Establishes provisions relating to water conservation. (BDR 48-379)
Summary
AB 134 creates a new voluntary water conservation plan process for holders of perfected water rights in Nevada. A perfected water right holder may submit a plan to the State Engineer for approval, with required information about the right, the conservation practices to be used, the term of the plan, and a statement that the holder does not intend to abandon or forfeit the right. The plan may run for up to 10 years and may be renewed with additional 10-year terms. The bill also prohibits the State Engineer from charging a filing fee for these plans and allows the State Engineer to require periodic reporting on the amount of water conserved.
The bill revises Nevada’s water policy to expressly promote voluntary conservation measures, including water conservation plans, crop rotation or conversion, improved irrigation practices, and reductions in surface and seepage losses. It also provides that water rights covered by an approved conservation plan are protected from abandonment and forfeiture during the plan term, and that such rights are treated as committed water for certain statutory purposes. In addition, the bill limits changes to the place of diversion, manner of use, or place of use while a plan is in effect, and it directs the State Engineer to treat these rights as existing rights when evaluating new applications for water permits and groundwater appropriations.
Impact
AB 134 would amend multiple chapters of Nevada water law, primarily NRS Chapters 533 and 534, to create a legal framework for voluntary conservation of perfected water rights. It would add a new approval process for water conservation plans, exempt those rights from abandonment and forfeiture rules while the plan is active, and require the State Engineer to consider those rights when reviewing competing applications for surface water and groundwater use. The bill also updates the state’s policy statement to emphasize conservation and efficient use of water resources.
Sentiment
The bill appears generally supportive of water conservation and administrative flexibility, with no recorded votes or committee transcript opposition in the provided materials. Its structure suggests a policy consensus around encouraging voluntary conservation while preserving existing water rights. The absence of recorded debate or votes indicates no documented controversy in the available record, though the bill’s protections for existing rights imply an effort to balance conservation goals with water-rights security.
Contention
The main potential points of contention are the bill’s effect on the traditional doctrines of abandonment and forfeiture, and the extent to which a conservation plan can shield a water right from being reallocated or challenged. Water-rights holders may favor the bill because it protects their rights while allowing temporary reductions in use, while others could question whether exempting these rights from abandonment and forfeiture could reduce water availability for new applicants. Another possible issue is the restriction on changing the place of diversion, manner of use, or place of use during the plan term, which may limit operational flexibility for the right holder.