- Arizona delegation urges Interior to withdraw draft plan.
- Lawmakers warn of severe cuts to Central Arizona Project water.
- Letter cites risks to microchip, aerospace, and mineral industries.
- Basin negotiations continue as 2026 operating rules take shape.
Monday, February 16, 2026 — Last week, two days before talks between the basin states over Colorado River water management collapsed, Congressman Juan Ciscomani and a majority of Arizona’s House delegation publicly urged the United States Department of the Interior to withdraw a draft proposal that could significantly reshape how Colorado River water is divided after 2026.
At issue is the Bureau of Reclamation’s Draft Environmental Impact Statement for post-2026 Colorado River operations, released on January 16, 2026. The document outlines several alternatives for managing water deliveries from Lake Powell and Lake Mead once current interim guidelines expire at the end of this year.
In a February 11, 2026 letter to Interior Secretary Doug Burgum
, six Arizona lawmakers expressed “serious concern” that the draft would impose “drastic reductions” on Arizona’s water supply and “directly undermine the economic and strategic gains advanced by this Administration.”
What Is the Draft Environmental Impact Statement?
The Draft Environmental Impact Statement, often called a Draft Environmental Impact Study, is part of a federally required review process under the National Environmental Policy Act. It analyzes how different water management options could affect communities, ecosystems, and economies throughout the Colorado River Basin.
The Colorado River serves seven states: Arizona, California, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, Colorado, and Wyoming. It supports about 40 million people and irrigates millions of acres of farmland. In Arizona, most Colorado River water is delivered through the Central Arizona Project, a 336-mile canal that carries water from Lake Havasu City to Phoenix and Tucson.
Nearly six million Arizonans rely on that system.
The lawmakers argue that, as currently written, the draft alternatives would “all but sever nearly six million Arizonans served by the Central Arizona Project from Colorado River supplies they have relied upon for more than four decades.”
The letter also points to language within the draft acknowledging that “widespread impacts on social and economic conditions may also be possible,” including situations where municipalities might need to pursue alternative or even hauled water to maintain basic services.
Why Arizona Says It Is Disproportionate.
The February 11 letter contends that the proposed alternatives would “disproportionately reduce Arizona’s Colorado River allocation while leaving Upper Basin States largely unaffected.”
The Colorado River Basin is divided into two regions. The Upper Basin includes Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming. The Lower Basin includes Arizona, California, and Nevada. The river’s use is governed by a series of agreements, court decisions, and federal laws collectively known as the Law of the River, anchored by the 1922 Colorado River Compact.
Arizona lawmakers argue that the draft does not meaningfully account for Upper Basin delivery obligations under the Compact, nor does it fully address Reclamation’s authority to manage federally owned reservoirs in the Upper Basin to ensure compliance.
The letter warns that if those issues are not corrected, the result may be litigation rather than consensus.
At the same time, the delegation states that a negotiated solution among the Basin States and Reclamation remains the preferred path forward.
Economic Stakes in Arizona.
The delegation frames the water issue in the context of Arizona’s recent economic growth. The letter highlights a “growing microchip sector, a major aerospace and defense presence, and significant critical mineral production.”
Arizona has become a focal point for domestic semiconductor manufacturing and advanced technology investment. Lawmakers argue that reliable water supplies are foundational to those industries and to the communities that support them.
A February 12 press release quotes the delegation as saying, “The Colorado River system functions best when risks, responsibilities, and necessary reductions are shared equitably to protect both the river and the infrastructure upon which the entire Basin depends.”
Water reliability is not only an economic issue but also a planning issue. Cities, irrigation districts, and industries make long-term investments based on expected water deliveries. Uncertainty in post-2026 rules could affect growth projections, infrastructure financing, and land development decisions.
Where Negotiations Stand.
For months, the seven Basin States have been negotiating updated operating guidelines that could shape water use for decades. The current interim rules expire at the end of 2026.
Reclamation’s draft outlines several potential pathways, including alternatives that would tie future reductions more closely to reservoir elevations. As Lake Mead and Lake Powell fluctuate, mandatory cutbacks could deepen.
Arizona, as a Lower Basin state with significant junior water rights under certain conditions, has historically borne large reductions during shortage declarations. That background informs the state’s concern about how future rules are structured.
The delegation’s letter formally requests that the draft be withdrawn and revised to address what they describe as legal and policy deficiencies.
Interior has not yet announced whether revisions will occur prior to issuing a final Environmental Impact Statement.
What Happens Next?
The federal review process includes public comment, analysis of alternatives, and eventual publication of a final Environmental Impact Statement and record of decision.
If disagreements remain unresolved, litigation is possible. If a negotiated agreement emerges among the Basin States and is incorporated into federal operations, it could reduce the likelihood of court battles.
The outcome will influence municipal planning, agricultural production, industrial expansion, and reservoir management throughout the Southwest.
With current guidelines set to expire at the end of 2026, decisions made in the coming months will determine how risks and reductions are shared across the Basin.
Q&A
What is the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for post-2026 operations?
It is a federal document analyzing options for managing Colorado River reservoirs and water deliveries after current interim guidelines expire at the end of 2026.
Why are Arizona lawmakers concerned?
They argue that the draft alternatives would impose severe reductions on water delivered through the Central Arizona Project and could disproportionately affect Arizona compared to Upper Basin states.
How many people could be affected in Arizona?
The letter states that nearly six million Arizonans rely on Colorado River water delivered through the Central Arizona Project.
What industries are mentioned as being at risk?
The letter references Arizona’s microchip manufacturing sector, aerospace and defense industries, and critical mineral production.
What is the Law of the River?
It is the collective term for the agreements, compacts, court decisions, and federal laws that govern Colorado River water allocation among the seven Basin states.
Could this lead to litigation?
The February 11 letter suggests that unresolved legal and policy issues could invite litigation rather than consensus if not addressed.
When will final decisions be made?
A final Environmental Impact Statement and record of decision are expected later in 2026, before current operating rules expire.
