Members ATtendance

VISITORS:  Bill French, Moscow Citizen and member PWCN; David Hall, Moscow Citizen and member PWCN; Bob Haynes, Regional Manager IDWR; Sarah Koerber, Moscow Citizen and member PWCN; Dennis Owsley, graduate student working on OK Project; Scott King, King Groundwater Science, Inc.; Kathleen Warnick, interested citizen.

1)      Call to Order and Approval of November 21, 2002 Minutes
Steve Busch, PBAC Vice Chair, called the meeting to order at 2:35 PM.  The minutes of the November 21, 2002 meetings were approved by consensus. 

2)      Report by Bob Haynes on IDWR Perspective of Naylor Farm LLC Pumping Application  - Bob handed out a two page, double sided handout detailing the procedures and requirements for a large pumping application such as the Naylor Farm LLC (Naylor).  A request by IDWR for eight pieces of support information from Naylor has been made.  Naylor has 30 days to answer but can request an extension.  The required supplemental pieces of support information include:
    (1)  a plat locating all wells and springs within one-half mile of the proposed wells.
    (2)  design, construction and operating techniques which will be employed to eliminate or reduce the impact on other water rights.
    (3)  more detailed information on the water requirements of the proposed project including peak diversion rate and time of year;            average diversion rate; annual volume; consumptive use and the period of year water will be required.
    (4)  information on the quantity of water available from the source and properties of the aquifer from which the water will be pumped.
    (5)  ownership or appropriate possessory interest in the lands necessary for all project facilities and water use.
    (6)  a financial statement demonstrating that finances are or will be available to appropriate the water and apply it to the beneficial         uses proposed.
    (7)  plans and specifications along with construction costs for the project works.
    (8)  copies of letters of comment from the governing body of the city and/or county associated with the point of pumping and place of use.
        The handout also covered the steps involved if the protestants, City of Moscow and City of Pullman, cannot resolve concerns with the applicant.  PBAC will be invited to comment once all the supplemental information has been accumulated by IDWR.  This  supplemental information will be made available to PBAC.  The handout clarifies that individuals and entities can still send comments to IDWR via email or post at no cost or can request to intervene at a cost of $25.  The primary advantage of the latter option is the right to cross-examine the applicant and witnesses should the application go to the hearing process.  The 6 criteria used in the hearing process were also listed.
        In his talk and question answering, Bob covered a variety of topics.  He apologized for the way the application was handled without early notification of PBAC and the local communities.  He stated that IDWR has to follow legal requirements.  This legal process had a slot for PBAC involvement prior to final considerations of the application.  However, this application has revitalized the need for clarifying what application information should be sent to PBAC and when. 
        Bob provided a quick summary of the water right process in Idaho and then covered most of what is on the handout.  Below are a few highlights not covered by the handout. 
        Any pumping or diversion over 5 cubic feet per second requires special advertising.  The State of Idaho Constitution guarantees any party the right to file for a water right.   However, water cannot be reserved for a project or future use; it must be put to beneficial use.
Municipal purveyors are an exception.  They can reserve water for future needs if it is spelled out in a municipal water management plan.  The plan must address the 6 IDWR criteria in the process of outlining the future needs.  Boise has filed for water uses 50 years in the future.
        There is also a hierarchy of uses with municipal use ranking above other uses such as irrigation and mining.  Municipalities can take water by eminent domain and just compensation.
In Idaho “first in time (for beneficial uses) is first in right.”  Prior to 1953 a water right could be obtained without filing if the water was put to beneficial use.  Since then a party must file with IDWR to obtain a water right.  Any right can be converted to another use through the proper procedure.  Water rights can be sold.   However, a non-assignable clause can now be attached to water rights to avoid the applicant sitting on the water right or obtaining it for speculation.
        Bob said the City of Pullman’s protest will not be thrown out.  It is a valid protest.  The water shared in the Palouse Basin is recognized as a shared resource.
In response to a question, Bob indicated that the City of Moscow could drill another well for redundancy as long as it did not increase pumping over the permitted amount.  Otherwise the City would need to file for an increase in it water rights.
Bob stated that the only reason the Palouse Basin is not in a Critical Ground Water Management Area is because of the local action taken to deal with the falling water levels in the deep aquifer system through the reconstitution of PBAC.
The Naylor application will be subject to technical evaluation by IDWR before any decisions concerning the granting a water right are made. 
        Regarding a question on what is an “adverse impact”, Bob indicated that the law defines it. The conversation then got side-tracked without further clarification of what an “adverse impact” is and how to recognize an adverse impact on a senior water right holder. 
Bob also said there is a need to differentiate the shallow aquifer from the deep aquifer because of the lack of connectivity and because of the documented recharge to the shallow aquifer which is lacking for the deep aquifer.

3)      Proposed Description of Palouse Basin to be handed out by IDWR & DOE to non-residential applicants for water rights in the Palouse Basin  -Kirkland handed out a draft, one page information sheet for Committee review.  It was suggested that a map of the basin be put on the back.  PBAC members were requested to review the draft and be prepared to consider it at the next meeting.

4)      Request for possible funding to send Dennis Owsley to Wyoming Historical Society Museum to review Anaconda exploration records for the Moscow area- Kirkland reviewed briefly for the Committee that Anaconda Mining Co. drilled upwards of 1200 holes in the Moscow basin area assessing the potential to mine clay for aluminum extraction and special uses in the late 40s and 50s.   Along with the shallow holes examining the clay they supposedly drilled a number of deep holes in search of the water needed for the clay processing operation.   After considerable exploration in the Moscow Basin, Anaconda gave up on an economical operation to process the clay.  The only know records of this exploratory work are with the Wyoming Historical Society.  There is a $1000 entrance fee for businesses to examine the Anaconda records but students can get in for $15.  Dennis Owsley, a graduate student who has been working for the OK project and doing water level measurements for PBAC, is willing to visit the Wyoming Historical Society and examine the files on the Moscow Basin to locate where the deep wells were drilled and examine the logs for useful information.  Much of the Anaconda exploration work was done in the vicinity of the Naylor Farm properties.  The Anaconda data could be a great help in resolving some of the issues associated with the Naylor water right application.  For example: What aquifers are present below the Naylor property?  What was the productivity of any pump tests performed by Anaconda? After some discussion it was moved by Joe Kline and seconded by Jay Becker to make available $500 to Dennis Owsley to visit the Wyoming Historical Society to view the Anaconda records of its exploratory work in the Moscow Basin.

5)      PBAC Support for Continued Negotiations between the Cities of Moscow and Pullman and Ralph Naylor Farm LLC regarding the Naylor Water Right Application- After some discussion PBAC agreed by consensus to support continued negotiations by the Cities of Moscow and Pullman with Ralph Naylor Farm LLC to try to arrive at an agreement that would permit Naylor to proceed toward a water right while protecting all senior water right holders from any adverse impacts resulting from pumping by Naylor.

6)      Status on Projects and Research Support – Kirkland recommended postponing this item since there will be a semi-annual reporting on the OK Project and related research at the next meeting.

7)      Reports and Announcements
Kirkland announced that Geotech was the low bid for the new 1000 foot WSU well to replace well # 6 and provide improved backup for well # 7.  WSU is now checking to see that the bid is valid.   Gary Wells, the senior engineer in charge of the project, has promised that WSU will work with PBAC to maximize the data collection during the drilling and testing phases.

At this point several people had to leave. The meeting was adjourned after agreeing to January 16, 2002 for the next meeting date.

8)      NEXT MEETING DATE

The meeting was adjourned by consensus.

Respectfully Submitted,

Larry Kirkland