BILLS THAT PASSED
HB 84 - Water Law - Nonuse Requirements
Rep. Tim Hawkes
House Bill 84, which was recommended by the Executive Water
Rights Task Force, clarifies that: (1) an approved nonuse application excuses
the requirement of beneficial use from the nonuse application's filing date;
(2) the filing or approval of a nonuse application, or a series of nonuse
applications, does not constitute beneficial use or protect a water right that
is already subject to forfeiture; and (3) a nonuse application does not bar a
water right owner from using the water as permitted under the water right or
from claiming any available defense against forfeiture. The bill also modifies
the procedures for instituting a forfeiture action for nonuse.
HB 118 - Authority of State Engineer
Rep. Tim Hawkes
House Bill 118, which was recommended by the Executive Water
Rights Task Force, allows the State Engineer to develop rules regarding the "duty of water" or in other words, a quantification of the maximum amount of
water that can be beneficially used, without waste, for a particular purpose.
Although the State Engineer and the courts in General Adjudications have used
this concept for over 100 years, there is no statutory authority for this
concept. This bill gives the State Engineer express authority to do what is
already being done with respect to the duty of water.
HB 180 (2nd Sub.) – Water Right Transfer Amendments
Rep. Logan Wilde
House Bill 180 modifies Utah Code section 73-3-18 regarding
assignment of an unperfected application to appropriate. If an assignment is
made using the Division of Water Rights’ assignment form, and it is recorded
and forwarded to the Division, the assignment will be treated as a report ofconveyance for updating title on the Division’s database.
HB 181 – State Engineer Fee Application Amendments
Rep. Logan Wilde
HB 301 (1st Sub.) – Canal Safety Amendments
Rep. Scott D. Sandall
House Bill 301 removes a requirement that a canal owner receive
notice from a municipality or county of any proposed subdivision located within
100 feet of the canal. The bill adds a more defined requirement that a
municipality or county not approve or reject a subdivision that is located
within 100 feet of canal until after the municipality has provided at least 20
days’ notice of the subdivision to the canal owner so that the canal owner can
provide input regarding access to the canal, maintenance of the canal, canal
protection, and canal safety. The bill also makes minor changes to the
requirement that canal owners provide contact information and canal location
information to each municipality and county in which its canal is located.
SB 11 (2nd Sub.) - Water Development Commission Amendments
Sen. Margaret Dayton
Senate Bill 11 renames the State Water Development Commission to
the Legislative Water Development Commission and modifies the membership of the
Commission. The bill removes all of the non-legislative, non-voting members
from the Commission: the state treasurer; two representatives of the Governor's
Office, including one representative from the Governor's Office of Management
and Budget; nine representatives of different river districts; the executive
director of the Department of Natural Resources; the executive director of the
Department of Environmental Quality; the commissioner of agriculture and food;
a member of the Board of Water Resources; a representative of an organized
environmental group; a representative of agricultural production; and a
representative with experience with finance and economics. The bill adds that
non-voting members can be appointed to two-year terms by the Legislative
Management Committee upon recommendation of the Commission co-chairs.
SB 45 – Retail Water Line Disclosure Amendments
Sen. Karen Mayne
Senate Bill 45 affects public entities that provide culinary
water service to customers. The bill requires that twice per calendar year,
these public retail water providers must provide a disclosure to its customers
that states whether the property owner or the provider is responsible for
repairs to the water line that serves the customer. The purpose of this
requirement is to give better clarification of where the provider's
responsibility for water line maintenance ends and where the property owner's
responsibility for water line maintenance begins. The bill modifies Utah Code
section 11-8-4, which was enacted in 2016 and requires the same disclosure for
sewer service providers relative to sewer line maintenance responsibilities.
SB 63 (1st Sub.) - Nonprofit Corporation Amendments – Water Companies
Sen. Margaret Dayton
Senate Bill 63 modifies the Utah Revised Nonprofit Corporation
Act to change the default rule on the transferability of shares in a water
company from non-transferrable to transferrable, unless the articles or bylaws
of the water company specify otherwise. The bill further specifies that any
restrictions on the transfer of shares in a water company must be reasonable,
adopted in good faith and for a legitimate purpose, adopted in the best
interests of the water company and its shareholders, and not discriminate
against any individual shareholder or class of shareholders. The bill also
clarifies that a shareholder in a water company has “an equitable, beneficial
interest in the use of the water supply of the water company, proportionate to
the shareholder’s shares in the water company, which is an interest in real
property” and has a right to receive his/her proportionate share of the
company’s water. The bill also expressly allows a water company to purchase
delinquent shares of stock and clarifies the process for distributions to
shareholders in a water company.
SB 214 (1st Sub.) - Public Water Supplier Amendments
Sen. Jani Iwamoto
Senate Bill 214 originally proposed to modify Utah's instream flow
statute (Section 73-3-30) to allow public water suppliers to change perfected
water rights for instream use. The substituted bill acknowledged that the
instream flow issue is very complex and that additional work and input from a
number of stakeholders is necessary before any changes are made to the instream
flow statute. The bill encourages the Water Development Commission and the
Executive Water Task Force to study possible options for expanding the list of
those who can file for instream flow rights.
SJR 11 - Joint Resolution Regarding the Central Utah Project
Sen. Curtis S. Bramble
Senate Joint Resolution 11 urges the United States Congress and
the new administration to budget sufficient funds to enable the Bonneville Unit
of the Central Utah Project to be completed.
BILLS THAT DID NOT PASS
HB 225 – Water Commissioner Amendments
Rep. Scott Chew
House Bill 225 exempts the State Engineer from the Utah Procurement Code with respect to the Water Commissioner Fund, but requires the State Engineer to make administrative rules governing the use of the Fund. The bill also clarifies and expands the items that can be paid from the Fund, including benefits for commissioners, expenses approved by a distribution system committee, and administration expenses of a distribution system committee.
HB 304 (1st Sub.) – Water Conservation Amendments
Rep. Gage Froerer
House Bill 304 modifies water conservation plan requirements,
including requiring each water conservancy district and each retail water
provider to have a water conservation plan that includes goals for reduction in
residential, commercial, and industrial uses, and water conservation measures
for these same uses, and including landscaping. The bill also changes some
recommended components of a water conservation plan into required components,
such as information regarding the installation of water efficient fixtures and
appliances; retail water rate structures designed to encourage conservation;
and existing or proposed regulations designed to encourage conservation,
including restrictions on grass landscaping.
HB 444 – Water Appropriation Modifications
Rep. Merrill F. Nelson
House Bill 444 clarifies which State divisions, departments, and
entities can file applications to appropriate water. The bill adds language
that these State entities must go through the same appropriation process as a
private property owner would have to go through, and that the State entities
have no special rights by virtue of being a public entity or public water
supplier.
SB 228 (1st Sub.) - Water Infrastructure Revisions
Sen. J. Stuart Adams
Senate Bill 228 seeks to modify rules about loans from the Board
of Water Resources, including a requirement that the Board establish a plan to
require loan applicants to submit their project plans for an independent value
engineering review to examine ways that the project’s value can be increased
through reducing costs and improving function.
SB 271 - Canal and Ditch Modifications
Sen. David P. Hinkins
Senate Bill 271 seeks to allow a property owner whose land is
crossed by a canal, ditch, drain, or “buried irrigation conduit” to change the
location of the canal, ditch, drain, or “buried irrigation conduit,” subject to
several requirements and limitations. The property owner must provide written
notice to the water owner, including detailed plans and specifications prepared
by a licenses engineer. The property owner must provide contact information for
two other engineers to independently review the plans and specifications, and
must pay for the cost of this independent review if the water owner elects to
use one of the two engineers suggested by the property owner. Alternatively,
the water owner can select its own independent engineer, but is responsible for
paying the costs incurred for this independent review. The property owner and
water owner must negotiate terms regarding any restrictions or impediments to
the flow of water through the water channel. This bill would not allow for
culinary water lines or secondary water lines to be moved.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment