A. Groundwater which is withdrawn pursuant to a grandfathered right or a groundwater withdrawal permit or from an exempt well may be transported without payment of damages within a sub-basin of an active management area, subject to the limitations on location of use in sections 45-472 and 45-473.
B. Groundwater which is withdrawn by a city, town or private water company within its service area may be transported without payment of damages within its service area within a sub-basin of an active management area.
C. Groundwater which is withdrawn by a city, town or private water company within its service area may be transported pursuant to a delivery contract authorized by section 45-492, subsection C, without payment of damages, within a sub-basin of an active management area.
D. Groundwater which is withdrawn by an irrigation district within its service area may be transported without payment of damages within its service area within a sub-basin of an active management area.
Notes of Decisions
Town of Chino Valley v. City of Prescott, 638 P.2d 1324 (Ariz. 1981).
· cites it 4× “A.R.S. § 45-541. Transportation of groundwater between sub-basins or away from Active Management Areas is also authorized if the groundwater is allowed to be withdrawn under the Act’s provisions, but damages must be paid for any injury caused.”
Arizona Pub. Serv. Co. v. Long, 773 P.2d 988 (Ariz. 1989).
· cites it 8× “See A.R.S. §§ 45-541 to 45-545. They contend that the groundwater element of the effluent must be put to reasonable and beneficial reuse for the benefit of the land from which it was withdrawn, and, if reuse is not possible, the effluent must be returned to the common *434…”
City of Prescott v. Town of Chino Valley, 790 P.2d 263 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1989).
· cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 45-541(B). Both Prescott and Chino Valley are located within the Little Chino sub-basin of the Prescott Active Management Area.”
Clifton N. Cherry, Et Ux. v. Wesley E. Steiner, 716 F.2d 687 (9th Cir. 1983).
“Prescott moved for dismissal on the ground that Ariz.Rev.Stat. § 45-541(A) authorized it to withdraw groundwater and transport the water to its customers.”
Davis v. Agua Sierra Resources, L.L.C., 174 P.3d 298 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008).
· cites it 2× “§ 45-453 (2003) provides that “[i]n areas outside of [AMAs], a person may,” except as provided in A.R.S. §§ 45-541 to -559, “[transport groundwater.”
Cherry v. Steiner, 543 F. Supp. 1270 (D. Ariz. 1982).
“§§ 45-541 — 44. Chapter 1 of the groundwater legislation creates the Department of Water Resources, § 45 — 102, within which is the Arizona Water Commission.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 45-541(A) — 2 cases
Town of Chino Valley v. City of Prescott, 638 P.2d 1324 (Ariz. 1981).
“A.R.S. § 45-541. Transportation of groundwater between sub-basins or away from Active Management Areas is also authorized if the groundwater is allowed to be withdrawn under the Act’s provisions, but damages must be paid for any injury caused.”
Clifton N. Cherry, Et Ux. v. Wesley E. Steiner, 716 F.2d 687 (9th Cir. 1983).
“Prescott moved for dismissal on the ground that Ariz.Rev.Stat. § 45-541(A) authorized it to withdraw groundwater and transport the water to its customers.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 45-541(B) — 1 case
City of Prescott v. Town of Chino Valley, 790 P.2d 263 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1989).
“A.R.S. § 45-541(B). Both Prescott and Chino Valley are located within the Little Chino sub-basin of the Prescott Active Management Area.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.