From Nebraska Statutes

Section 46-719
Interrelated Water Review Board; created; members; powers and duties.

(1)(a) The Interrelated Water Review Board is created for the purposes stated in subsections (2) through (5) of this section. The board shall consist of five members. The board, when appointed and convened, shall continue in existence only until it has resolved a dispute referred to it pursuant to such subsections. The Governor shall appoint and convene the board within forty-five days of being notified of the need to resolve a dispute. The board shall be chaired by the Governor or his or her designee, which designee shall be knowledgeable concerning surface water and ground water issues.

The Governor shall appoint one additional member of his or her choosing and shall appoint the other three members of the board from a list of no fewer than six nominees provided by the Nebraska Natural Resources Commission within twenty days after request by the Governor for a list of nominees.

(b) Not more than two members of the board shall reside in the geographic area involved in the dispute. A person is not eligible for membership on the board if the decisions to be made by the board would or could cause financial benefit or detriment to the person, a member of his or her immediate family, or a business with which the person is associated, unless such benefit or detriment is indistinguishable from the effects of such action on the public generally or a broad segment of the public. The board shall be subject to the Open Meetings Act.

(c) For purposes of subsections (2) and (3) of this section, action may be taken by a vote of three of the board's five members. For purposes of subsections (4) and (5) of this section, action may be taken only by a vote of at least four of the board's five members.

(2)(a) If the Department of Natural Resources and the affected natural resources districts cannot resolve disputes over the content of a basin-wide plan or an integrated management plan by utilizing the process described in sections 46-715 to 46-718, the Governor shall be notified and the dispute submitted to the Interrelated Water Review Board. When the board has been appointed and convened to resolve disputes over a basin-wide plan, the department and each affected district shall present their proposed basin-wide plans to the board. When the board has been convened to resolve disputes over an integrated management plan, the department and each affected natural resources district shall present their (i) proposed goals and objectives for the integrated management plan, (ii) proposed geographic area to be subject to controls, and (iii) proposed surface water and ground water controls and any proposed incentive program for adoption and implementation in the river basin, subbasin, or reach involved. The department and each affected natural resources district shall also be given adequate opportunity to comment on the proposals made by the other parties to the dispute.

(b) When the Interrelated Water Review Board concludes that the issues in dispute have been fully presented and commented upon by the parties to the dispute, which conclusion shall be made not more than forty-five days after the board is convened, the board shall select the proposals or portions of proposals that the board will consider for adoption and shall schedule one or more public hearings to take testimony on the selected proposals. The hearings shall be held within forty-five days after the board's selection of proposals to consider for adoption and shall be within or in reasonable proximity to the area that would be affected by implementation of any of the proposals to be considered at the hearings. Notice of the hearings shall be published as provided in section 46-743. The cost of publishing the notice shall be shared by the department and the affected natural resources districts. All interested persons may appear at the hearings and present testimony or provide other evidence relevant to the issues being considered.

(c) Within forty-five days after the final hearing pursuant to subdivision (b) of this subsection, the Interrelated Water Review Board shall by order, as applicable, adopt a basin-wide plan or an integrated management plan for the affected river basin, subbasin, or reach and, in the case of an integrated management plan, shall designate a ground water management area for integrated management or an integrated management subarea for such river basin, subbasin, or reach. An integrated management plan shall be consistent with subsection (2) of section 46-715, and the surface water and ground water controls and any applicable incentive programs adopted as part of that plan shall be consistent with subsection (3) of section 46-715. The controls adopted by the board shall not be substantially different from those described in the notice of hearing. The area designated as a ground water management area or an integrated management subarea shall not include any area that was not identified in the notice of the hearing as within the area proposed to be subject to the controls in the plan.

(d) The order adopted under this subsection shall be published in the manner prescribed in section 46-744.

(e) Surface water controls adopted by the Interrelated Water Review Board shall be implemented and enforced by the department. Ground water controls adopted by the Interrelated Water Review Board shall be implemented and enforced by the affected natural resources districts.

(3) Whether an integrated management plan is adopted pursuant to section 46-718 or by the Interrelated Water Review Board pursuant to subsection (2) of this section, the department or a natural resources district responsible in part for implementation and enforcement of an integrated management plan may propose modification of the goals or objectives of that plan, of the area subject to the plan, or of the surface water controls, ground water controls, or incentive programs adopted to implement the plan. The department and the affected natural resources districts shall utilize the procedures in sections 46-715 to 46-718 in an attempt to reach agreement on and to adopt and implement proposed modifications. If agreement on such modifications cannot be achieved utilizing those procedures, either the department or an affected natural resources district may notify the Governor of the dispute. The Interrelated Water Review Board shall be appointed and convened in accordance with subsection (1) of this section to resolve the dispute and, if applicable, to adopt any modifications utilizing the procedures in subsection (2) of this section.

(4) The department and the affected natural resources districts may also raise objections concerning the implementation or enforcement of previously adopted surface water or ground water controls. The department and the affected natural resources districts shall utilize the procedures in sections 46-715 to 46-718 in an attempt to reach agreement on such implementation or enforcement issues. If agreement on such issues cannot be achieved utilizing such procedures, either the department or an affected natural resources district may notify the Governor of the dispute. The Interrelated Water Review Board shall be appointed and convened in accordance with subsection (1) of this section. After permitting each party to fully express its reasons for its position on the disputed issues, the board may either take no action or conclude (a) that one or more parties needs to modify its approach to implementation or enforcement and direct that such modifications take place or (b) that one or more parties either has not made a good faith effort to implement or enforce the portion of the plan or controls for which it is responsible or is unable to fully implement and enforce such portion and that such party's jurisdiction with respect to implementation and enforcement of the plan and controls shall be terminated and reassigned to one or more of the other parties responsible for implementation and enforcement. A decision by the Interrelated Water Review Board to terminate and reassign jurisdiction of any portion of the plan or controls shall take effect immediately upon that decision. Notice of such reassignment shall be published at least once in one or more newspapers as necessary to provide general circulation in the area affected by such reassignment.

(5) The board may be reconvened in accordance with subsection (1) of this section at a later date upon request to the Governor by the party for which jurisdiction for implementation and enforcement was terminated if such party desires to have its jurisdiction reinstated, but no such request shall be honored until at least one year after the termination and not more than once per year thereafter. The board may reinstate jurisdiction to that party only upon a clear showing by such party that it is willing and able to fully implement and enforce the plan and any applicable controls. Notice that a party's jurisdiction has been reinstated shall be provided in the same manner that notice of the earlier termination was given.

Posted by Steve Smith at 04:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The MRNRD will hold a hearing on water allocations at the City Auditorium at West 5th and C Street in McCook, Nebraska on August 30th 2007 at 7:00 PM.

The NRD will take testimony on what the allocation should be. Reportedly the MRNRD will propose setting the allocation at 60 inches over 5 years. Which works out to 12 inches a year.

The full notice can be seen on the MRNRD web site.

Posted by Steve Smith at 09:59 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Understanding Nebraska’s Obligations in the Republican River Compact
by Attorney General Jon Bruning

Recent comments by Kansas Attorney General Paul Morrison at the Republican River Compact meeting have created some concern in Nebraska about the future. Keeping in mind that no one can predict the future, here is the history of the compact and the legal landscape as it exists today.

Nebraska entered into a compact with Kansas and Colorado in 1943. That agreement gave 49 percent of the water in the Republican River to Nebraska, 40 percent to Kansas and 11 percent to Colorado. Each year the supply changes depending on the rain in the basin and the amount of water stored in the seven federal reservoirs. In 1998, Kansas sued Nebraska and Colorado claiming we both were using more than our share. The case was settled, in part, after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that depletions to river flow caused by groundwater use would count as part of the supply available to the states and did not find any state used more than its share. The settlement determined how states would include groundwater use in the compact accounting.

Even with the inclusion of groundwater use, in normal water conditions like those in 1995 through 2001, Nebraska uses less than its allocation each year. Seven years of drought, however, have brought available supply to an all-time low. In response, Nebraska no longer allows increases in irrigated acres or new wells, and limited groundwater allocations were adopted throughout the basin. Many groundwater users have reduced their pumping even lower than their allocations allow. Similarly, surface water users have agreed to relinquish the use of their water so that it can be given directly to Kansas. Nebraska also has reduced the number of irrigated acres through the CREP and EQUIP programs.

So what happens next? In normal years, Nebraska’s water use is well within its compact share. In non-normal drought years, additional measures are needed. These include adopting lower allocations and working out long-term surface water leases to send across the state line. These water leases provide the best bang for the buck for Nebraska and for Kansas. Vegetation management may also be useful.

As for compact compliance, the compact provides for the water administrators in the three states to meet and agree on the compact numbers. That process will move forward this fall. If the states cannot agree on the numbers, the settlement includes a dispute resolution mechanism. The dispute resolution process includes nonbinding arbitration. If the dispute is not resolved by arbitration then any state has the option of presenting the issue to the U.S. Supreme Court.

No one wants more litigation. Our hope remains that we can work with Kansas to ensure Nebraska gets the water it is entitled to and meets its obligations under the compact. We know that’s a tall order. If we can’t avoid court, rest assured I and my office will do everything we can to defend Nebraska’s interests.

Posted by Steve Smith at 02:12 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The Governor's agent says Nebraska has no plans on how to comply with the Republican River agreement requirements. She says this in spite Basin NRD plans that would keep the State in compliance.

The Basin NRDs released a statement in response.

Read the response

It is good to see the NRDs publicly call the DNR on the games it is playing. If the NRDs remain united on requiring accurate information and consistent policy from the DNR, it will go a long way to solving the fundamental problem. Our only complaint with the NRDs is that until now they had allowed the DNR to tell different stories to different people and change the "facts" as they went along.

Posted by Steve Smith at 01:18 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Republican River Compact Administration Meeting

Held in Junction City Kansas Conference Center

The web site for the center is http://www.junctioncitycourtyard.com/meetingsevents.aspx

The motel is reportedly full so if you plan on staying overnight you may need to find other accommodations.

The purpose of the meeting is for the three States to meet and discuss Compact Compliance.

The meeting and workshop are open to the public

The agenda for the meeting is as follows:

47^th ANNUAL MEETING

REPUBLICAN RIVER COMPACT ADMINISTRATION

August 14 and15, 2007

Junction City Convention Center

Junction City, Kansas

Work Session:

August 14, 2007, 1:00 to 8:00 P.M.

Proposed Agenda for Annual Meeting:

August 15, 2007, 9:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M.

1.                  Introductions

2.                  Modification and Adoption of Agenda

3.                  Approval of Previous Annual Meeting Minutes

4.                  Report of Chairman & Commissioners' Reports

a.      Kansas

b.      Colorado

c.      Nebraska

5.                  Federal Reports

a.      Bureau of Reclamation

b.      Corps of Engineers

c.      Geological Survey

6.                  Committee Reports

a.      Engineering Committee

                                                                           i.      User Accounting Manual

                                                                         ii.      2007 Accounting

                                                                        iii.      Recharge and Return flow methods

                                                                       iv.      Harlan County Evaporation split

                                                                         v.      Documentation of acreage retirement

                                                                       vi.      Principia Mathematica contract for maintenance and operation of RRGWM

                                                                      vii.      Other matters

b.      Conservation Committee

c.      Legal Committee

                                                                           i.      RRCA regulation regarding the approval of a diversion in one state that is used in another state

                                                                         ii.      Non-Federal dam evaporation

7.                  Unfinished Business

a.      Amended regulations of the RRCA

b.      Lower Republican Feasibility Study

c.      Harlan County Evaporation Split

8.                  New Business and Assignments to the Compact's Committees

a.      Action on Committee Reports

b.      Committee Assignments

c.      Compact Compliance

9.                  Remarks from the Public

10.              Future Meeting Arrangements

11.              Adjournment

Posted by Steve Smith at 07:58 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Governor Heineman released a letter to the Water Policy Task Force on Monday, July 30.

Page 1

Page 2

Posted by Steve Smith at 02:18 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The system used to measure compliance with the Republican River agreement with Kansas has some serious problems.

This is the information WaterClaim presented at the Legislative Hearing held on July 31, 2007.

Model Problems

Posted by Steve Smith at 01:01 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)