Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances bill requiring notice, hearing and December 1 deadline for water‑management methodology changes
Summary
The Senate Natural Resources Committee on Thursday advanced Senate Bill 10‑61, which would require notice, a hearing opportunity and a Dec. 1 deadline before the Department of Water Resources may issue or revise the methodology that governs conjunctive management of surface and groundwater on the Eastern Snake Plain.
The Senate Natural Resources Committee voted to advance Senate Bill 10‑61, a bill aimed at establishing procedural safeguards and a calendar for changes to the Department of Water Resources’ methodology order used in conjunctive management of surface and groundwater on the Eastern Snake Plain aquifer.
Senator Julie Van Orden, sponsor of the bill, said the measure requires the director of the Department of Water Resources to give affected persons notice and an opportunity to request a hearing before issuing a new or revised ‘‘methodology’’ — the technical framework that governs how the department forecasts supplies, determines shortfalls and issues as‑applied curtailment or injury determinations. The bill further requires any final methodology order to be issued no later than Dec. 1 prior to the year in which it would take effect, a date the sponsor said is intended to give irrigators time to make seasonal cropping and irrigation decisions.
Paul Arrington of the Idaho Water Users Association told the committee the methodology order is effectively the ‘‘rules of the game’’ for how the department runs conjunctive management and that changes issued in April 2023 — after irrigation season had begun — created significant controversy and uncertainty among users. Arrington said the bill resulted from stakeholder discussions between groundwater and surface‑water users to increase predictability and reduce conflict.
Farmer and groundwater user Brian Murdock testified in support, saying the bill places sideboards on the director’s ability to change methodology mid‑season and gives water users needed predictability.
Senators asked technical questions about the distinction between the methodology order (the overall framework) and the annual as‑applied orders that implement the methodology based on each year’s facts. Arrington and the sponsor explained the bill applies to the methodology order itself and that as‑applied orders would continue to be issued under the methodology’s timing and steps.
Senators moved the bill to the floor with a do‑pass recommendation; the committee recorded no roll‑call in the transcript and advanced the measure for fuller Senate consideration.
