SJRA advances surface water allocations for two Texas utility districts amid failing groundwater wells
San Jacinto River Authority, Texas · Meeting date: August 24, 2026 · Published: August 25, 2026
Montgomery County MUD 119 and Spring Creek Utility District will fully fund new pipeline infrastructure and pay minimum pumpage fees to secure surface water, mitigating the risks of regional aquifer decline without impacting existing GRP rates.
Key points
- The GRP Review Committee recommended surface water allocations for MUD 119 and SCUD, advancing the contracts to the SJRA Board of Directors.
- MUD 119 originally requested 365 million gallons per year, but the contract incorporates a 260-million-gallon minimum groundwater pumpage fee to ensure rate neutrality.
- The utility districts will fully fund the design, construction, and easements for the delivery pipelines before turning the assets over to the River Authority.
- The requests are driven by regional groundwater instability, including 2023 failures in Evangeline aquifer wells and recent underperformance in Jasper aquifer drilling.
- If the allocations are finalized, the GRP's average daily allocation will rise to 23.22 MGD, pushing the system's maximum day allocation to the plant's 30 MGD capacity limit.
Full report
The San Jacinto River Authority (SJRA) Groundwater Reduction Plan (GRP) Review Committee has recommended advancing surface water allocation contracts for Montgomery County Municipal Utility District 119 (MUD 119) and the Spring Creek Utility District (SCUD). The August 24, 2026, decision paves the way for the districts to connect to SJRA's surface water system amid growing concerns over local groundwater reliability.
Under the proposed agreements, the utility districts will fully fund the design, construction, inspection, and easements for the new delivery pipelines. Once completed, the infrastructure will be turned over to the River Authority. The contracts explicitly state that the districts will not receive reimbursement for the infrastructure costs unless the Lone Star Groundwater Conservation District reverts to its 2010 regulatory framework.
To ensure the new connections do not negatively impact existing GRP rates, SJRA staff structured the contracts with minimum groundwater pumpage fees. For example, while MUD 119 initially requested 365 million gallons per year—equivalent to 1 million gallons per day (MGD)—the district will be contractually obligated to pay for a minimum of 260 million gallons of groundwater pumpage annually, regardless of actual usage. SCUD agreed to a similar framework, though with a lower minimum threshold based on its specific demand.
The push for surface water is driven by regional aquifer instability. A staff member noted that several Evangeline aquifer wells in the area failed in 2023, and one of MUD 119's wells is currently at high risk due to its depth. Furthermore, a recent Jasper aquifer well drilled by SCUD failed to perform as planned, forcing the district to modify its completions strategy.
Despite the groundwater risks, the approvals faced some pushback. One committee member, who ultimately abstained from both votes, argued that the districts should be required to provide hydrogeological and economic analyses proving that surface water is more cost-effective than drilling new wells. He warned that surface water production is highly expensive and could cost ratepayers in excess of $12 per thousand gallons if current subsidies are removed.
If the SJRA Board of Directors finalizes the contracts alongside other recent requests, the GRP's average daily allocation will increase to 23.22 MGD. The system's maximum daily allocation would hit 30 MGD, maxing out the surface water plant's current rated capacity. To accommodate future demand, SJRA is exploring membrane pretreatment upgrades to unlock unutilized capacity, a project expected to reach completion in three to four years—roughly the same timeline as the new MUD pipelines.
This summary was generated by AI based on the source document and may contain errors.
Source: GRP Review Committee, San Jacinto River Authority