United States v. Bd. of Dirs. of the Truckee-Carson Irrigation Dist., 3:95-CV-00757-HDM
| Decision Date | 11 May 2015 |
| Docket Number | 3:95-CV-00757-HDM |
| Parties | UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, and PYRAMID LAKE PAIUTE TRIBE OF INDIANS, Intervenor-Plaintiff, v. BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TRUCKEE-CARSON IRRIGATION DISTRICT, individually and as Representatives of the Class of all Water Users in the Newlands Reclamation Project; TRUCKEE-CARSON IRRIGATION DISTRICT, Defendants, and STATE OF NEVADA, Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Division of Wildlife and Division of State Lands; CHURCHILL COUNTY; DODGE BROTHERS AND DOGE JR. FAMILY TRUST; DAVID P. HARRIGAN; GEORGE AND SHELLY RAE RAKURSHIN; WILLIAM D. AND GWENDOLYN WASHBURN; MARVIN WEISHAUPT; HOWARD D. WOLF FAMILY TRUST; RAY CONLAN; CORKILL BROS., INC.; CALVIN R. MOFFITT AND CANDACE J. MOFFITT; BELL FAMILY TRUST; LARRY L. FRITZ FAMILY TRUST; DAVID L. MATLEY AND CHRISTINE L. MATLEY FAMILY TRUST AND DAVID MATLEY; HAROLD G. AND RHONDA JOHNSON AND JOHNSON FAMILY TRUST; A&A DAIRY; JOYCE LOHR; PERALDO BROTHERS; STILLWATER FARMS, INC.; CHARLES P. FREY, JR. AND DEBRA S. FREY; NORMAN W. FREY; FALLON-PAIUTE SHOSHONE TRIBE, Intervenor-Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Nevada |
On April 20, 2009, the Court of Appeals entered an order largely affirming this court's decision of December 3, 2003, but vacating and remanding for recalculation of the recoupment for the years 1974, 1975, 1978, 1979, and 1980. On October 6, 2011, this court entered its order calculating the total amount subject to recoupment for those years to be 309,480 acre feet. The court did not recalculate and include recoupment for four additional years - 1973, 1976, 1985, and 1986 - as they were not included in the Court of Appeals' mandate.
On July 22, 2013, the Court of Appeals withdrew and amended its original mandate to include recoupment for any excess diversions in 1973, 1976, 1985, and 1986, subject to this court's consideration of Truckee-Carson Irrigation District's ("TCID") argument that an alternative basis exists for denial of recoupment in 1985 and 1986. The Court of Appeals stated:
With regard to 1985 and 1986, there may be merit to TCID's contention that there is an alternative ground in the record for the district court's finding that recoupment was unavailable or limited for those years, namely, deviation from the OCAP authorized by court order. We leave to the district court to determine whether, and to what extent, this consideration affects the recoupment available for 1985 and 1986. . . .
United States v. Bd. of Directors of Truckee-Carson Irr. Dist., 723 F.3d 1029, 1035 (9th Cir. 2013).
On January 29, 2014, this court issued its order determining that the amount subject to recoupment for 1973 was 23,224 acre feet, and the amount subject to recoupment for 1976 was 3,204 acre feet. The court then directed the parties to submit further briefing to address the issue of whether, and to what extent, court orders may have impacted plaintiffs' entitlement to recoupment for 1985 and 1986. Specifically, the court asked the parties to address any orders in existence that pertain to the rights to use water in 1985 and 1986, as well as the court's earlier holdings that (1) the OCAPs are "subordinate to the Orr Ditch and Alpine Decrees . . . [and] any orders or judgments issued pursuant to the Nevada District Court's continuing jurisdiction in those cases necessarily would supercede any inconsistent terms of the OCAP"; (2) any changes to the 1973 OCAP require either the Tribe's written agreement or court approval; and (3) "the evidence [at trial] established that in 1985 and 1986 the decree court entered orders with regard to diversions by the Federal Water Master for water spreading and diversions in 1985 and 1986 that take precedence over any interim OCAPs for those years and any diversions or deliveries that occurred under court orders are not properly a part of any recoupment calculation."
On August 1, 2014, TCID filed its brief in response to the court's order (#838).1 The government and Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe of Indians ("Tribe") filed their joint response on September29, 2014 (#843). TCID filed a reply on November 13, 2014 (#848).2
This order is issued for the limited purpose of responding to the Ninth Circuit's mandate to the district court to determine the amount of water subject to recoupment for the years 1985 and 1986. In all other respects, the earlier orders of the court, including the conclusion that the State of Nevada and the individual water users are not responsible for repayment of water, are reconfirmed.
In its 2003 decision, the court concluded that any OCAP issued by Reclamation are "subordinate to the Orr Ditch and Alpine Decrees . . . [and] any orders or judgments issued pursuant to the Nevada District Court's continuing jurisdiction in those cases necessarily would supercede any inconsistent terms of the OCAP." While the court concluded that the interim OCAPs in effect in 1985 and 1986 were valid and binding on TCID, it also concluded that "[t]he evidence established that in 1985 and 1986 the decree court entered orders with regard to diversions by the Federal Water Master for water spreading and diversions in 1985 and 1986 that take precedence over any interim OCAPs for those years and any diversions or deliveries that occurred under court orders are not properly a part of any recoupment calculation." The following court orders are germane to the determination of the amount of water, if any, that is subject to recoupment for 1985 and 1986.
On January 15, 1985, Judge Craig entered an order allowingdiversions into the Truckee Canal for the Newlands Project. Specifically, the order stated:
On September 26, 1984, the Bureau of Reclamation, through the Department of the Interior, stopped diversions into the Truckee Canal for the Newlands Project. The Water Master has been requested by owners of water rights in the Newlands Project to begin diversions into the Truckee Canal pursuant to the terms of the Final Decree entered September 8, 1944, herein, for storage for use during the 1985 irrigation season. GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, the Water Master, GARRY STONE, is hereby authorized to commence diversions to the Newlands Project pursuant to the Final Decree entered September 8, 1944.
On October 28, 1985, Judge Thompson entered an order stating that in light of a motion by the Justice Department for approval of interim OCAP, "certain orders [we]re necessary to maintain the status quo." (Doc. #745-3 at 9). He ordered that "[p]ending this court's ruling on the above-referenced motion of the Justice Department . . . diversions of Truckee River water to Lahontan Reservoir as authorized by the Watermaster pursuant to the January 15, 1985, Order of Judge Walter E. Craig entered in the case of United States v. Orr Water Ditch Co., Equity No. A-3, shall be permitted." Id. At 9-10. He further ordered that TCID "shall be permitted to deliver irrigation water during the period of November 1, through November 15, of this year to project farmers who have planted winter grain and/or new fall seedings of alfalfa on their project water right lands." Id. at 10. Finally, he ordered that any disputes over what lands should be classified bench or bottom were to be initially submitted to and decided by the Watermaster, and that "[p]ending resolvement of those disputes by the Watermaster and, if review of his decision is requested, by the court in those proceedings, the status quo shall be maintained and[TCID] shall deliver the historical deliveries to those lands as shown on its bench and bottom maps." Id.
On November 15, 1985, Judge Thompson conducted a hearing at which he approved the interim OCAP "to the extent that they are applicable during the period from this date, until March 15, 1986." (Tr. Ex. 43; Doc. #748-5 at 2). The OCAP approved by Judge Thompson's order incorporated Reclamation's bench/bottom maps, not TCID's. (Doc. #843-1 at 43 (Tr. Ex. 43 at 5)).
On March 13, 1986, Judge Thompson entered a "water spreading" order that stated:
During the 1986 irrigation season water released from Lahontan Reservoir and spread on project lands with the consent of the water user by TCID to avoid or minimize damages to downstream properties from flooding on the Carson River shall not be considered as irrigation releases nor charged to the project farmers' 3.5 or 4.5 acre feet per acre decreed entitlement.
(Tr. Ex. 1305; Doc. #843-2 at 46).
Considering the procedural history outlined above, the court concludes that court orders in effect in 1985 authorized deviation from any and all OCAPs from January 15, 1985, until November 15, 1985. Beginning on January 15, 1985, Judge Craig's order authorized diversions during the 1985 irrigation season pursuant to the 1944 Final Decree. Any interim OCAP in existence on January 15, 1985, was superceded by Judge Craig's order of January 15, 1985. This court's prior holding that orders entered by the decree court supersede inconsistent terms of the OCAP holds true whether the OCAPs existed at the time of the court order or whether they were subsequently adopted. Thus, following Judge Craig's order until its expiration,...
To continue reading
Request your trial