| Table 1 | |||||||
| Bastrop County Carrizo-Wilcox (Simsboro) Aquifer Allocations | |||||||
| Drought "Below Normal Rainfall" Conditions | |||||||
| 2040 | 2050 | ||||||
| 1 | SUPPLY (acft/yr) | ||||||
| Carrizo-Wilcox Aquifer Supply per Lower Colorado RWPG (4/18/2001) | 21,950 | 21,950 | |||||
| Additional Wilcox Formation Recharge per TWDB (5/8/2001) | 2,455 | 2,455 | |||||
| TOTAL SUPPLY (acft/yr) | 24,405 | 24,405 | |||||
| 2 | DROUGHT "BELOW NORMAL RAINFALL" DEMAND (acft/yr) | ||||||
| Region K Carrizo-Wilcox Aquifer Demand | 12,597 | 13,341 | |||||
| Region L Simsboro Aquifer (SCTN-3c) Demand 1 | 10,362 | 10,382 | |||||
| Region L Carrizo-Wilcox Aquifer (CZ-10D) Demand 2 | 4,002 | 12,500 | |||||
| TOTAL DROUGHT DEMAND (acft/yr) | 26,961 | 36,223 | |||||
| 3 | SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) (acft/yr) | ||||||
| TOTAL SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) (acft/yr) | (2,556) | (11,818) | |||||
| 1 Water management strategy for Bexar County. | |||||||
| 2 Water management strategy for Comal and Guadalupe Counties. | |||||||
| Table 2 | |||||||
| Bastrop County Carrizo-Wilcox (Simsboro) Aquifer Allocations | |||||||
| Average "Normal Rainfall" Conditions | |||||||
| 2040 | 2050 | ||||||
| 1 | SUPPLY (acft/yr) | ||||||
| Carrizo-Wilcox Aquifer Supply per Lower Colorado RWPG (4/18/2001) | 21,950 | 21,950 | |||||
| Additional Wilcox Formation Recharge per TWDB (5/8/2001) | 2,455 | 2,455 | |||||
| TOTAL SUPPLY (acft/yr) | 24,405 | 24,405 | |||||
| 2 | AVERAGE "NORMAL RAINFALL" DEMAND (acft/yr) | ||||||
| Region K Carrizo-Wilcox Aquifer Demand 1 | 10,833 | 11,473 | |||||
| Region L Simsboro Aquifer (SCTN-3c) Demand 2 | 10,362 | 10,382 | |||||
| Region L Carrizo-Wilcox Aquifer (CZ-10D) Demand 3 | 0 | 0 | |||||
| TOTAL AVERAGE DEMAND (acft/yr) | 21,195 | 21,855 | |||||
| 3 | SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) (acft/yr) | ||||||
| TOTAL SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) (acft/yr) | 3,210 | 2,550 | |||||
| 1 Calculated as 86 percent of Drought "Below Normal Rainfall" Demand in Table 1 pursuant to | |||||||
| comparison of TWDB projections of demand under "Normal" and "Below Normal" Rainfall conditions. | |||||||
| 2 Pumpage from the Simsboro Aquifer to meet demands in Bexar County associated with this water | |||||||
| management strategy is not expected to vary with climatological (average vs. drought) conditions. | |||||||
| Adjustments to Region L demands from the Carrizo-Wilcox Aquifer are associated with water | |||||||
| management strategy CZ-10D, as explained in footnote 3 below. | |||||||
| 3 Municipal water suppliers in Comal and Guadalupe Counties will rely primarily upon nearby | |||||||
| sources of supply such as the Guadalupe River, Canyon Reservoir, the Edwards Aquifer, the | |||||||
| Schertz-Seguin Water Supply Project, and other groundwater available in Gonzales County. | |||||||
| These municipal water suppliers are expected to use more distant sources such as Bastrop | |||||||
| County groundwater only when absolutely necessary during drought. | |||||||