News

Daniel Rothberg, with the Nevada Independent, reports on Assembly Bill 30 which was moved to the Senate floor without recommendation on May 17th

https://thenevadaindependent.com/article/indy-environment-lawmakers-consider-natural-resource-issues-contentious-water-bill

View the meeting here: https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/NELIS/REL/80th2019/Committee/225/Meetings

April 11^th was the deadline for Committee passage out of the first House where the measure was introduced.  Water bills that met the April 11^th deadline include; AB30, AB62, AB95, AB163, AB265, SB140, SB150, SB232, SB236 and SB250.

The Assembly Committee on Natural Resources, Agriculture and Mining (NRAM) passed AB30 with a significant amendment that eliminated problematic language while providing some clarity that the State Engineer can only approve 3M plans to “avoid” conflicts and not to “eliminate” conflicts.  Numerous individuals and groups opposed AB30 at the initial hearing, however, the Central Nevada Regional Water Authority, Humboldt River Basin Water Authority, Eureka County, the Great Basin Water Network and Center for Biological Diversity testified neutral on the amended bill.  NRAM also passed an amended AB62 which revises the time period for which the State Engineer may grant an extension for the completion of work for the diversion of water, and AB95 which provides that if the State Engineer orders a curtailment by priority rights in a groundwater basin he must allow a domestic well to continue to withdraw 0.5 acre-feet of water per year if the owner of the domestic well installs or has installed a water meter.

AB163 and AB265 also made it out of NRAM by the deadline.  AB163 as amended revises requirements for water utilities to have water conservation plans and revises minimum standards for plumbing fixtures in new construction and expansions and renovations in certain structures. AB265 requires the Desert Research Institute to conduct a study concerning water treatment, including desalination and reverse osmosis treatment systems, and recycling. The Central Nevada Regional Water Authority supports desalination as a water resource. Sustainability needs to be the foundation of any strategy for water management and Nevada, the driest state in the nation, has a finite sustainable water supply for its communities and ecosystems.  Significant advances in desalination have made it a potential water resource for the future.

On the Senate side, SB140, SB232, SB236 and SB250 were all passed out of the Committee on Natural Resources by the deadline.  SB140 requires the State Engineer, in any basin in which there is water available for appropriation to reserve 10 percent of the total remaining water. The water reserved by the State Engineer may only be used on a temporary basis in an emergency, including if the basin is under a declaration of drought.  CNRWA was among the many supporters of this bill.

SB232 authorizes the trustee or trustees to designate a beneficiary of a trust to vote in certain elections, sign certain petitions and run for certain offices of an irrigation district.

SB236 creates an exception from the requirement to file a change application where: both the original place of diversion and new place of diversion are located on the same property for which water has already been appropriated; and the new place of diversion is located not more than 300 feet from the original place of diversion.

SB 250 provides that any right to appropriate water that is dedicated to a county, city, public utility, water purveyor or other public entity in order to ensure a sufficient supply of water to one or more parcels and in connection with the approval of any parcel map or permit must remain so dedicated and must not be sold, leased or otherwise used for a purpose other than ensuring a sufficient water supply for the parcel or parcels, as applicable, until the modification or redevelopment of the parcel or parcels. An amendment provides that the dedication requirement must be the subject of an ordinance, published rule, or regulation adopted by the supplier of water and must be based on reliable data and demand estimating procedures, and except in the case of mergers or acquisitions of a utility water system or transactions by the water supplier in furtherance of developing or maintaining a sustainable water supply, the supplier of water is prohibited from conveying a water right previously dedicated for purposes of sale to a private person, private entity, or public entity.

Finally, the Senate Committee on Government Affairs passed SB150 which requires counties and cities to develop a water resource plan. Cities do not need to develop a plan if they are included in a county water resource plan.  Nevada, the driest state in the nation, has a finite sustainable water supply for its communities and ecosystems, and therefore local government land use plans (master plans) should be based on identified sustainable water resources. 

CNRWA has long advocated for local government land-use plans to be based on identified sustainable water resources.

A total of 247 bills failed to make it out of Committee by the April 11^th deadline including two water bills; AB51 and SB499. 

AB51 would have required the State Engineer to adopt regulations related to the conjunctive management of groundwater and surface water and authorized the State Engineer to levy certain special assessments related to conjunctive management while SB499 would have created the Advisory Board on Water Resources Planning and Drought Resiliency within the Division of Water Resources of the State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources.

A subcommittee of the Senate Finance and Assembly Ways and Means Committees voted to create and fund a new statewide water planning program within the Division of Water Resources to improve water conservation, drought response, long-term flood management and long-range planning.  The final budget must still be approved by the Assembly and Senate.

A significantly amended AB 30 was passed out of the Assembly Natural Resources Committee yesterday.  The Reno Gazette Journal article on the hearing appears below.  The Central Nevada Regional Water Authority joined Eureka County, the Great Basin Water Network and Center for Biological Diversity in testifying neutral on the amended bill.  The amendment was drafted by GBWN and finalized and negotiated with input from a number of stakeholders.  While not perfect, AB 30 as amended eliminated problematic language while providing some clarity that the State Engineer can only approve 3M plans to “avoid” conflicts and not to “eliminate” conflicts.  The bill will next go to the full Assembly for a vote.

Lawmakers changed Nevada water bill to allay threat of pipeline to Las Vegas

Benjamin Spillman, Reno Gazette Journal Published 10:06 p.m. PT April 10, 2019

Language that could have made it easier to clear the way to pipe water from rural Nevada to Las Vegas is no longer included in a pending state water bill. 

Lawmakers on Wednesday moved an amended version of the bill following pressure from conservationists, American Indian tribes and rural communities who oppose siphoning water from remote Nevada valleys to the state’s largest city.  

Although the bill still requires approval from both the Assembly and Senate to become law, opponents say the watered-down version assuages their concerns about the pipeline.  

“This bill does not authorize the Las Vegas pipeline,” said Patrick Donnelly, Nevada director of the Center for Biological Diversity. 

Donnelly was among representatives of several conservation groups who changed their official stance on Assembly Bill 30 from opposition to neutral. 

“This is a win for the environment because sometimes you win by not losing,” Donnelly said before the Assembly Committee on Natural Resources, Agriculture and Mining voted on the amended version of the bill. 

The committee split on party lines, approving the bill by a 7-4 vote. 

“The changes made the bill better, but they did not make the bill good enough,” said Assemblyman Jim Wheeler, R-Gardnerville.

The bill, sponsored by the Division of Water Resources, seeks to provide Nevada’s state engineer, the state’s top water official, more options when it comes to settling disputes over water rights. 

AB30 would enhance the state engineer’s authority to resolve conflicts over water rights through monitoring, management and mitigation agreements, also known as “3M plans.” 

A Feb. 27 hearing on AB30 and another water bill, AB51, which died in committee, attracted a standing-room-only crowd, most of whom were in opposition. 

Farmers, conservationists and American Indians from Nevada and Utah turned out in opposition to the proposals in two bills while no one spoke in support of measures critics say would direct more water toward urban and suburban development at the expense of farming, ranching and the environment in rural valleys. 

“I’m sure everyone remembers the initial hearing on this bill it was not looking very favorable for finding a path forward,” said Brad Crowell, director of the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, which oversees the division that sponsored the bill. 

In the ensuing weeks, opponents worked with state officials to make changes that allayed fears the bill would help cities sap water resources from rural communities. 

“That is why we are not here with pitchforks and torches,” said Kyle Roerink, director of the Great Basin Water Network, which works to protect water resources for rural communities. 

Specifically, the amended bill struck the provision that the state engineer could use 3M plans to “eliminate” conflicts over water rights applications. The revised version says 3M plans can be used to avoid conflicts. 

“That sounds like a semantic difference, but the implications are actually huge,” Donnelly said. 

He said under the original language the state engineer could have declared a 3M plan that called on trucking or piping water to refresh a depleted spring works to “eliminate” conflict over a water rights application. 

By using the term “avoid,” instead, Donnelly said the state engineer is required to direct water rights applicants to resolve conflicts in advance by working with existing water rights holders or reducing the scope of the application. 

Assemblywoman Heidi Swank, D-Las Vegas, who is chairperson of the committee, complimented the sponsors for working with the opponents to modify the bill. 

“This is how it is supposed to work,” Swank said. “It is not always we are going to come together and have a nice moment like this but when we do, we should all remember it.”