| OCR Text |
Show UTAH 723 ficial use of water for other purposes or will prove detrimental to the public welfare or the natural stream environment.56 In doubtful cases, it is the duty of the State engineer to approve the proposed application since it is the policy of the State to pro- mote the largest beneficial use of its water resources,57 but the appli- cant has the burden of showing that he has met all of the statutory requirements which entitle him to an approval of his application.58 As will be explained in more detail later, the decision of the State engineer is subject to appeal in the district court. An approved application does not grant an applicant a vested right to the use of the water; rather, he has the right to complete his ap- propriation upon compliance with all requirements of the act. How- ever, an approved application is a valuable inchoate right, and it may be defended in court.59 (5) Perfecting an application Once an application is approved, the applicant is given a specific time within which to place the water to beneficial use and submit written proof of appropriation. An applicant may be granted addi- tional time for completing construction of the works and applying the water to beneficial use upon a showing of diligence or reasonable cause for delay.60 The Utah Supreme Court has ruled that in order for an applicant to be entitled to an extension of time, he must make a reasonable effort to accomplish his undertaking with the dispatch expected of men engaged in a like enterprise who desire a speedy accomplishment of their designs.61 If an application lapses for failure of the applicant to comply with the provisions of the act, the State engineer may, upon a showing of reasonable cause, reinstate the application, but the priority date of the application must be changed to the date of reinstatement.62 Once the water is placed to beneficial use, the applicant submits proof of his appropriation and is issued a certificate of appropria- tion, which is recorded in the county recorder's office. A certificate of appropriation constitutes p>rima facie evidence of the water right.63 Thereafter, the only requirement to preserve the validity of the right is that there be a continued beneficial use of water in the manner provided for in the certificate. (6) Judicial review of administrative decision Any person aggrieved by a decision of the State engineer may, within sixty days after notice of the decision, bring a civil action in the district court for a plenary review thereof. The practice and procedure in these actions is the same as in other equity cases,64 and the hearing proceeds as a trial de novo, with the district court re- viewing the same issues which were ruled on by the State engineer 50 Utah Code Ann., sec. 73-3-8. "'Little Cottonwood Water Co. v. Ktmball, 76 Utah 243, 289 Pac. 116 (1930). 58 Shields x. Dry Greek Irr. Co., 12 U. 2d 98, 363 P. 2d 82 (1961). 59 Tanner v. Provo Res. Co., 78 Utah 158, 2 P. 2d 107 (1931). 80 Utah Code Ann., sec. 73-3-12. 61 Caroon Canal Co. v. Sanpete Water Users Assn., 10 U. 2d 376, 353 P. 2d 916 (1960). 62 Utah Code Ann., sec. 73-3-18. 63 Utah Code Ann., sec. 73-3-17. 64 Utah Code Ann., sees. 73-3-14, 73-3-15. 409-242-73------47 |
