollutants.
The Sensitive Water Supplies (SWS) designation applies to public and private water supplies possessing conditions making them more susceptible to pollution events, thus requiring additional protection. This designation restricts point source discharges in the watershed and institutes a 10 μg/L (micrograms per liter) chlorophyll-a criterion to protect against taste and odor problems and reduce water treatment costs.
Outstanding Resource Waters are those constituting outstanding resources or of exceptional recreational and/or ecological significance. This designation prohibits any new point source discharges or additional load or increased concentration of specified pollutants.
Waters designated as Scenic Rivers in Appendix A of the OWQS are protected through restrictions on point source discharges in the watershed. A 0.037 mg/L total phosphorus criterion is applied to all Scenic Rivers in Oklahoma.
Nutrient Limited Watersheds are those containing a waterbody with a designated beneficial use that is adversely affected by excess nutrients.Lower Arkansas Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 17
Groundwater Protection Areas
Lower Arkansas Region
Various types of protection are in place to prevent degradation of groundwater and levels of vulnerability. Groundwater quality in this region could benefit from more protection for the Boone aquifer, which has been identified by the OWRB as a “high” nutrient vulnerable aquifer, and the Arkansas River and Canadian River alluvial aquifers, which have been identified as “very high” nutrient vulnerable.
Groundwater Protection
The Oklahoma Water Quality Standards (OWQS) sets the criteria for protection of groundwater quality as follows: “If the concentration found in the test sample exceeds [detection limit], or if other substances in the groundwater are found in concentrations greater than those found in background conditions, that groundwater shall be deemed to be polluted and corrective action may be required.”
Wellhead Protection Areas are established by the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) to improve drinking water quality through the protection of groundwater supplies. The primary goal is to minimize the risk of pollution by limiting potential pollution-related activities on land around public water supplies.
Oil and Gas Production Special Requirement Areas, enacted to protect groundwater and/or surface water, can consist of specially lined drilling mud pits (to prevent leaks and spills) or tanks whose contents are removed upon completion of drilling activities; well set-back distances from streams and lakes; restrictions on fluids and chemicals; or other related protective measures.
Nutrient-Vulnerable Groundwater is a designation given to certain hydrogeologic basins that are designated by the OWRB as having high or very high vulnerability to contamination from surface sources of pollution. This designation can impact land application of manure for regulated agriculture facilities.
Class 1 Special Source Groundwaters are those of exceptional quality and particularly vulnerable to contamination. This classification includes groundwaters located underneath watersheds of Scenic Rivers, within OWQS Appendix B areas, or underneath wellhead or source water protection areas.
Appendix H Limited Areas of Groundwater are localized areas where quality is unsuitable for default beneficial uses due to natural conditions or irreversible human-induced pollution.
NOTE: Although the State of Oklahoma has a mature and successful surface water quality monitoring program, no comprehensive approach or plan to monitor the quality of the state’s groundwater resources has been developed.18 Lower Arkansas Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Water Quality Trends Study
As part of the 2012 OCWP Update, OWRB monitoring staff compiled more than ten years of Beneficial Use Monitoring Program (BUMP) data and other resources to initiate an ongoing statewide comprehensive analysis of surface water quality trends. Five parameters were selected for OCWP watershed planning region analysis—chlorophyll-a, conductivity, total nitrogen, total phosphorus, and turbidity.
Reservoir Trends: Water quality trends for reservoirs were analyzed for chlorophyll-a, conductivity, total nitrogen, total phosphorus, and turbidity at sixty-five (65) reservoirs across the state. Data sets were of various lengths, depending on the station’s period of record. The direction and magnitude of trends varies throughout the state and within regions. However, when considered statewide, the final trend analysis revealed several notable details.
Chlorophyll-a and nutrient concentrations continue to increase at a number • of lakes. The proportions of lakes exhibiting a significant upward trend were 42% for chlorophyll-a, 45% for total nitrogen, and 12% for total phosphorus.
Likewise, conductivity and turbidity have trended upward over time. Nearly • 28% of lakes show a significant upward trend in turbidity, while nearly 45% demonstrate a significant upward trend for conductivity.
Stream Trends: Water quality trends for streams were analyzed for conductivity, total nitrogen, total phosphorus, and turbidity at sixty (60) river stations across the state. Data sets were of various lengths, depending on the station’s period of record, but generally, data were divided into historical and recent datasets, and analyzed separately and as a whole. The direction and magnitude of trends varies throughout the state and within regions. However, when considered statewide, the final trend analysis revealed several notable details.
Total nitrogen and phosphorus are very different when comparing period of • record to more recent data. When considering the entire period of record, approximately 80% of stations showed a downward trend in nutrients. However, if only the most recent data (approximately 10 years) are considered, the percentage of stations with a downward trend decreases to 13% for nitrogen and 30% for phosphorus. The drop is accounted for in stations with either significant upward trends or no detectable trend.
Likewise, general turbidity trends have changed over time. Over the entire • period of record, approximately 60% of stations demonstrated a significant upward trend. However, more recently, that proportion has dropped to less than 10%.
Similarly, general conductivity trends have changed over time, albeit less • dramatically. Over the entire period of record, approximately 45% of stations demonstrated a significant upward trend. However, more recently, that proportion has dropped to less than 30%.
Typical Impact of Trends Study Parameters
Chlorophyll-a is a measure of algae growth. When algae growth increases, there is an increased likelihood of taste and odor problems in drinking water as well as aesthetic issues.
Conductivity is a measure of the ability of water to pass electrical current. In water, conductivity is affected by the presence of inorganic dissolved solids, such as chloride, nitrate, sulfate, and phosphate anions (ions that carry a negative charge) or sodium, magnesium, calcium, iron, and aluminum cations (ions that carry a positive charge). Conductivity in streams and rivers is heavily dependent upon regional geology and discharges. High specific conductance indicates high concentrations of dissolved solids, which can affect the suitability of water for domestic, industrial, agricultural and other uses. At higher conductivity levels, drinking water may have an unpleasant taste or odor or may even cause gastrointestinal distress. High concentration may also cause deterioration of plumbing fixtures and appliances. Relatively expensive water treatment processes, such as reverse osmosis, are required to remove excessive dissolved solids from water. Concerning agriculture, most crops cannot survive if the salinity of the water is too high.
Total Nitrogen is a measure of all dissolved and suspended nitrogen in a water sample. It includes kjeldahl nitrogen (ammonia + organic), nitrate and nitrite nitrogen. It is naturally abundant in the environment and is a key element necessary for growth of plants and animals. Excess nitrogen from polluting sources can lead to significant water quality problems, including harmful algal blooms, hypoxia and declines in wildlife and its habitat.
Phosphorus is one of the key elements necessary for growth of plants and animals. Excess nitrogen and phosphorus lead to significant water quality problems, including harmful algal blooms, hypoxia, and declines in wildlife and its habitat. Increases in total phosphorus can lead to excessive growth of algae, which can increase taste and odor problems in drinking water as well as increased costs for treatment.
Turbidity refers to the clarity of water. The greater the amount of total suspended solids (TSS) in the water, the murkier it appears and the higher the measured turbidity. Increases in turbidity can increase treatment costs and have negative effects on aquatic communities by reducing light penetration.Lower Arkansas Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 19
Stream Water Quality Trends
Lower Arkansas Region
Site
Flint Creek
near Kansas
Fourche-Maline Creek near Red Oak
Illinois River
near Watts
Illinois River near Tahlequah
Lee Creek
near Short
Poteau River near Heavener
Sager Creek near West Siloam Springs
Parameter
All Data Trend (1975-1996, 1997-2009)1
Recent Trend (1997-2009)
All Data Trend (1975-1996, 1998-2009)1
Recent Trend (1998-2009)
All Data Trend (1969-1988, 1988-2009)1
Recent Trend (1988-2009)
All Data Trend (1975-1988, 1988-2009)1
Recent Trend (1988-2009)
All Data Trend (1976-1981, 1995-2009)1
Recent Trend (1995-2009)
All Data Trend (1992-2009)1
Recent Trend (1992-2009)
All Data Trend (1997-2009)1
Recent Trend (1997-2009)
Conductivity (us/cm)
NT
NT
NT
NT
Total Nitrogen (mg/L)
NT
NT
NT
NT
NT
NT
NT
NT
Total Phosphorus (mg/L)
Turbidity (NTU)
NT
NT
NT
NT
NT
NT
NT
NT
Increasing Trend Decreasing Trend NT = No significant trend detectedTrend magnitude and statistical confidence levels vary for each site. Site-specific information can be obtained from the OWRB Water Quality Division.
1Date ranges for analyzed data represent the earliest site visit date and may not be representative of all parameters.
Notable concerns in the Lower Arkansas Region are:
Significant upward trend for total nitrogen and phosphorus on Fourche-Maline Creek•
Significant upward trend for total phosphorus on Sager Creek•
Reservoir Water Quality Trends
Lower Arkansas Region
Site
New Spiro Lake
Robert S. Kerr Reservoir
Tenkiller Ferry Lake
Wister Lake
Parameter
(1995-2006)
(1996-2008)
(1985-2006)
(1974-2009)
Chlorophyll-a (mg/m3)
NT
NT
Conductivity (us/cm)
NT
Total Nitrogen (mg/L)
NT
NT
NT
Total Phosphorus (mg/L)
NT
NT
NT
Turbidity (NTU)
NT
NT
NT
NT
Increasing Trend Decreasing Trend NT = No significant trend detectedTrend magnitude and statistical confidence levels vary for each site. Site-specific information can be obtained from the OWRB Water Quality Division.
A notable concern in the Lower Arkansas Region is:
Significant upward trends for chlorophyll-a on New Spiro and Wister reservoirs• 20 Lower Arkansas Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Total 2060 Water Demand by Sector and Basin
(Percent of Total Basin Demand)
Lower Arkansas Region
Projected water demand by sector. Thermoelectric Power is expected to remain the largest demand sector in the region, accounting for 59% of the total regional demand in 2060.
Water Demand
The Lower Arkansas Region’s water needs account for about 11% of the total statewide demand. Regional demand will increase by 58% (117,760 AFY) from 2010 to 2060. The majority of the demand and growth in demand over this period will be in the Thermoelectric Power sector.
Thermoelectric Power demand is expected to remain the largest demand sector in the region, accounting for 59% of the 2060 demand. The AES Shady Point plant and the Oklahoma Gas and Electric Company’s Muskogee plant are the major users of water for thermoelectric power generation in the region. Currently, 99% of the demand from this sector is supplied by surface water and 1% by alluvial groundwater.
Municipal and Industrial demand is projected to account for approximately 14% of the region’s 2060 demand. Currently, 98% of the demand from this sector is supplied by surface water, about 1% by bedrock groundwater, and 1% by alluvial groundwater.
Crop Irrigation demand is expected to account for 10% of the 2060 demand. Currently, 64% of the demand from this sector is supplied by surface water, 26% by alluvial groundwater, and 9% by bedrock groundwater. Predominant irrigated crops in the Lower Arkansas Region include corn, pasture grasses, and soybeans.
Self Supplied Industrial demand in the region is projected to account for 8% of the 2060 demand. Currently, 97% of the demand from this sector is supplied by surface water and 3% by alluvial groundwater.
Oil and Gas demand is projected to account for approximately 6% of the 2060 demand. Currently, 98% of the demand from this sector is supplied by surface water and 2% by bedrock groundwater.
Livestock demand is projected to account for 2% of the 2060 demand. Currently, 63% of the demand from this sector is supplied by surface water, 22% by alluvial groundwater, and 15% by bedrock groundwater. Livestock use in the region is predominantly chicken, followed distantly by cattle for cow-calf production and horses.
Self Supplied Residential demand is projected to account for 1% of the 2060 demand. Currently, 98% of the demand from this sector is supplied by alluvial groundwater and 2% by bedrock groundwater.
Population and demand projection data developed specifically for OCWP analyses focus on retail customers for whom the system provides direct service. These estimates were generated from Oklahoma Department of Commerce population projections. In addition, the 2008 OCWP Provider Survey contributed critical information on water production and population serviced that was used to calculate per capita water use. Population for 2010 was estimated and may not reflect actual 2010 Census values. Exceptions to this methodology are noted.Lower Arkansas Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 21
The Lower Arkansas Region’s water needs account for about 11% of the total statewide demand. Regional demand will increase by 58% (117,760 AFY) from 2010 to 2060. The majority of the demand and growth in demand over this period will be in the Thermoelectric Power sector.
Water Demand
Water demand refers to the amount of water required to meet the needs of people, communities, industry, agriculture, and other users. Growth in water demand frequently corresponds to growth in population, agriculture, industry, or related economic activity. Demands have been projected from 2010 to 2060 in ten-year increments for seven distinct consumptive water demand sectors.
Water Demand Sectors
nThermoelectric Power: Thermoelectric power producing plants, using both self-supplied water and municipal-supplied water, are included in the thermoelectric power sector.
n Self Supplied Residential: Households on private wells that are not connected to a public water supply system are included in the SSR sector.
n Self Supplied Industrial: Demands from large industries that do not directly depend upon a public water supply system. Water use data and employment counts were included in this sector, when available.
n Oil and Gas: Oil and gas drilling and exploration activities, excluding water used at oil and gas refineries (typically categorized as self supplied industrial users), are included in the oil and gas sector.
n Municipal and Industrial: These demands represent water that is provided by public water systems to homes, businesses, and industries throughout Oklahoma, excluding water supplied to thermoelectric power plants.
n Livestock: Livestock demands were evaluated by livestock group (beef, poultry, etc.) based on the 2007 Agriculture Census.
n Crop Irrigation: Water demands for crop irrigation were estimated using the 2007 Agriculture Census data for irrigated acres by crop type and county. Crop irrigation requirements were obtained primarily from the Natural Resource Conservation Service Irrigation Guide Reports.
OCWP demands were not projected for non-consumptive or instream water uses, such as hydroelectric power generation, fish and wildlife, recreation and instream flow maintenance. Projections, which were augmented through user/stakeholder input, were based on standard methods using data specific to each sector and OCWP planning basin.
Projections were initially developed for each county in the state, then allocated to each of the 82 basins. To provide regional context, demands were aggregated by Watershed Planning Region. Water shortages were calculated at the basin level to more accurately determine areas where shortages may occur. Therefore, gaps, depletions, and options are presented in detail in the Basin Summaries and subsequent sections. Future demand projections were developed independent of available supply, water quality, or infrastructure considerations. The impacts of climate change, increased water use efficiency, conservation, and non-consumptive uses, such as hydropower, are presented in supplemental OCWP reports.
Present and future demands were applied to supply source categories to facilitate an evaluation of potential surface water gaps and alluvial and bedrock aquifer storage depletions at the basin level. For this baseline analysis, the proportion of each supply source used to meet future demands for each sector was held constant at the proportion established through current, active water use permit allocations. For example, if the crop irrigation sector in a basin currently uses 80% bedrock groundwater, then 80% of the projected future crop irrigation demand is assumed to use bedrock groundwater. Existing out-of-basin supplies are represented as surface water supplies in the receiving basin.
Total Water Demand by Sector
Lower Arkansas Region
Planning Horizon
Crop Irrigation
Livestock
Municipal & Industrial
Oil & Gas
Self Supplied Industrial
Self Supplied Residential
Thermoelectric Power
Total
AFY
2010
26,370
6,980
30,460
2,130
23,820
2,840
109,280
201,890
2020
27,320
7,090
33,070
4,160
23,840
3,170
121,910
220,570
2030
28,270
7,190
35,750
6,700
23,940
3,510
136,010
241,370
2040
29,220
7,290
38,440
9,870
24,270
3,840
151,730
264,670
2050
29,950
7,400
41,160
13,640
24,970
4,180
169,270
290,580
2060
31,120
7,500
43,960
18,020
25,670
4,530
188,840
319,650
Total Water Demand
by Sector
Lower Arkansas Region
Supply Sources Used to Meet
Current Demand (2010)
Lower Arkansas Region22 Lower Arkansas Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
There are more than 1,600 Oklahoma water systems permitted or regulated by the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ); 785 systems were analyzed in detail for the 2012 OCWP Update. The public systems selected for inclusion, which collectively supply approximately 94 percent of the state’s current population, consist of municipal or community water systems and rural water districts that were readily identifiable as non-profit, local governmental entities. This and other information provided in the OCWP will support provider-level planning by providing insight into future supply and infrastructure needs.
The Lower Arkansas Region includes 79 of the 785 public supply systems analyzed for the 2012 OCWP Update. The Public Water Providers map indicates the approximate service areas of these systems. (The map may not accurately represent existing service areas or legal boundaries. In addition, water systems often serve multiple counties and can extend into multiple planning basins and regions.)
In terms of 2010 population served (excluding provider-to-provider sales), the five largest systems in the region, in decreasing order, are Muskogee, Tahlequah PWA, Sequoyah County Water Association, Sallisaw, and Poteau PWA. These five systems provide service for approximately 40 percent of the population served by public water providers in the region.
Demands upon public water systems, which comprise the majority of the OCWP’s Municipal and Industrial (M&I) water demand sector, were analyzed at both the basin and provider level. Retail demand projections detailed in the Public Water Provider Demand Forecast table were developed for each of the OCWP providers in the region. These projections include estimated system losses, defined as water lost either during water production or distribution to residential homes and businesses. Retail demands do not include wholesaled water.
OCWP provider demand forecasts are not intended to supersede water demand forecasts developed by individual providers. OCWP analyses were made using a consistent methodology based on accepted data available on a statewide basis. Where available, provider-generated forecasts were also reviewed as part of this effort.
Public Water Providers
Lower Arkansas Region
Public Water Providers Lower Arkansas Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 23
Provider
SDWIS ID1
County
Retail Per Capita (GPD)2
Population Served
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
2060
ADAIR CO RWD #1 (CHERRY TREE)
OK3000104
Adair
148
2,097
2,445
2,793
3,141
3,497
3,854
ADAIR CO RWD #2
OK3000105
Adair
154
912
1,063
1,215
1,366
1,521
1,677
ADAIR CO RWD #3
OK3000106
Adair
70
3,984
4,645
5,307
5,968
6,644
7,323
ADAIR CO RWD #4
OK3000107
Adair
72
1,075
1,253
1,431
1,610
1,792
1,975
ADAIR CO RWD #5
OK1021770
Adair
212
708
825
943
1,060
1,180
1,301
ADAIR CO RWS & SWMD #6
OK2000145
Adair
75
28
33
38
42
47
52
ARKOMA
OK3004013
LeFlore
54
2,226
2,398
2,560
2,713
2,875
3,038
BOKOSHE PWA
OK3004012
LeFlore
74
462
500
529
558
596
625
BRAGGS WATER WORKS
OK2005104
Muskogee
78
1,061
1,095
1,129
1,163
1,197
1,197
BURNT CABIN RWD
OK1021763
Cherokee
193
283
326
367
410
451
493
CAMERON PWA
OK3004011
LeFlore
104
321
350
369
389
418
438
CHECOTAH
OK1020515
McIntosh
288
3,586
4,021
4,465
4,964
5,518
6,119
CHEROKEE CO RWD # 1 (FT GIBSON)
OK1021621
Cherokee
154
710
710
710
710
710
710
CHEROKEE CO RWD # 2 (KEYS)
OK1021711
Cherokee
70
1,564
1,797
2,027
2,260
2,486
2,719
CHEROKEE CO RWD #3 (GRANDVIEW)
OK4001117
Cherokee
73
4,072
4,678
5,275
5,882
6,471
7,076
CHEROKEE CO RWD # 7 (WELLING)
OK3001126
Cherokee
147
609
700
789
880
968
1,058
CHEROKEE CO RWD # 8 (BRIGGS)
OK3001118
Cherokee
325
420
483
544
607
667
730
CHEROKEE CO RWD #12
OK2001189
Cherokee
90
93
107
121
135
149
162
CHEROKEE CO RWD #13
OK1021721
Cherokee
66
2,625
3,016
3,401
3,792
4,172
4,562
CONSOLIDATED RWD #1 LEFLORE CO
OK3004040
LeFlore
148
1,838
1,982
2,110
2,238
2,367
2,502
EAST CENTRAL OKLA WATER AUTH
OK1021713
Sequoyah
80
1,232
1,274
1,312
1,344
1,378
1,410
FORT GIBSON
OK1021622
Muskogee
252
4,325
4,472
4,608
4,723
4,839
4,954
GANS UTIL AUTH
OK3006802
Sequoyah
69
642
725
781
837
921
977
GORE PWA
OK1021773
Sequoyah
117
1,859
2,054
2,250
2,426
2,622
2,817
HASKELL COUNTY WATER COMPANY
OK1020301
Haskell
128
6,029
6,833
7,679
8,574
9,463
10,444
HEAVENER UTILITY AUTH/PSG
OK1020101
LeFlore
110
3,320
3,571
3,804
4,036
4,268
4,510
KEOTA PWA
OK3003112
Haskell
79
531
603
674
755
827
917
LATIMER CO RWD #4
OK1020110
Latimer
68
526
550
579
612
645
684
LATIMER COUNTY RWD #1
OK3003904
Latimer
157
3,224
3,374
3,549
3,756
3,958
4,195
LATIMER RWD #3
OK3003908
Latimer
113
134
141
148
157
165
175
LEE CREEK RWD
OK3006820
Sequoyah
98
258
286
312
338
364
390
LEFLORE CO RWD # 1
OK3004003
LeFlore
91
1,757
1,894
2,016
2,139
2,261
2,391
LEFLORE CO RWD # 14
OK3004001
LeFlore
122
6,751
7,277
7,748
8,219
8,691
9,189
Public Water Providers/Retail Population Served (1 of 3)
Lower Arkansas Region24 Lower Arkansas Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Provider
SDWIS ID1
County
Retail Per Capita (GPD)2
Population Served
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
2060
LEFLORE CO RWD # 15
OK3004046
LeFlore
360
354
382
407
431
456
482
LEFLORE CO RWD # 2
OK3004007
LeFlore
99
3,677
3,963
4,220
4,477
4,733
5,005
LEFLORE CO RWD # 5
OK3004010
LeFlore
150
1,627
1,754
1,867
1,981
2,094
2,215
MCCURTAIN
OK3003101
Haskell
54
580
656
744
831
919
1,017
MCINTOSH CO RWD #1
OK3004916
McIntosh
40
357
400
444
493
549
608
MCINTOSH CO RWD #5
OK3004939
McIntosh
120
1,552
1,737
1,930
2,145
2,387
2,645
MCINTOSH CO RWD # 3 (VICTOR)
OK3004903
McIntosh
58
1,588
1,778
1,975
2,195
2,443
2,707
MCINTOSH CO RWD #7
OK3004920
McIntosh
142
207
232
257
286
318
353
MCINTOSH CO RWS & SWMD #2 (ONAPA)
OK1020535
McIntosh
66
985
1,102
1,225
1,361
1,515
1,679
MULDROW PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY
OK1020208
Sequoyah
132
3,204
3,556
3,880
4,195
4,519
4,843
MUSKOGEE
OK1021607
Muskogee
342
36,178
37,399
38,527
39,498
40,470
41,432
MUSKOGEE CO RWD # 1(OKTAHA)
OK3005106
Muskogee
83
376
399
410
422
433
444
MUSKOGEE CO RWD # 2(GOOSENECK)
OK3005102
Muskogee
107
1,008
1,042
1,073
1,100
1,127
1,154
MUSKOGEE CO RWD # 4
OK3005104
Muskogee
74
862
891
917
940
963
986
MUSKOGEE CO RWD # 5
OK3005107
Muskogee
98
4,016
4,151
4,275
4,382
4,490
4,597
MUSKOGEE CO RWD # 6
OK3005105
Muskogee
131
1,638
1,693
1,743
1,787
1,831
1,875
MUSKOGEE CO RWD # 7
OK3005103
Muskogee
97
1,723
1,781
1,834
1,880
1,927
1,973
MUSKOGEE CO RWD # 9
OK3005119
Muskogee
102
302
313
322
330
338
346
PANAMA PWA
OK3004016
LeFlore
200
1,391
1,499
1,596
1,693
1,790
1,893
PORUM PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY
OK1020302
Muskogee
91
731
756
778
798
817
837
POTEAU PWA
OK3004015
LeFlore
126
8,111
8,742
9,308
9,874
10,441
11,039
PVIA (WHOLESALER ONLY)
OK1020104
LeFlore
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
QUINTON
OK3006123
Pittsburg
74
1,083
1,132
1,181
1,230
1,290
1,349
Public Water Providers/Retail Population Served (2 of 3)
Lower Arkansas RegionLower Arkansas Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 25
Public Water Providers/Retail Population Served (3 of 3)
Lower Arkansas Region
Provider
SDWIS ID1
County
Retail Per Capita (GPD)2
Population Served
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
2060
RED OAK PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY
OK1020105
Latimer
88
587
606
646
685
724
763
ROLAND
OK1020212
Sequoyah
229
3,203
3,547
3,880
4,193
4,527
4,850
SALLISAW
OK1020206
Sequoyah
274
8,674
9,608
10,483
11,339
12,214
13,089
SEQUOYAH CO RWD #3
OK3006804
Sequoyah
208
1,074
1,190
1,299
1,405
1,513
1,622
SEQUOYAH CO RWD #4
OK3006809
Sequoyah
112
1,193
1,322
1,442
1,560
1,681
1,802
SEQUOYAH CO RWD #5
OK3006815
Sequoyah
54
2,478
2,747
2,997
3,242
3,492
3,744
SEQUOYAH CO RWD #7
OK3006806
Sequoyah
154
3,044
3,374
3,681
3,983
4,290
4,599
SEQUOYAH COUNTY WATER ASSOC
OK1020210
Sequoyah
175
14,715
16,309
17,795
19,251
20,736
22,228
SPIRO
OK1020106
LeFlore
91
2,293
2,476
2,640
2,804
2,958
3,132
SPIRO EAST RW
OK3004005
LeFlore
119
3,643
3,934
4,195
4,455
4,700
4,975
STIGLER
OK1020303
Haskell
232
3,013
3,408
3,832
4,274
4,727
5,208
STILWELL
OK1020205
Adair
455
3,462
4,028
4,604
5,179
5,764
6,357
TAHLEQUAH PWA
OK1021701
Cherokee
214
16,169
18,574
20,953
23,358
25,702
28,107
VIAN
OK3006812
Sequoyah
59
1,406
1,559
1,701
1,840
1,982
2,124
WARNER
OK1020409
Muskogee
134
1,452
1,502
1,541
1,581
1,621
1,661
WATER DIST INC
OK3004009
LeFlore
122
4,188
4,514
4,806
5,098
5,391
5,700
WATTS
OK3000108
Adair
100
1,156
1,344
1,531
1,719
1,906
2,125
WEST SILOAM SPRINGS
OK3002109
Delaware
100
920
1,054
1,188
1,322
1,474
1,625
WESTVILLE
OK3000109
Adair
111
1,885
2,197
2,520
2,832
3,155
3,477
WILBURTON
OK1020103
Latimer
128
3,061
3,201
3,361
3,551
3,751
3,971
WISTER
OK3004014
LeFlore
155
1,019
1,105
1,172
1,238
1,314
1,391
1 SDWIS - Safe Drinking Water Information System
2 RED ENTRY indicates data were taken from 2007 OWRB Water Rights Database. GPD=gallons per day.26 Lower Arkansas Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Provider
SDWIS ID1
County
Demand (AFY)
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
2060
ADAIR CO RWD #1 (CHERRY TREE)
OK3000104
Adair
347
404
462
520
579
638
ADAIR CO RWD #2
OK3000105
Adair
157
183
209
236
262
289
ADAIR CO RWD #3
OK3000106
Adair
313
365
417
469
522
575
ADAIR CO RWD #4
OK3000107
Adair
87
101
116
130
145
160
ADAIR CO RWD #5
OK1021770
Adair
168
196
224
252
280
309
ADAIR CO RWS & SWMD #6
OK2000145
Adair
2
3
3
4
4
4
ARKOMA
OK3004013
LeFlore
134
144
154
163
173
183
BOKOSHE PWA
OK3004012
LeFlore
38
42
44
46
50
52
BRAGGS WATER WORKS
OK2005104
Muskogee
93
96
98
101
104
104
BURNT CABIN RWD
OK1021763
Cherokee
61
70
79
88
97
106
CAMERON PWA
OK3004011
LeFlore
38
41
43
45
49
51
CHECOTAH
OK1020515
McIntosh
1,158
1,298
1,441
1,602
1,781
1,975
CHEROKEE CO RWD # 1 (FT GIBSON)
OK1021621
Cherokee
123
123
123
123
123
123
CHEROKEE CO RWD # 2 (KEYS)
OK1021711
Cherokee
123
141
159
177
195
213
CHEROKEE CO RWD #3 (GRANDVIEW)
OK4001117
Cherokee
335
385
434
484
533
583
CHEROKEE CO RWD # 7 (WELLING)
OK3001126
Cherokee
100
115
130
145
159
174
CHEROKEE CO RWD # 8 (BRIGGS)
OK3001118
Cherokee
153
176
198
221
243
266
CHEROKEE CO RWD #12
OK2001189
Cherokee
9
11
12
14
15
16
CHEROKEE CO RWD #13
OK1021721
Cherokee
194
223
251
280
308
337
CONSOLIDATED RWD #1 LEFLORE CO
OK3004040
LeFlore
305
329
350
371
392
415
EAST CENTRAL OKLA WATER AUTH
OK1021713
Sequoyah
111
114
118
121
124
127
FORT GIBSON
OK1021622
Muskogee
1,221
1,262
1,300
1,333
1,365
1,398
GANS UTIL AUTH
OK3006802
Sequoyah
49
56
60
65
71
75
GORE PWA
OK1021773
Sequoyah
243
268
294
317
343
368
HASKELL COUNTY WATER COMPANY
OK1020301
Haskell
864
979
1,100
1,228
1,356
1,496
HEAVENER UTILITY AUTH/PSG
OK1020101
LeFlore
409
440
469
497
526
556
KEOTA PWA
OK3003112
Haskell
47
53
59
66
73
81
LATIMER CO RWD #4
OK1020110
Latimer
40
42
44
47
49
52
LATIMER COUNTY RWD #1
OK3003904
Latimer
566
592
623
659
695
737
LATIMER RWD #3
OK3003908
Latimer
17
18
19
20
21
22
LEE CREEK RWD
OK3006820
Sequoyah
28
32
34
37
40
43
Public Water Provider Demand Forecast (1 of 3)
Lower Arkansas Region
Projections of Retail Water Demand
Each public water supply system has a “retail” demand, defined as the amount of water used by residential and non-residential customers within that provider’s service area. Public-supplied residential demand includes water provided to households for domestic uses both inside and outside the home. Non-residential demand includes customer uses at office buildings, shopping centers, industrial parks, schools, churches, hotels, and related locations served by a public water supply system. Retail demand doesn’t include wholesale water to other providers.
Municipal and Industrial (M&I) demand is driven by projected population growth and specific customer characteristics. Demand forecasts for each public system are estimated from average water use (in gallons per capita per day) multiplied by projected population. Oklahoma Department of Commerce 2002 population projections (unpublished special tabulation for the OWRB) were calibrated to 2007 Census estimates and used to establish population growth rates for cities, towns, and rural areas through 2060. Population growth rates were applied to 2007 population-served values for each provider to project future years’ service area (retail) populations.
The main source of data for per capita water use for each provider was the 2008 OCWP Provider Survey conducted by the OWRB in cooperation with the Oklahoma Rural Water Association and Oklahoma Municipal League. For each responding provider, data from the survey included population served, annual average daily demand, total water produced, wholesale purchases and sales between providers, and estimated system losses.
For missing or incomplete data, weighted average per capita demand was used for the provider’s county. In some cases, survey data were supplemented with data from the OWRB water rights database. Per capita supplier demands can vary over time due to precipitation and service area characteristics, such as commercial and industrial activity, tourism, or conservation measures. For the baseline demand projections described here, the per capita demand was held constant through each of the future planning year scenarios. OCWP estimates of potential reductions in demand from conservation measures are analyzed on a basin and regional level, but not for individual provider systems.Lower Arkansas Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 27
Provider
SDWIS ID1
County
Demand (AFY)
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
2060
LEFLORE CO RWD # 1
OK3004003
LeFlore
180
194
206
219
231
244
LEFLORE CO RWD # 14
OK3004001
LeFlore
921
993
1,057
1,121
1,186
1,254
LEFLORE CO RWD # 15
OK3004046
LeFlore
143
154
164
174
184
195
LEFLORE CO RWD # 2
OK3004007
LeFlore
407
439
467
496
524
554
LEFLORE CO RWD # 5
OK3004010
LeFlore
273
295
314
333
352
372
MCCURTAIN
OK3003101
Haskell
35
39
45
50
55
61
MCINTOSH CO RWD #1
OK3004916
McIntosh
16
18
20
22
25
27
MCINTOSH CO RWD # 3 (VICTOR)
OK3004903
McIntosh
103
115
128
143
159
176
MCINTOSH CO RWD #5
OK3004939
McIntosh
209
233
259
288
321
356
MCINTOSH CO RWD #7
OK3004920
McIntosh
33
37
41
45
50
56
MCINTOSH CO RWS & SWMD #2 (ONAPA)
OK1020535
McIntosh
72
81
90
100
112
124
MULDROW PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY
OK1020208
Sequoyah
475
527
575
622
670
718
MUSKOGEE
OK1021607
Muskogee
13,857
14,325
14,757
15,129
15,501
15,870
MUSKOGEE CO RWD # 1(OKTAHA)
OK3005106
Muskogee
35
37
38
39
40
41
MUSKOGEE CO RWD # 2(GOOSENECK)
OK3005102
Muskogee
121
125
129
132
135
138
MUSKOGEE CO RWD # 4
OK3005104
Muskogee
71
74
76
78
80
81
MUSKOGEE CO RWD # 5
OK3005107
Muskogee
440
455
468
480
492
504
MUSKOGEE CO RWD # 6
OK3005105
Muskogee
240
249
256
262
269
275
MUSKOGEE CO RWD # 7
OK3005103
Muskogee
187
193
199
204
209
214
PANAMA PWA
OK3004016
LeFlore
312
336
358
379
401
424
PORUM PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY
OK1020302
Muskogee
75
77
79
81
83
85
POTEAU PWA
OK3004015
LeFlore
1,144
1,233
1,313
1,393
1,473
1,558
PVIA (WHOLESALER ONLY)
OK1020104
LeFlore
0
0
0
0
0
0
QUINTON
OK3006123
Pittsburg
90
94
98
102
107
112
RED OAK PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY
OK1020105
Latimer
58
60
64
67
71
75
ROLAND
OK1020212
Sequoyah
822
910
995
1,076
1,161
1,244
SALLISAW
OK1020206
Sequoyah
2,660
2,947
3,215
3,478
3,746
4,015
SEQUOYAH CO RWD #3
OK3006804
Sequoyah
250
277
303
327
353
378
SEQUOYAH CO RWD #4
OK3006809
Sequoyah
149
165
180
195
210
225
SEQUOYAH CO RWD #5
OK3006815
Sequoyah
150
167
182
197
212
227
SEQUOYAH CO RWD #7
OK3006806
Sequoyah
526
583
636
688
741
795
SEQUOYAH COUNTY WATER ASSOC
OK1020210
Sequoyah
2,892
3,205
3,497
3,783
4,075
4,368
Public Water Provider Demand Forecast (2 of 3)
Lower Arkansas Region28 Lower Arkansas Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Public Water Provider Demand Forecast (3 of 3)
Lower Arkansas Region
Provider
SDWIS ID1
County
Demand (AFY)
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
2060
SPIRO
OK1020106
LeFlore
234
253
270
287
302
320
SPIRO EAST RW
OK3004005
LeFlore
486
525
559
594
627
663
STIGLER
OK1020303
Haskell
782
884
994
1,109
1,227
1,352
STILWELL
OK1020205
Adair
1,763
2,051
2,344
2,637
2,935
3,237
TAHLEQUAH PWA
OK1021701
Cherokee
3,881
4,458
5,029
5,607
6,169
6,747
VIAN
OK3006812
Sequoyah
93
104
113
122
132
141
WARNER
OK1020409
Muskogee
218
225
231
237
243
249
WATER DIST INC
OK3004009
LeFlore
572
617
657
696
736
779
WATTS
OK3000108
Adair
129
150
171
192
213
237
WEST SILOAM SPRINGS
OK3002109
Delaware
103
118
133
148
165
182
WESTVILLE
OK3000109
Adair
235
273
314
352
393
433
WILBURTON
OK1020103
Latimer
440
460
483
511
539
571
WISTER
OK3004014
LeFlore
177
192
203
215
228
241
1 SDWIS - Safe Drinking Water Information System
The OWRB provider demand forecasts are not intended to supersede demand forecasts developed by individual water providers. However, the OCWP analyses sought to use a consistent methodology based on accepted data that are available on a statewide basis. When made available, provider-generated forecasts were also reviewed as part of this effort.Lower Arkansas Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 29
Provider
SDWIS ID1
Sales
Purchases
Sells To
Emergency or Ongoing
Treated or Raw or Both
Purchases from
Emergency
or Ongoing
Treated or Raw or Both
ADAIR CO RWD #1 (CHERRY TREE)
OK3000104
Stilwell
O
T
ADAIR CO RWD #2
OK3000105
Stilwell
O
T
ADAIR CO RWD #3
OK3000106
Stilwell
O
T
ADAIR CO RWD #4
OK3000107
Stilwell
O
T
BOKOSHE PWA
OK3004012
PVIA
O
T
CAMERON PWA
OK3004011
PVIA
O
T
CHECOTAH
OK1020515
McIntosh CO RWD #5
McIntosh Co RWD #9
McIntosh Co RWD #7
McIntosh Co RWD #3
McIntosh Co RWD #1
O
O
O
O
O
T
T
T
T
T
CHEROKEE CO RWD #3 (GRANDVIEW)
OK4001117
Tahlequah PWA
O
T
CHEROKEE CO RWD # 7 (WELLING)
OK3001126
Tahlequah PWA
Adair Co RWD #2
O
T
CHEROKEE CO RWD # 8 (BRIGGS)
OK3001118
Tahlequah PWA
O
T
CONSOLIDATED RWD #1 LEFLORE CO
OK3004040
PVIA
FORT GIBSON
OK1021622
Muskogee County RWD #7
Muskogee County RWD #4
O
O
T
T
GANS UTIL AUTH
OK3006802
Sequoyah Co RWD #3
O
T
HASKELL COUNTY WATER COMPANY
OK1020301
Quinton
Keota PWA
O
O
T
T
Stigler
Muskogee
O
T
HEAVENER UTILITY AUTH/PSG
OK1020101
Water Dist Inc
O
T
PVIA
E
T
KEOTA PWA
OK3003112
Haskell County Water Company
O
T
LATIMER COUNTY RWD #1
OK3003904
Wilburton
O
T
LATIMER RWD #3
OK3003908
Talihina
O
T
LEFLORE CO RWD # 1
OK3004003
Poteau Valley Improvement Authority (PVIA)
O
T
LEFLORE CO RWD # 2
OK3004007
PVIA LeFlore County
O
T
LEFLORE CO RWD # 5
OK3004010
PVIA
O
T
LEFLORE CO RWD # 14
OK3004001
Spiro
E
T
MCCURTAIN
OK3003101
PVIA
O
T
MCINTOSH CO RWD #1
OK3004916
Checotah
O
T
MCINTOSH CO RWD # 3 (VICTOR)
OK3004903
Checotah
O
T
Wholesale Water Transfers (1 of 3)
Lower Arkansas Region)
Wholesale Water Transfers
Some providers sell water on a “wholesale” basis to other providers, effectively increasing the amount of water that the selling provider must deliver and reducing the amount that the purchasing provider diverts from surface and groundwater sources. Wholesale water transfers between public water providers are fairly common and can provide an economical way to meet demand. Wholesale quantities typically vary from year to year depending upon growth, precipitation, emergency conditions, and agreements between systems.
Water transfers between providers can help alleviate costs associated with developing or maintaining infrastructure, such as a reservoir or pipeline; allow access to higher quality or more reliable sources; or provide additional supplies only when required, such as in cases of supply emergencies. Utilizing the 2008 OCWP Provider Survey and OWRB water rights data, the Wholesale Water Transfers table presents a summary of known wholesale arrangements for providers in the region. Transfers can consist of treated or raw water and can occur on a regular basis or only during emergencies. Providers commonly sell to and purchase from multiple water providers. 30 Lower Arkansas Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Provider
SDWIS ID1
Sales
Purchases
Sells To
Emergency or Ongoing
Treated or Raw or Both
Purchases from
Emergency
or Ongoing
Treated or Raw or Both
MCINTOSH CO RWD #5
OK3004939
Checotah
O
T
MULDROW PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY
OK1020208
Sequoyah Co RWD #7
O
T
MUSKOGEE
OK1021607
Muskogee Co RWD # 1
Muskogee Co RWD # 2
Muskogee Co RWD #5
Muskogee Co RWD #6
Muskogee Co RWD # 9
Muskogee Co RWD # 10
Porter PWA
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
T
T
T
T
MUSKOGEE CO RWD # 1(OKTAHA)
OK3005106
Muskogee
MUSKOGEE CO RWD # 2(GOOSENECK)
OK3005102
Muskogee
O
MUSKOGEE CO RWD # 4
OK3005104
Fort Gibson
O
T
MUSKOGEE CO RWD # 5
OK3005107
Muskogee
O
T
MUSKOGEE CO RWD # 6
OK3005105
Muskogee
O
T
MUSKOGEE CO RWD # 7
OK3005103
Fort Gibson
O
T
PANAMA PWA
OK3004016
PVIA
O
T
POTEAU PWA
OK3004015
LeFlore Co RWD #1
O
T
PVIA
O
T
PVIA
OK1020104
Bokoshe PWA
Cameron PWA
Heavener Utility Auth/PSG
LeFlore Co RWD #1 Consolidated
LeFlore Co RWD #2
LeFlore Co RWD #5 LeFlore Co RWD #14
LeFlore Co RWD #15
Panama PWA
Poteau PWA
Water Dist Inc
Wister
O
O
E
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
QUINTON
OK3006123
Haskell County Water Company
O
RED OAK PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY
OK1020105
Water Dist Inc
O
T
ROLAND
OK1020212
Sequoyah County Water Assoc
Sequoyah Co RWD #7
O
E
T
T
Sequoyah County Water Assoc
Sequoyah Co RWD #7
E
E
T
T
Wholesale Water Transfers (2 of 3)
Lower Arkansas RegionLower Arkansas Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 31
Wholesale Water Transfers (3 of 3)
Lower Arkansas Region
Provider
SDWIS ID1
Sales
Purchases
Sells To
Emergency or Ongoing
Treated or Raw or Both
Purchases from
Emergency
or Ongoing
Treated or Raw or Both
SALLISAW
OK1020206
Sequoyah Co RWD #3
Sequoyah Co RWD #4
O
O
T
T
Sequoyah County Water Assoc
E
T
SEQUOYAH CO RWD #3
OK3006804
Gans Util Auth
O
T
Sallisaw
O
T
SEQUOYAH CO RWD #4
OK3006809
Sallisaw
O
T
SEQUOYAH CO RWD #5
OK3006815
Sequoyah County Water Assoc
O
T
SEQUOYAH CO RWD #7
OK3006806
Roland
E
T
Muldrow PWA
Roland
O
E
T
T
SEQUOYAH COUNTY WATER ASSOC
OK1020210
Vian
Sequoyah Co RWD #5
Sallisaw
Roland
O
O
E
E
T
T
T
T
Roland
O
T
SPIRO EAST RW
OK3004005
PVIA
O
T
STIGLER
OK1020303
Haskell County Water Company
O
T
STILWELL
OK1020205
Adair Co RWD #1
Adair Co RWD #2
Adair Co RWD #3
Adair Co RWD #4
O
O
O
O
T
T
T
T
TAHLEQUAH PWA
OK1021701
Cherokee Co RWD #3
Cherokee Co RWD #7
Cherokee Co RWD #8
Cherokee Co RWD #11
O
O
O
O
T
T
T
T
VIAN
OK3006812
Sequoyah County Water Assoc
O
T
WATER DIST INC
OK3004009
PVIA
Heavener Utility Auth/PSG
Red Oak Public Works Authority
O
O
O
T
T
T
WILBURTON
OK1020103
Latimer Co RWD #1
O
T
WISTER
OK3004014
PVIA
O
T
1 SDWIS - Safe Drinking Water Information System32 Lower Arkansas Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Provider
SDWIS ID1
County
Permitted Quantity
Source
Permitted Surface Water
Permitted Alluvial Groundwater
Permitted Bedrock Groundwater
(AFY)
Percent
ADAIR CO RWD #1 (CHERRY TREE)
OK3000104
Adair
---
---
---
---
ADAIR CO RWD #2
OK3000105
Adair
---
---
---
---
ADAIR CO RWD #3
OK3000106
Adair
---
---
---
---
ADAIR CO RWD #4
OK3000107
Adair
---
---
---
---
ADAIR CO RWD #5
OK1021770
Adair
160
100%
0%
0%
ADAIR CO RWS & SWMD #6
OK2000145
Adair
---
---
---
---
ARKOMA
OK3004013
LeFlore
---
---
---
---
BOKOSHE PWA
OK3004012
LeFlore
---
---
---
---
BRAGGS WATER WORKS
OK2005104
Muskogee
90
100 %
---
---
BURNT CABIN RWD
OK1021763
Cherokee
90
100%
0%
0%
CAMERON PWA
OK3004011
LeFlore
---
---
---
---
CHECOTAH
OK1020515
McIntosh
2,502
100%
0%
0%
CHEROKEE CO RWD # 1 (FT GIBSON)
OK1021621
Cherokee
---
---
---
---
CHEROKEE CO RWD #3 (GRANDVIEW)
OK4001117
Cherokee
---
---
---
---
CHEROKEE CO RWD # 7 (WELLING)
OK3001126
Cherokee
---
---
---
---
CHEROKEE CO RWD # 8 (BRIGGS)
OK3001118
Cherokee
---
---
---
---
CHEROKEE CO RWD #12
OK2001189
Cherokee
---
---
---
---
CHEROKEE CO RWD #13
OK1021721
Cherokee
293
100%
0%
0%
EAST CENTRAL OKLA WATER AUTH
OK1021713
Sequoyah
1,422
100%
0%
0%
FORT GIBSON
OK1021622
Muskogee
5,677
100%
0%
0%
GANS UTIL AUTH
OK3006802
Sequoyah
---
---
0%
0%
GORE PWA
OK1021773
Sequoyah
560
100%
0%
0%
HASKELL COUNTY WATER COMPANY
OK1020301
Haskell
1,713
100%
0%
0%
HEAVENER UTILITY AUTH/PSG
OK1020101
LeFlore
4,426
84%
0%
16%
KEOTA PWA
OK3003112
Haskell
---
---
---
---
LATIMER CO RWD #4
OK1020110
Latimer
---
---
---
---
LATIMER COUNTY RWD #1
OK3003904
Latimer
---
---
---
---
LATIMER RWD #3
OK3003908
Latimer
---
---
---
---
LEE CREEK RWD
OK3006820
Sequoyah
---
---
---
---
CONSOLIDATED RWD #1 LEFLORE CO
OK3004040
LeFlore
---
---
---
---
Public Water Provider Water Rights and Withdrawals - 2010 (1 of 3)
Lower Arkansas Region
Provider Water Rights
Public water providers using surface water or groundwater obtain water rights from the OWRB. Water providers purchasing water from other suppliers or sources are not required to obtain water rights as long as the furnishing entity has the appropriate water right or other source of authority. Each public water provider’s current water right(s) and source of supply have been summarized in this report. The percentage of each provider’s total 2007 water rights from surface water, alluvial groundwater, and bedrock groundwater supplies was also calculated, indicating the relative proportions of sources available to each provider.
A comparison of existing water rights to projected demands can show when additional water rights or other sources and in what amounts might be needed. Forecasts of conditions for the year 2060 indicate where additional water rights may be needed to satisfy demands by that time. However, in most cases, wholesale water transfers to other providers must also be addressed by the selling provider’s water rights. Thus, the amount of water rights required will exceed the retail demand for a selling provider and will be less than the retail demand for a purchasing provider.
In preparing to meet long-term needs, public water providers should consider strategic factors appropriate to their sources of water. For example, public water providers who use surface water can seek and obtain a “schedule of use” as part of their stream water right, which addresses projected growth and consequent increases in stream water use. Such schedules of use can be employed to address increases that are anticipated to occur over many years or even decades, as an alternative to the usual requirement to use the full authorized amount of stream water in a seven-year period. On the other hand, public water providers that utilize groundwater should consider the prospect that it may be necessary to purchase or lease additional land in order to increase their groundwater rights.Lower Arkansas Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 33
Public Water Provider Water Rights and Withdrawals - 2010 (2 of 3)
Lower Arkansas Region
Provider
SDWIS ID1
County
Permitted Quantity
Source
Permitted Surface Water
Permitted Alluvial Groundwater
Permitted Bedrock Groundwater
(AFY)
Percent
LEFLORE CO RWD # 1
OK3004003
LeFlore
---
---
---
---
LEFLORE CO RWD # 2
OK3004007
LeFlore
---
---
---
---
LEFLORE CO RWD # 5
OK3004010
LeFlore
---
---
---
---
LEFLORE CO RWD # 14
OK3004001
LeFlore
---
---
---
---
LEFLORE CO RWD # 15
OK3004046
LeFlore
---
---
---
---
MCCURTAIN
OK3003101
Haskell
---
---
---
---
MCINTOSH CO RWD #1
OK3004916
McIntosh
---
---
---
---
MCINTOSH CO RWD # 3 (VICTOR)
OK3004903
McIntosh
---
---
---
---
MCINTOSH CO RWD #5
OK3004939
McIntosh
331
100%
0%
0%
MCINTOSH CO RWD #7
OK3004920
McIntosh
---
---
---
---
MCINTOSH CO RWS & SWMD #2 (ONAPA)
OK1020535
McIntosh
1,000
100%
0%
0%
MULDROW PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY
OK1020208
Sequoyah
372
100%
0%
0%
MUSKOGEE
OK1021607
Muskogee
55,720
100%
0%
0%
MUSKOGEE CO RWD # 1(OKTAHA)
OK3005106
Muskogee
---
---
---
---
MUSKOGEE CO RWD # 2(GOOSENECK)
OK3005102
Muskogee
---
---
---
---
MUSKOGEE CO RWD # 4
OK3005104
Muskogee
---
---
---
---
MUSKOGEE CO RWD # 5
OK3005107
Muskogee
---
---
---
---
MUSKOGEE CO RWD # 6
OK3005105
Muskogee
---
---
---
---
MUSKOGEE CO RWD # 7
OK3005103
Muskogee
---
---
---
---
PANAMA PWA
OK3004016
LeFlore
31
0%
0%
100%
PORUM PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY
OK1020302
Muskogee
1,015
100%
0%
0%
POTEAU PWA
OK3004015
LeFlore
1
100%
0%
0%
PVIA
OK1020104
LeFlore
21,789
100%
0%
0%
QUINTON
OK3006123
Pittsburg
---
---
---
---
RED OAK PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY
OK1020105
Latimer
---
---
---
---
ROLAND
OK1020212
Sequoyah
920
100%
---
---
SALLISAW
OK1020206
Sequoyah
18,377
100%
0%
0%
SEQUOYAH CO RWD #3
OK3006804
Sequoyah
---
---
---
---
SEQUOYAH CO RWD #4
OK3006809
Sequoyah
---
---
---
---
SEQUOYAH CO RWD #5
OK3006815
Sequoyah
320
100%
---
---34 Lower Arkansas Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Provider
SDWIS ID1
County
Permitted Quantity
Source
Permitted Surface Water
Permitted Alluvial Groundwater
Permitted Bedrock Groundwater
(AFY)
Percent
SEQUOYAH CO RWD #7
OK3006806
Sequoyah
---
---
---
---
SEQUOYAH COUNTY WATER ASSOC
OK1020210
Sequoyah
12,789
99%
0%
1%
SPIRO
OK1020106
LeFlore
329
100%
0%
0%
SPIRO EAST RW
OK3004005
LeFlore
---
---
---
---
STIGLER
OK1020303
Haskell
690
49%
51%
0%
STILWELL
OK1020205
Adair
3,130
100%
0%
0%
TAHLEQUAH PWA
OK1021701
Cherokee
16,994
100%
0%
0%
VIAN
OK3006812
Sequoyah
---
---
---
---
WARNER
OK1020409
Muskogee
761
100%
0%
0%
WATER DIST INC
OK3004009
LeFlore
---
---
---
---
WATTS
OK3000108
Adair
---
---
---
---
WEST SILOAM SPRINGS
OK3002109
Delaware
---
---
---
---
WESTVILLE
OK3000109
Adair
568
0%
0%
100%
WILBURTON
OK1020103
Latimer
1,965
100%
0%
0%
WISTER
OK3004014
LeFlore
---
---
---
---
1 SDWIS - Safe Drinking Water Information System
Public Water Provider Water Rights and Withdrawals - 2010 (3 of 3)
Lower Arkansas RegionLower Arkansas Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 35
Adair County RWD 1 (Cherry Tree)
Current Source of Supply
Primary sources: City of Stilwell
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: refurbish standpipes; replace pump stations.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: replace distribution system lines; add a connection to Sequoyah County Water Association.
Adair County RWD 2
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: City of Stilwell
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: replace portion of distribution system lines.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
Adair County RWD 3
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: City of Stilwell
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: add storage tank.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: replace distribution system lines; add storage tank and booster pump station.
Adair County RWD 4
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: City of Stilwell
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: refurbish pressure reducing stations in distribution system.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: add standpipe.
Adair County RWD 5
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Barren Fork Creek
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: add storage.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: increase water treatment capacity.
Adair County RWS & SWMD 6
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
New supply source: possible water Flint Ridge RWD.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
Arkoma (LeFlore County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Ft. Smith, AR
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: replace storage tank.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
Bokoshe PWA (LeFlore County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Poteau Valley Improvement Authority
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
Braggs Water Works (Muskogee County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Arkansas River
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: replace distribution system lines.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: replace storage tank and distribution system lines.
Burnt Cabin RWD (Cherokee County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Tenkiller Ferry Lake
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: replace distribution system lines; increase water treatment capacity.
Cameron PWA (LeFlore County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Poteau Valley Improvement Authority
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: replace distribution system lines.
City of Checotah (McIntosh County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Lake Eufaula
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
Cherokee County RWD 1 (Ft. Gibson)
Current Source of Supply
Primary sources: None identified
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
Cherokee County RWD 2 (Keys)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Tenkiller Ferry Lake
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
New supply source: Possible water purchase from Tahlequah.
Cherokee Co RWD 3
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: City of Tahlequah, Seminary Springs
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: replace main distribution system lines.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: replace water tower and booster pump station; increase water treatment capacity.
Cherokee County RWD 7 (Welling)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: City of Tahlequah, Adair County RWD 2
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: replace distribution system lines; add distribution system looping lines upgrade pump station pumps; connection to Adair County RWD 2.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: upsize distribution system lines; add storage and pump capacity.
Cherokee County RWD 8 (Briggs)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: City of Tahlequah
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: replace distribution system lines; add storage.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: replace portion of main water lines; replace pump station pumps.
Cherokee County RWD 12
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
New supply source: drill additional well.
Infrastructure improvements: drill deeper wells; add pumps.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: add generator.
Cherokee County RWD 13
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Tenkiller Ferry Lake
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
Consolidated RWD 1 (LeFlore County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Poteau Valley Improvement Authority
Short-Term Needs
OCWP Water Provider Survey
Lower Arkansas Region
Provider Supply Plans
In 2008, a survey was sent to 785 municipal and rural water providers throughout Oklahoma to collect vital background water supply and system information. Additional detail for each of these providers was solicited in 2010 as part of follow-up interviews conducted by the ODEQ. The 2010 interviews sought to confirm key details of the earlier survey and document additional details regarding each provider’s water supply infrastructure and plans. This included information on existing sources of supply (including surface water, groundwater, and other providers), short-term supply and infrastructure plans, and long-term supply and infrastructure plans.
In instances where no new source was identified, maintenance of the current source of supply is expected into the future. Providers may or may not have secured the necessary funding to implement their stated plans concerning infrastructure needs, commonly including additional wells or raw water conveyance, storage, and replacement/upgrade of treatment and distribution systems.
Additional support for individual water providers wishing to pursue enhanced planning efforts is documented in the Public Water Supply Planning Guide. This guide details how information contained in the OCWP Watershed Planning Region Reports and related planning documents can be used to formulate provider-level plans to meet present and future needs of individual water systems. 36 Lower Arkansas Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Infrastructure improvements: replace portion of distribution system lines; refurbish water towers and add check valve.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: replace distribution system lines; add standpipes, booster stations, backup power and security fencing.
East Central OK. Water Auth. (Sequoyah Co.)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Tenkiller Ferry Lake
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: replace portion of main water line that crosses the Arkansas River.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
City of Ft. Gibson (Muskogee County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary sources: Arkansas River
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: replace water main lines; add storage.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: add storage; increase water treatment capacity.
Gans Utility Authority (Sequoyah County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Sequoyah County RWD 3
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: replace portion of distribution system lines; add storage.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
Gore PWA (Sequoyah County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Tenkiller Ferry Lake
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: replace portion of distribution system lines; add storage.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: increase water treatment capacity.
Haskell County Water Company
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Lake Eufaula, City of Stigler
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: add two new filters to water treatment plant.
Heavener Utility Auth. / PSG (LeFlore County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Poteau River
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
Keota PWA (Haskell County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Haskell County Water Company
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: refurbish storage tank.
Latimer County RWD 1
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: City of Wilburton
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
Latimer County RWD 3
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: City of Talihina
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
Latimer County RWD 4
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Strip Pit
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
Lee Creek RWD (Sequoyah County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: City of Ft. Smith, Ar
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvement: replace distribution system lines.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvement: replace distribution system lines.
LeFlore County RWD 1
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Lake Wister Poteau Valley Improvement Auth.
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvement: replace distribution system lines.
Long-Term Needs
New supply source: improvements for expansion from Poteau.
LeFlore County RWD 2
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Poteau Valley Improvement Authority
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvement: replace distribution system lines; add distribution system lines.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvement: replace distribution system lines; add distribution system lines; add storage.
LeFlore County RWD 4
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Poteau Valley Improvement Authority
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
LeFlore County RWD 5
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Poteau Valley Improvement Authority
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvement: replace distribution system lines; add storage.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvement: add meters.
LeFlore County RWD 14
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Poteau Valley Improvement Authority
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvement: replace distribution system lines.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
LeFlore County RWD 15
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Lake Wister Poteau Valley Improvement Auth.
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvement: replace portion of distribution system lines.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
City of McCurtain (Haskell County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Poteau Valley Improvement Authority
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvement: replace distribution system lines.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvement: upgrade the distribution and water system; pipeline construction to Bokoshe PWA; obtain supplies from PVIA. New Supply Source: PVIA.
McIntosh County RWD 1
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: City of Checotah
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
McIntosh County RWD 5
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: City of Checotah (Eufaula Lake)
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvement: add distribution system lines; add storage.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
McIntosh County RWD 7
Current Source of Supply
Primary sources: None identified
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
McIntosh County RWS & SWMD 2 (Onapa)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Lake Eufaula
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
McIntosh County RWD 3
Current Source of Supply
Primary sources: City of Checotah
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
Muldrow Public Works Auth. (Sequoyah County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Muldrow City Lake
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: add storage; add new clarifier and two new filters to water treatment plant.
City of Muskogee
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Ft. Gibson Lake
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: replace portion of distribution system lines.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
Muskogee County RWD 1 (Oktaha)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: City of Muskogee
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
OCWP Water Provider Survey
Lower Arkansas RegionLower Arkansas Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 37
OCWP Water Provider Survey
Lower Arkansas Region
Infrastructure improvements: add standpipe; upsize water main lines.
Muskogee County RWD 2 (Gooseneck)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: City of Muskogee
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: replace portion of distribution system lines.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: replace distribution system lines; replace pumps.
Muskogee County RWD 4
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: City of Ft. Gibson
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
Muskogee County RWD 5
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: City of Muskogee
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: add distribution system lines.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: replace water main lines.
Muskogee County RWD 6
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: City of Muskogee
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: add storage.
Muskogee County RWD 7
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: City of Ft. Gibson
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: replace pump station; add storage.
Long-Term Needs
New supply source: Working to purchase water from Tenkiller Utilities Auth.
Panama PWA (LeFlore County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Poteau Valley Improvement Authority
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: replace portion of distribution system lines; refurbish storage tower.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: replace portion of distribution system lines.
Porum Public Works Auth. (Muskogee Co.)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Lake Eufaula
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: replace portion of distribution system lines; add storage.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: water treatment plant upgrades.
Poteau PWA (LeFlore County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Poteau Valley Improvement Auth., Wister Lake
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: replace portion of distribution system lines.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: replace portion of distribution system lines; add storage.
Poteau Valley Improvement Auth. (LeFlore County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Wister Lake
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: add intake structure. New supply source: Lower Poteau River.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
City of Quinton (Pittsburg County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Haskell County Water Authority
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: add distribution system lines.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
Red Oak Public Works Auth. (Latimer County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary sources: Strip Pit
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
City of Roland (Sequoyah County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Roland Municipal Lake
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
City of Sallisaw (Sequoyah County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Brushy Lake
Short-Term Needs
New supply source: surface water.
Long-Term Needs
New supply source: purchase water from Sequoyah Co. Water Assn.
Infrastructure improvements: additional reservoir / lake storage.
Sequoyah County RWD 3
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: City of Sallisaw
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: replace distribution system lines.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: replace distribution system lines.
Sequoyah County RWD 4
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: City of Sallisaw
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
Sequoyah County RWD 5
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Illinois River
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvement: replace distribution system lines; add storage.
Sequoyah County RWD 7
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: City of Ft. Smith, AR
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvement: replace distribution system lines; add storage; upgrade pump stations.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
Sequoyah County Water Association
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Tenkiller Ferry Lake
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvement: replace distribution system lines; add distribution system lines.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
City of Spiro (Sequoyah County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Holi-Tuska Creek
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvement: replace distribution system lines.
Spiro East RWS (LeFlore County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Poteau Valley Improvement Authority
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
City of Stigler (Haskell County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Stigler Lake
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
City of Stilwell (Adair County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Stilwell City Lake (Carson Lake), Evansville Creek, Starr Springs
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
Tahlequah PWA (Cherokee County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Illinois River
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvement: replace distribution system lines; add storage.
City of Vian (Sequoyah County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Sequoyah County Water Association
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvement: replace distribution system lines.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvement: replace distribution system lines.
City of Warner (Muskogee County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Lake Eufaula
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvement: replace distribution system lines.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
Water Distributors Company, Inc.
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Poteau Valley Improvement Authority
Short-Term Needs
None identified.38 Lower Arkansas Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
OCWP Water Provider Survey
Lower Arkansas Region
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvement: replace distribution system lines; add storage; upgrade pump station.
City of Watts (Adair County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: City of Siloam Springs, Arkansas
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvement: replace distribution system lines; add distribution system lines.
City of Westville (Adair County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Benton/Washington Regional Public Water Authority, Arkansas
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
City of Wilburton (Latimer County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Lloyd Church Lake
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
City of Wister (LeFlore County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Poteau Valley Improvement Authority
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvement: replace distribution system lines.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
West Siloam Springs (Delaware County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Siloam Springs, Arkansas
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.Lower Arkansas Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 39
Drinking Water Infrastructure Cost Summary
As part of the public water provider analysis, regional cost estimates to meet system drinking water infrastructure needs over the next 50 years were prepared. While it is difficult to account for changes that may occur within this extended time frame, it is beneficial to evaluate, at least on the order-of-magnitude level, the long-range costs of providing potable water.
Project cost estimates were developed for a selection of existing water providers, and then weighted to determine total regional costs. The OCWP method is similar to that utilized by the EPA to determine national drinking water infrastructure costs in 2007. However, the OCWP uses a 50-year planning horizon while the EPA uses a 20-year period. Also, the OCWP includes a broader spectrum of project types rather than limiting projects to those eligible for the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund program. While costs for new reservoirs specific to providers are not included, this study evaluated whether there was an overall need in the region for new surface water supplies. When rehabilitation of existing reservoirs or new reservoir projects were necessary, these costs were applied at the regional level.
More information on the methodology and cost estimates is available in the supplemental report, Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Assessment by Region.
Infrastructure Cost Summary
Lower Arkansas Region
Provider System Category1
Infrastructure Need (millions of 2007 dollars)
Present - 2020
2021 - 2040
2041 - 2060
Total Period
Small
$85
$175
$727
$987
Medium
$357
$408
$605
$1,370
Large
$0
$0
$0
$0
Reservoir2
$0
$1
$42
$43
Total
$442
$584
$1,374
$2,400
1 Large providers are defined as those serving more than 100,000 people, medium systems as those serving between 3,301 and 100,000 people, and small systems as those serving 3,300 or fewer people.
2 The “reservoir” category refers specifically to rehabilitation projects.
Approximately $2.4 billion is needed to meet the projected drinking water infrastructure • needs of the Lower Arkansas region over the next 50 years. The largest infrastructure costs are expected to occur after 2040.
Distribution and transmission projects account for more than 80 percent of the providers’ • estimated infrastructure costs, followed distantly by water treatment projects.
Medium-sized providers have the largest overall drinking water infrastructure costs.•
Projects involving rehabilitation of existing reservoir make up approximately two percent of • the total costs.40 Grand Regional Report, Basin Data & Analysis
Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Water Supply Options
Limitations Analysis
For each of the state’s 82 OCWP basins, an analysis of water supply and demand was followed by an analysis of limitations for surface water, bedrock groundwater, and alluvial groundwater use. For surface water, the most pertinent limiting characteristics considered were (1) physical availability of water, (2) permit availability, and (3) water quality. For alluvial and bedrock groundwater, permit availability was not a limiting factor through 2060, and existing data were insufficient to conduct meaningful groundwater quality analyses. Therefore, limitations for major alluvial and bedrock aquifers were related to physical availability of water and included an analysis of both the amount of any forecasted depletion relative to the amount of water in storage and rate at which the depletion was predicted to occur.
Methodologies were developed to assess limitations and assign appropriate scores for each supply source in each basin. For surface water, scores were calculated weighting the characteristics as follows: 50% for physical availability, 30% for permit availability, and 20% for water