Agreement aims to curb groundwater pumping, update Rio Grande Project operations, and give water users more certainty across the lower basin
SANTA FE, N.M. — New Mexico, Texas, Colorado and the United States have filed a package of settlement agreements in the longrunning U.S. Supreme Court case Texas v. New Mexico and Colorado, seeking to end more than a decade of litigation over Rio Grande water and establish a durable framework for sharing scarce supplies in the Lower Rio Grande.
The settlement—developed with input from irrigation districts in southern New Mexico and far West Texas—now goes to the Court’s Special Master for a hearing in Philadelphia at the end of September. After that hearing, the Special Master will issue a report and recommendation to the full Supreme Court, which has the final say.
“This settlement brings an end to more than a decade of costly and contentious litigation and provides a clear path forward for New Mexico,” Attorney General Raúl Torrez said, calling the deal a “significant milestone for our communities, our farmers, and for the future of water management in the basin.”
State Engineer Elizabeth Anderson said the package “allows New Mexico to maintain control of our water uses and adds flexibility to how we are able to meet our Compact requirements,” while Interstate Stream Commission Director Hannah Riseley-White emphasized that it reflects local input and “implements sound water management strategies that will provide certainty and reliability to New Mexico communities throughout the Rio Grande Basin.”
What’s in the Deal?
According to state and federal officials, the settlement is designed to bring the Depressionera Rio Grande Compact into alignment with modern hydrology and today’s scarcity.
It tightens the accounting for deliveries below Elephant Butte Reservoir by adopting more precise formulas and a rolling system of credits and debits, so surpluses and shortfalls can be balanced across wet and dry years rather than triggering sudden, disruptive cutbacks A central feature is New Mexico’s commitment to curbing groundwater pumping that measurably depletes surface flows released from Elephant Butte for the Elephant Butte Irrigation District (EBID) and the El Paso Water Improvement District No. 1.
New Mexico would have two years to adopt and implement a comprehensive groundwater- management plan tailored to the Lower Rio Grande, with monitoring and enforcement mechanisms to ensure that depletions are actually reduced.
Because the federal government operates the Rio Grande Project through the Bureau of Reclamation, the package also calls for updates to the Project’s operating manual. Those changes are intended to improve transparency and efficiency in how releases are scheduled and delivered to EBID and El Paso, reduce transit losses, and bring day-to-day operations into sync with the settlement’s new accounting rules.
To give New Mexico a practical way to stay on side of the Compact without imposing blanket curtailments, the agreement would allow the state, when necessary, to transfer water rights from EBID to satisfy deliveries owed to Texas—paired with compensation to EBID for any rights used to meet those obligations.
Parties and advisors have pointed to a benchmark reduction on the order of 18,200 acre-feet per year in groundwater depletions— an amount water-law experts consider substantial in this already over-allocated reach of the river. State officials say most of that reduction is expected to come from voluntary, compensated water-rights purchases and long-term fallowing programs, supported by investments in conservation and more efficient irrigation infrastructure. The aim is to phase in durable reductions while avoiding abrupt shutoffs that could upend local farms and economies.
For farmers, cities and irrigation districts on both sides of the state line, the promise of the deal is predictability.
By pinning down how much water is available to be released and diverted, how much can be pumped without eroding Compact deliveries, and how credits and debits carry between years, the settlement seeks to replace ad-hoc crisis management with a stable, enforceable playbook. As Jay Ornelas, general manager of the El Paso Water Improvement District No. 1, put it, the agreement offers “long-term protection” for El Paso farmers and the city that rely on Rio Grande Project water—while New Mexico officials emphasize it preserves local decision- making and flexibility in how the state meets its interstate duties.
The Settlement Was Unavoidable
The Rio Grande Compact of 1938 was forged for a different era. It divided the river’s surface flows among Colorado, New Mexico, and Texas using gauges and accounting rules that made sense when reservoirs were fuller, snowpacks were more reliable, and groundwater was treated as legally and practically separate from the river. Upstream storage and downstream deliveries were tracked mostly at the surface, with Elephant Butte Reservoir— completed in 1916 as part of the federal Rio Grande Project—serving as the main “savings account” for irrigation in southern New Mexico and far West Texas.
By the latter half of the 20th century, and especially in the 2000s, that tidy separation broke down. As drought lengthened and heat intensified, farmers and cities leaned harder on wells. Hydrologists showed what users on the ground already felt: pumping from the connected aquifer can sap the river itself, particularly along the 100-mile reach between Elephant Butte and the Texas line. That physical reality collided with a legal framework that hadn’t fully contemplated it, and friction grew between surface-water users and groundwater pumpers—often the same communities trying to survive drier years.
Texas sued New Mexico in 2013, arguing that Lower Rio Grande pumping was undercutting the deliveries owed to Texas under the Compact. New Mexico countersued the federal government in 2011 over Rio Grande Project operations, and the litigation widened to include Colorado and the United States. After the Supreme Court rejected a 2022 state-to-state proposal because the federal government hadn’t signed on, the parties returned to negotiations with the Bureau of Reclamation and the irrigation districts at the table. Meanwhile, storage at Elephant Butte sank toward record lows and dry riverbeds appeared farther north and more often, underscoring how little slack remained in the system.
In short, a settlement became unavoidable because the basin’s math no longer works without treating groundwater and surface water as one system—and without modernizing how the Rio Grande Project is operated and accounted for. Continuing to fight in court risked a courtimposed solution, years of uncertainty, and potentially massive liabilities. The package now before the Special Master reflects that hard lesson: it updates the accounting, reins in depletions tied to pumping, clarifies Project operations, and builds in tools—like compensated water-rights transfers—so New Mexico can meet its interstate duties without sudden, across-the-board shutoffs.
Final Stages While the Supreme Court’s sign-off is still pending, New Mexico officials frame the settlement as a pragmatic end to litigation and a beginning for locally driven, accountable water management in one of North America’s most stressed river basins. As Riseley-White put it, “There isn’t one answer … it’s going to be an all-of-the-above approach” The final stages of this agreement are expected as follows:
• Late September hearing in Philadelphia: The Special Master will take testimony and questions on the settlement package.
• Report & recommendation to the Supreme Court: After the hearing, the Special Master will advise the Justices, who will decide whether to approve the agreements.
• Implementation phase: If approved, New Mexico would move to finalize its groundwater-management plan within two years, operational changes would take effect for the Rio Grande Project, and state and federal dollars would support conservation, efficiency upgrades, and voluntary water-rights acquisitions.