H.B. 222: Nonuse Application Amendments
House Bill 222 amends Utah's statute regarding
nonuse applications. The bill inserts language into the statute to provide (1) that
one or more successive overlapping change applications do not protect a water
right that is already subject to forfeiture due to nonuse, and (2) that the
approval of one or more nonuse applications does not constitute beneficial use
of the water for purposes of calculating the 15-year period during which a
forfeiture action must be brought.
H.B. 305 (Second Substitute): Water Rights and Resources Amendments
The Legislature passed Rep. Joel Briscoe's (D-Salt Lake) House Bill 305, which is intended to improve the accuracy of water use data. The bill
instructs the Drinking Water Board to require a certified water operator of a
public water supplier, or professional engineer performing the duties of an
operator, to verify the accuracy of water use and supply data submitted to the
Division of Drinking Water. It also provides that the Division of Water Rights
may collect and validate water use data. The bill further requires the Division
of Water Rights to enact rules specifying the type of water use data that will
be reported and how that data will be verified.
To view this bill, as enrolled,
click here.
H.B. 464 (Third Substitute): Wildfire on Public Lands and Watersheds
The Utah Legislature passed House Bill 464 to require the
Conservation Commission within the Department of Agriculture and Food to work
with Utah State University and certain conservation districts to study the
environmental and economic impacts of wildfire on public lands in Utah. Among
other things, the study will analyze the impacts of wildfire on the state's
watersheds and air quality. The Legislature also authorized a one-time,
$200,000 appropriation from the General Fund to carry out the study.
H.C.R. 1: Concurrent Resolution on Waters of the United
States
On March 1, Governor Herbert signed House Concurrent Resolution 1, a concurrent
resolution expressing his and the Legislature's joint disapproval of the
so-called "Waters of the United States" rule. The Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers finalized the rule
last year to resolve uncertainty the U.S. Supreme Court created in its divided
Rapanos v. United States decision regarding the extent of Clean Water Act (CWA)
jurisdiction. The rule has drawn praise from conservation groups and the ire of
farmers, industry, and at least 30 states, including Utah, which have filed
challenges in courts across the country to stop the rule.
The resolution, which Rep. Mike Noel (R-Kanab) introduced,
criticizes the rule as an "unlawful exercise of federal regulatory
authority" that will improperly expand the CWA to include dry land and
infringe on the ability of states to manage their water resources. It would
also express support for Attorney General Sean Reyes's ongoing efforts to
vacate the rule. The rule is currently on hold pursuant to a nationwide stay
the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals issued in October while it determines which
courts have jurisdiction to hear the various court challenges.
To view this bill, as enrolled,
click here.
H.J.R. 4 (First Substitute): Water Infrastructure
House Joint Resolution 4 urges Utah's congressional
delegation to support the efforts of Utah water users to secure title transfer
of reclamation projects and associated water rights from the federal government
to local water user organizations. The project specifically mentioned in the
joint resolution are the Strawberry Valley Project, Moon Lake Project, Emery
County Project, Sanpete Project, and Provo River Project.
To view this bill, as enrolled,
click here.
S.B. 23 (Second Substitute): Protected Purchaser Amendments
Senate Bill 23 modifies the definition of a "protected
purchaser" in the
Investment Securities chapter of the Utah Uniform Commercial Act. The bill adds additional requirements for a purchaser of a share of stock
in a water company to qualify as a protected purchaser. The standard
requirements of a protected purchaser are (1) give value, (2) not have notice
of an adverse claim, and (3) obtain control of the certificate.
A purchaser of a share of stock in a water
company will also need to show that he, or his predecessors in interest, (1)
paid assessments on the share for at least four of the prior seven years, or
(2) used water available under the share for at least four of the prior seven
years.
To view this bill, as enrolled,
click here.
S.B. 28: Water System Conservation Pricing
Senate Bill 28, sponsored by Sen. Scott Jenkins (R-Plain City)
and recommended by the Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment Interim
Committee, sailed through the legislature and was passed on February 10th. It now awaits the Governor's signature. It requires retail water providers to
establish a tiered rate structure where the price per unit of water increases
as the quantity of water delivered increases from tier to tier. Many water retailers already use tiered
pricing as a conservation incentive and to obtain assistance from state
revolving loan funds. Each retailer
retains the flexibility of identifying the size and number of tiers or blocks
of water and of setting the increasing rate applicable to each tier. This bill mandates this pricing approach for
all "retailer water providers," a term that is already defined by
statute as entities which supply culinary water to more than 500 end user
connections. The bill also requires that
the end users be given, at least annually, notice of: (1) the amount of water
used, (2) the billing cycle or period; and (3) the tiered rates.
To view this bill, as enrolled,
click here.
S.B. 75: Adjudication Amendments
Senate Bill 75 makes a number of changes to the
general adjudication
statutes found in Title 73, Chapter 4 of the Utah Code. As with other general
adjudication amendments that have passed in the last few years, this bill seeks
to take more responsibility from the Division of Water Rights and puts it on
the water users to ensure that timely and proper water claims are filed.
A substantial change is with respect to the
hydrographic survey maps. Previously, these surveys of water use were completed as an
initial step by the Division of Water Rights, and were the primary source of
information that the Division then used to complete Water User's Claims for the
water users to review and sign. Under the bill, no survey will be done in the
preliminary stages of the adjudication; rather, the hydrographic survey maps
will be prepared late in the process-at the same time that the proposed
determination is prepared-using the data from the submitted claims to prepare
the maps.
Other significant provisions of the bill include:
-Changing the term "Water User's Claims" to
"Statements of Claim"
-Allowing the Division to accept electronic Statements of
Claim
-Providing a mechanism for water users to ask the Division
for an extension of time to file their Statements of Claim
-Providing additional notice and a public meeting regarding
unclaimed rights of record, which will occur after claim are due but before a
proposed determination is published. Owners of the unclaimed rights of record
may object to the list of unclaimed rights (i.e., assert that their rights
should be included in the general adjudication), but the claimants will have to
demonstrate that their failure to file a timely statement of claim was excused
by circumstances beyond their control, mistake, or other justification.
To view this bill, as enrolled,
click here.
S.B. 80 (Second Substitute): Infrastructure Funding Amendments
Senate Bill 80, sponsored by Senator Stuart Adams (R-Layton),
moved well through the process and was substituted twice, and then held until
the very last day because it includes a budget appropriation. As substituted, the bill redirects over time
a 1/16% sales tax rate from the Transportation Fund back to the water community
and places it in the new Water Infrastructure Restricted Account that was
created last year. By 2021, all of these
sales tax revenues will go to the new water fund. This sales tax rate was originally destined
for water project funding but got diverted to major transportation needs, most
of which have now been met. Now that the
state has identified $33 billion in costs for essential water infrastructure
need between now and 2060, there is a clear need for these sales tax funds back
in the Water Infrastructure Account.
To view this bill, as enrolled,
click here.
S.B. 251 (Third Substitute): Water
Infrastructure Funding Amendments
Senate Bill 251, sponsored by Senator Stuart Adams (R-Layton),
came out late in the session on March 1st, was substituted three times, and
then one version passed the Senate and another the House. On the last day, the two bodies agreed on a
compromise version and passed that version.
The bill, among other things, requires new procedures to be established
for funding state water projects on the Bear and Colorado Rivers and funds
certain studies related to those projects.
To view this bill, as enrolled,
click here.
S.C.R. 1: Concurrent
Resolution Encouraging Universal Metering of Water Systems
Senate Concurrent Resolution 1, sponsored by Sen. Scott Jenkins (R-Plain
City) and recommended by the Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment
Interim Committee, encourages public water suppliers to implement metering of
water on "all retail public and private water systems," including
secondary water systems, because water users tend to voluntarily conserve more
water when they know how much water they are actually using. It flew through both houses and on to the
Governor's desk, who signed the resolution on February 24, 2016.
To view this bill, as enrolled,
click here.
Posts
