The 2015 General Session of the Utah Legislature begins January 26 and runs through Thursday March 12th. Here are the highlights of the currently released bills of interest:

House Bills

House Bill 25: Application Revisions

Representative V. Lowry Snow

This bill is in response to the 2011 Utah Supreme Court ruling in the Jensen v. Jones case that concluded that the State Engineer did not have statutory authority to use the prior non-use of water as a reason to reject a change application or reduce the amount of water approved under a change application. This bill seeks to give the State Engineer express statutory authority to do so, subject to certain procedures and limitations. This bill is the product of a small group of stakeholders that got together after attempts to pass such legislation failed in 2012, 2013, and 2014 for a variety of different reasons. The members of that group were the General Managers of Central Utah, Jordan Valley, Washington, and Weber Basin Water Conservancy Districts, along with representatives from the Farm Bureau and the League of Cities and Towns.

The bill allows a person filing a change application to have a private, non-binding discussion with the State Engineer on any potential issue, including non-use, before filing the change application. The bill then provides the State Engineer a 90-day window after a change application is filed to give the applicant notice of any concerns he may have regarding non-use and the resulting impact (defined in terms of "quantity impairment") that the proposed change may have on one or more specifically identified water rights. If the State Engineer gives such notice, or if a timely protest is filed alleging quantity impairment because of the unexcused non-use of water, then the applicant has the burden of proving that quantity impairment will not occur and the State Engineer may reject the change application or reduce the amount approved to the extent that such quantity impairment is likely to occur. The bill also reorganizes the application to appropriate and change application statutes and makes some minor technical changes to the wording.

To read the full text of the bill, click here.

http://le.utah.gov/~2015/bills/hbillint/HB0025.pdf  

House Bill 43: Water Rights - Change Application Amendments

Representative Kay L. McIff

This bill seeks to change the procedures for shareholders of a mutual water company requesting the filing of a change application. It requires mediation if the company refuses to file the change application or if the shareholder and mutual water company cannot agree to conditions of the change application. It also allows the shareholder to advance the change application to the State Engineer for administrative review regardless of the mutual water company decision. If the mutual water company declines the change application request, the company is required to state the reasons why.

To read the full text of the bill, click here.

http://le.utah.gov/~2015/bills/hbillint/HB0043.pdf 

House Bill 47: Protection of Water Rights

Representative Kay L. McIff

This bill seeks to define the scope and limits of the public trust doctrine in Utah, including a provision that to the extent a State public trust obligation exists relative to public ownership of water, the State fulfills its public trust obligation through legislative enactments of laws regulating the use of water. The bill also clarifies that a water right is a property right that is protected by the Utah Constitution, and cannot be taken for public use without just compensation. This bill is nearly identical to House Bill 233 that Representative McIff ran in 2014 and House Bill 68 that Representative McIff ran in 2013.

To read the full text of the bill, click here.

http://le.utah.gov/~2015/bills/hbillint/HB0047.pdf  

House Bill 58: Change Application Modification (see also Senate Bill 35)

Representative Keith Grover

This bill is in response to the 2011 Utah Supreme Court ruling in the Salt Lake City v. Big Ditch case that concluded that Big Ditch, while not the owner of certain water rights, could file a change application on those water rights because it was a "person entitled to the use of water" as that phrase is used in the "Change Application" statute, pursuant to a contract it has with Salt Lake City. Attempts to pass a bill that addressed both this issue and the issue raised in the Jensen v. Jones case (see H.B. 25 above) have failed in the last three sessions. This bill clarifies and redefines who is entitled to file a change application, ie.: (1) a holder on an approved but unperfected application to appropriate water; (2) the record owner of a perfected water right; (3) a person who has written authorization from a person described in (1) or (2) above to file the application of that person's behalf; and (4) a shareholder in a water company who files in accordance with the existing "Shareholder Change Application" statute.

To read the full text of the bill, click here.

http://le.utah.gov/~2015/bills/hbillint/HB0058.pdf  

House Bill 108: Public Water Access Act

Representative Dixon M. Pitcher

This bill seeks to make significant changes to the Utah Public Water Access Act, which governs stream access issues in the State. The bill would modify the definition of "public access water" to include a requirement that the stream or waterway must, in its natural state during ordinary high water, be capable of floating a commercial commodity or being navigated by watercraft. The bill then provides that a public access water, at or below the ordinary high water mark, is open to year-round public use for any lawful activity that utilizes the water, including boating, fishing, swimming, or wading. Members of the public may not, however, use private land to access public access water, but may use private land for reasonable portage around manmade or natural obstructions. The bill also allows landowners the right to place a fence across a public access water, provided that the fence comply with all laws and is constructed in a manner that does not create an unreasonable danger to the public using the public access water, and provided that the landowner allows the public to use a ladder, gate, or other mechanism to portage around the fence.

To read the full text of the bill, click here.

http://le.utah.gov/~2015/bills/hbillint/HB0108.pdf 

Senate Bills

Senate Bill 15: Water Law - Forfeiture Exemptions

Senator Margaret Dayton

This bill seeks to amend Utah Code section 73-1-4 regarding nonuse and forfeiture. The bill adds some clarifying language that the section does not apply to "a period of nonuse of a water right during the time the water right is subject to an approved change application where the applicant is diligently pursuing certification"

To read the full text of the bill, click here.

http://le.utah.gov/~2015/bills/sbillint/SB0015.pdf  

Senate Bill 35: Water Rights Amendments (see also House Bill 58)

Senator Margaret Dayton

This bill would define the phrase, "person entitled to the use of water," in Utah Code Ann. � 73-3-3. Under present law, a person entitled to the use of water, may or may not hold the legal title to the water right, may file an application on such water rights even though actual title to the water right is held by another. For example, In re General Determination of all rights to water with the Uinta Basin (Strawberry Water Users Assoc. v. Bureau of Reclamation), the Utah Supreme Court held that the Bureau of Reclamation held title to water rights in a "protective role" and that the Strawberry Water Users Association, as the person entitled to the use of water, was empowered to file applications with the State Engineer on these water rights.

Similarly in Salt Lake City v. Big Ditch Irrigation, the Court held that Big Ditch Irrigation Company had the right to file applications on water rights of Salt Lake City that Big Ditch uses under a 1905 Exchange Agreement with Salt Lake City (where Big Ditch's rights to high quality Big Cottonwood Creek Water were exchanged for water rights held by Salt Lake City in Utah Lake water). This bill would essentially reverse these Court decisions and eliminate the ability of persons other than (1) a holder on an approved but unperfected application to appropriate water; (2) the record owner of a perfected water right; (3) a person who has written authorization from a person described in (1) or (2) above to file the application of that person's behalf; and (4) a shareholder in a water company who files in accordance with the existing "Shareholder Change Application" statute, to file applications.

To read the full text of the bill, click here.

http://le.utah.gov/~2015/bills/sbillint/SB0035.pdf

Senate Bill 40: Water Law - Application Withdrawal

Senator Margaret Dayton

This bill seeks to amend Utah Code section 73-3-6 to allow for the withdrawal of water right applications. Although the Division of Water Rights has historically allowed for applications to be withdrawn, this bill would provide specific statutory authorization and explanation for withdrawals. The bill provides that an applicant or an applicant's successor-in-interest may withdraw an unperfected application (even if already approved) by filing a written withdrawal request with the Division. Upon receipt of the withdrawal request, the Division must promptly update its records to show that the application has been withdrawn and is of no further force or effect. An applicant who withdraws an application is not entitled to a refund of the application filing fees.

To read the full text of the bill, click here.

http://le.utah.gov/~2015/bills/sbillint/SB0040.pdf