Assembly Bill No. 133–Committee on Natural Resources, Agriculture and Mining

(On Behalf of Humboldt River Basin Water Authority)

February 4, 1999

____________

Referred to Committee on Natural Resources, Agriculture and Mining

 

SUMMARY—Limits circumstances under which person may apply for permit to appropriate water for wildlife purposes or for benefit of environment. (BDR 48-523)

FISCAL NOTE: Effect on Local Government: No.

Effect on the State or on Industrial Insurance: No.

~

EXPLANATION – Matter in bolded italics is new; matter between brackets [omitted material] is material to be omitted. Green numbers along left margin indicate location on the printed bill (e.g., 5-15 indicates page 5, line 15).

 

AN ACT relating to water; limiting the circumstances under which a person may apply for a permit to appropriate water for wildlife purposes or for the benefit of the environment; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.

 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND ASSEMBLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

1-1 Section 1. NRS 533.330 is hereby amended to read as follows:

1-2 533.330 [No application shall be for the water of] A person may not

1-3 apply for a permit to appropriate water:

1-4 1. From more than one source to be used for more than one purpose ,

1-5 [;] but individual domestic use may be included in any application with the

1-6 other use named [.] in the application;

1-7 2. For wildlife purposes unless the person:

1-8 (a) Owns the wildlife habitat; or

1-9 (b) If the person is an agency of this state or the United States, is

1-10 authorized to manage the wildlife,

1-11 for which the water is proposed to be used beneficially by that person or

1-12 agency; or

1-13 3. Except as otherwise provided in NRS 533.437 to 533.4377,

1-14 inclusive, for the benefit of the environment.

2-1 Sec. 2. NRS 533.370 is hereby amended to read as follows:

2-2 533.370 1. Except as otherwise provided in this section and NRS

2-3 533.330, 533.345, 533.371, 533.372 and 533.503 , [and this section,] the

2-4 state engineer shall approve an application submitted in proper form which

2-5 contemplates the application of water to beneficial use if:

2-6 (a) The application is accompanied by the prescribed fees;

2-7 (b) The proposed use or change, if within an irrigation district, does not

2-8 adversely affect the cost of water for other holders of water rights in the

2-9 district or lessen the [district’s] efficiency of the district in its delivery or

2-10 use of water; and

2-11 (c) The applicant provides proof satisfactory to the state engineer of:

2-12 (1) His intention in good faith to construct any work necessary to

2-13 apply the water to the intended beneficial use with reasonable diligence;

2-14 and

2-15 (2) His financial ability and reasonable expectation actually to

2-16 construct the work and apply the water to the intended beneficial use with

2-17 reasonable diligence.

2-18 2. Except as otherwise provided in subsection 5, the state engineer

2-19 shall [either] approve or reject each application within 1 year after the final

2-20 date for filing a protest. However:

2-21 (a) Action [can] may be postponed by the state engineer upon written

2-22 authorization to do so by the applicant or, [in case of a protested

2-23 application, by both] if an application is protested, by the protestant and

2-24 the applicant; and

2-25 (b) In areas where studies of water supplies are being made or where

2-26 court actions are pending, the state engineer may withhold action until it is

2-27 determined there is unappropriated water or the court action becomes final.

2-28 3. Except as otherwise provided in subsection 5, [where] if there is no

2-29 unappropriated water in the proposed source of supply, or [where] if its

2-30 proposed use or change conflicts with existing rights, or threatens to prove

2-31 detrimental to the public interest, the state engineer shall reject the

2-32 application and refuse to issue the requested permit. [Where] If a previous

2-33 application for a similar use of water within the same basin has been

2-34 rejected on [these] those grounds, the new application may be denied

2-35 without publication.

2-36 4. If a hearing is held regarding an application, the decision of the state

2-37 engineer must be in writing and include findings of fact, conclusions of

2-38 law and a statement of the underlying facts supporting the findings of fact.

2-39 The written decision may take the form of a transcription of an oral ruling.

2-40 The rejection or approval of an application must be endorsed on a copy of

2-41 the original application, and a record made of the endorsement in the

2-42 records of the state engineer. The copy of the application so endorsed must

2-43 be returned to the applicant. Except as otherwise provided in subsection 6,

3-1 if the application is approved, the applicant may, on receipt thereof,

3-2 proceed with the construction of the necessary works and take [all] any

3-3 steps required to apply the water to beneficial use and to perfect the

3-4 proposed appropriation. If the application is rejected , the applicant may

3-5 take no steps toward the prosecution of the proposed work or the diversion

3-6 and use of the public water [so] as long as the rejection continues in force.

3-7 5. The provisions of subsections 1, 2 and 3 do not apply to an

3-8 application for an environmental permit.

3-9 6. The provisions of subsection 4 do not authorize the recipient of an

3-10 approved application to use any state land administered by the division of

3-11 state lands of the state department of conservation and natural resources

3-12 without the appropriate authorization for [such a] that use from the state

3-13 land registrar.

3-14 Sec. 3. The amendatory provisions of this act do not apply to a permit

3-15 to appropriate water for a purpose specified in subsection 2 or 3 of NRS

3-16 533.330 which is issued before July 1, 1999.

3-17 Sec. 4. This act becomes effective on July 1, 1999.

~