Laserfiche WebLink
Ground Water Commission Meeting Minutes Page 7 <br /> November 15, 2024 <br /> Mr. Sanchez affirmed that the replacement well would be in the same basin and <br /> aquifer as the proposed new wells. <br /> Commissioner Tietmeyer then commented that the proposed plan seems to be a <br /> change of diversion. <br /> Mr. Sanchez commented that the proposed plan would be structured through a <br /> replacement plan and change of water right. <br /> Commissioner Tietmeyer asked for details regarding the pumping history of the <br /> proposed replacement well. <br /> Mr. Sanchez replied that the well has been part of the Conservation Resource Program <br /> (CRP) and has not been pumped in the past ten years. However, the well does have a <br /> 10 year period of record to generate consumptive use data. <br /> Mr. Sanchez provided a letter from Sand Hills Management District that was not in <br /> support of approval for the proposed variance. Responding to the letter, Mr. Sanchez <br /> reiterated that the proposed plan is more effective at achieving the statement of <br /> basis for purpose under Rule 5.6.1.D.1 than would otherwise be achieved by <br /> complying with the rule. Mr. Sanchez described the financial hardship the Applicant <br /> would undergo to build the infrastructure to pump the replacement water if <br /> complying with the rule. It was estimated that the total cost would be $250,000 to <br /> comply with the rule. Regarding precedence set through approval of this variance, Mr. <br /> Sanchez acknowledges those concerns and would be in support of the variance being <br /> non-precedent setting. <br /> Mr. Sanchez summarized his arguments that the proposal eliminates unnecessary risk <br /> associated with complying with Rule 5.6.1.D.1, and would not cause a negative <br /> impact to other water users. <br /> Aaron Ladd representing Sand Hills Ground Water Management District then addressed <br /> the Commission. Mr. Ladd directed the Commission to the letter provided by the <br /> District recommending that the variance request be denied. <br /> Mr. Ladd believes it is important to follow the procedures requiring the physical <br /> delivery of replacement water be made under the rule, along with the requirement of <br /> unusual hardship to be shown before a variance can be granted. Mr. Ladd does not <br /> believe that the unusual hardship standard is met in this case for a variance to be <br /> granted. The physical measurement of water for a replacement plan is required for a <br /> replacement plan to be effective, rather than an accounting practice. Mr. Ladd <br /> believes granting a variance that wouldn't require the physical measurement of water <br /> under a replacement plan could cause confusion with the public and other water <br /> users. Additionally, the replacement well is currently under the CRP program and has <br /> not pumped since the 1980's, so in this case, a change would be made from a well not <br />