Kan. Admin. Regs. § 5-20-2 - Formal review of intensive groundwater use control area orders
(a) For each
intensive ground-water use control area (IGUCA) designated by order of the
chief engineer before July 1, 2008, pursuant to
K.S.A. 82a-1038 and amendments thereto, a public
hearing to review the designation shall be conducted by the chief engineer
within seven years of the effective date of this regulation. A subsequent
review of the designation shall occur within 10 years after the previous public
review hearing or more frequently as determined by the chief
engineer.
(b) For each IGUCA
designated by order of the chief engineer on or after July 1, 2008, a public
hearing to review the designation shall be conducted by the chief engineer
within seven years after the order is final. A subsequent review of the
designation shall occur within 10 years after the previous public review
hearing or more frequently as determined by the chief engineer.
(c) Upon the request of a petition signed by
at least five percent of the affected water users in an IGUCA designated by
order of the chief engineer, a public review hearing to review the designation
shall be conducted by the chief engineer. This requested public review hearing
shall not be conducted more frequently than every four years.
(d) Written notice of a public review hearing
shall be given to each person holding a water right in the affected area.
Notice of the hearing shall be given by publication in a newspaper or
newspapers of general circulation within the affected area at least 30 days
before the date set for the hearing. The notice shall indicate the reason for
the hearing and shall specify the time and place of the hearing. At the public
review hearing, documentary and oral evidence shall be taken, and a full and
complete record of the public review hearing shall be kept.
(e) The following shall be considered by the
chief engineer at the public review hearing:
(1) Whether one or more of the circumstances
specified in
K.S.A. 82a-1036, and amendments thereto, exist;
and
(2) whether the public interest
requires that the IGUCA designation be continued. The state shall have the
burden of proving the need for continuance of the IGUCA designation.
(f) Based on the review specified
in subsection (e), one of the following actions shall be taken by the chief
engineer:
(1) Continue the IGUCA with its
original or current corrective control provisions;
(2) reduce the restrictions imposed by one or
more corrective control provisions within the scope and goals specified in the
original IGUCA order;
(3) reduce
the IGUCA boundaries;
(4) increase
any allocations within the IGUCA;
(5) address any other issues that have been
identified in the review; or
(6)
revoke the IGUCA order and implement alternative measures, if necessary, to
address the water issues in the affected areas.
(g) If, as a result of the review specified
in subsection (e), the chief engineer determines that the restrictions imposed
by current corrective control provisions may need to be increased or additional
corrective control provisions may be needed, a hearing shall be conducted by
the chief engineer according to K.A.R. 5-14-3a.
(h) If, as a result of the review specified
in subsection (e), the chief engineer determines that the boundaries of the
IGUCA may need to be increased, a new IGUCA proceeding shall be initiated by
the chief engineer pursuant to K.A.R. 5-20-1.
Notes
State regulations are updated quarterly; we currently have two versions available. Below is a comparison between our most recent version and the prior quarterly release. More comparison features will be added as we have more versions to compare.
No prior version found.