Tri County water project stalled for years; health department says iterative plan review, not intentional holdup

Tri County Regional Water officials told the Senate City, County & Local Affairs Committee that a critical source‑restoration project serving portions of Yell and surrounding counties has been slowed by repeated plan reviews and comment cycles over several years. Board chairman Robert Dale and general manager John Choate said the project first entered the approval pipeline in 2015 and has accumulated multiple rounds of comments that, together with inflation, have pushed costs higher and placed completion at risk.

"We first applied in 02/2015 for this project," Choate said, noting he and his board have repeatedly responded to Department of Health comment letters that have grown from an initial set of items to many more during iterative reviews. Tri County representatives asked the committee staff to compel a clear list of the outstanding items and for targeted assistance to move the plan to an approval decision.

Matt Gilmore of the Arkansas Department of Health responded that the department is processing plans and issuing comment letters as needed to satisfy statutory and federal requirements. "There's not a bottleneck. There's not a holdup. We are approving stuff as we get them," Gilmore said; he offered to provide the committee the latest comment letter and to meet with Tri County and its engineers to clarify remaining items.

Committee members expressed frustration about long timelines—one legislator said, "Seven years is too long"—and requested a concrete timeline from the Department of Health and Tri County's engineers showing when plan elements were submitted and when responses were provided. The Department of Health acknowledged periodic back‑and‑forth with engineering firms and said it aims for roughly 14‑day internal turnaround once it receives a complete plan, but delays can occur if reviewers need additional clarifications from submitting engineers.

Tri County and other rural utilities urged the committee to consider temporary measures to reduce cost escalation while approvals proceed — for example, interim emergency loans or staffing support to accelerate plan reviews — and requested the department and committee staff exchange the project correspondence and a joint timeline. The Department of Health agreed to send its latest comment letter to the committee within the week and to meet with Tri County representatives to try to clear outstanding issues.

The committee did not order a formal remedy during the hearing, but members directed staff to obtain the regulatory correspondence and to follow up with the Department of Health and the Department of Agriculture on options to expedite projects where public health or supply are at immediate risk.