NRS
533.380 Time for completion of work and application of water to
beneficial use; limitations and extensions; regulations.
1. Except as otherwise provided in
subsection 5, in an endorsement of approval upon any application, the State
Engineer shall:
(a) Set a time before which the construction of
the work must be completed, which must be within 5 years after the date of
approval.
(b) Except as otherwise provided in this
paragraph, set a time before which the complete application of water to a beneficial
use must be made, which must not exceed 10 years after the date of the
approval. The time set under this paragraph respecting an application for a
permit to apply water to a municipal or quasi-municipal use on any land:
(1) For which a final subdivision map has
been recorded pursuant to chapter 278 of NRS;
(2) For which a plan for the development
of a project has been approved by the local government pursuant to NRS 278.010 to 278.460, inclusive; or
(3) On any land for which a plan for the
development of a planned unit development has been recorded pursuant to chapter 278A of NRS,
Ê must not be
less than 5 years.
2. The State Engineer may limit the
applicant to a smaller quantity of water, to a shorter time for the completion
of work, and, except as otherwise provided in paragraph (b) of subsection 1, to
a shorter time for the perfecting of the application than named in the
application.
3. Except as otherwise provided in
subsection 4 and NRS 533.395 and 533.4377, the State Engineer may, for good
cause shown, grant any number of extensions of time within which construction
work must be completed, or water must be applied to a beneficial use under any
permit therefor issued by the State Engineer, but a single extension of time
must not exceed 5 years. An application for the extension must in all cases be:
(a) Made within 30 days following notice by
registered or certified mail that proof of the work is due as provided for in NRS 533.390 and 533.410; and
(b) Accompanied by proof and evidence of the good
faith and reasonable diligence with which the applicant is pursuing the
perfection of the application.
Ê The State
Engineer shall not grant an extension of time unless the State Engineer
determines from the proof and evidence so submitted that the applicant is
proceeding in good faith and with reasonable diligence to perfect the
application. The failure to provide the proof and evidence required pursuant to
this subsection is prima facie evidence that the holder is not proceeding in
good faith and with reasonable diligence to perfect the application.
4. Except as otherwise provided in
subsection 5 and NRS 533.395, whenever
the holder of a permit issued for any municipal or quasi-municipal use of water
on any land referred to in paragraph (b) of subsection 1, or for any use which
may be served by a county, city, town, public water district or public water
company, requests an extension of time to apply the water to a beneficial use,
the State Engineer shall, in determining whether to grant or deny the
extension, consider, among other factors:
(a) Whether the holder has shown good cause for
not having made a complete application of the water to a beneficial use;
(b) The number of parcels and commercial or
residential units which are contained in or planned for the land being
developed or the area being served by the county, city, town, public water
district or public water company;
(c) Any economic conditions which affect the ability
of the holder to make a complete application of the water to a beneficial use;
(d) Any delays in the development of the land or
the area being served by the county, city, town, public water district or
public water company which were caused by unanticipated natural conditions; and
(e) The period contemplated in the:
(1) Plan for the development of a project
approved by the local government pursuant to NRS
278.010 to 278.460, inclusive; or
(2) Plan for the development of a planned
unit development recorded pursuant to chapter
278A of NRS,
Ê if any, for
completing the development of the land.
5. The provisions of subsections 1 and 4
do not apply to an environmental permit or a temporary permit issued pursuant
to NRS 533.436 or 533.504.
6. For the purposes of this section, the
measure of reasonable diligence is the steady application of effort to perfect
the application in a reasonably expedient and efficient manner under all the
facts and circumstances. When a project or integrated system is composed of
several features, work on one feature of the project or system may be
considered in finding that reasonable diligence has been shown in the
development of water rights for all features of the entire project or system.
7. The State Engineer shall:
(a) Adopt any regulation necessary to carry out
the provisions of this section; and
(b) Provide a copy of such regulations to any
person upon request.
[65:140:1913; A 1951,
132]—(NRS A 1967,
193; 1981,
113, 1838;
1989,
1052, 1400;
1991,
759; 1993,
2349; 2009,
644; 2011,
1568; 2013,
501, 3679;
2017,
3500; 2019,
2623)
Notes of Decisions
Desert Irrigation, Ltd. v. State of Nevada, 944 P.2d 835 (Nev. 1997).
· cites it 9× “The Court is more troubled with the State Engineer’s failure to address whether NRS 533.380(4) should apply as to a proposed transfer of the rights to a non-contiguous parcel and to which the petitioner sought to remove the water.”
Sierra Pac. Indus. v. Wilson, 440 P.3d 37 (Nev. 2019).
· cites it 12× “Intermountain has since applied for and received numerous extensions pursuant to NRS 533.380 to extend the time of construction and to put the water to beneficial use.”
Bailey v. State, 594 P.2d 734 (Nev. 1979).
· cites it 2× “This principle has been incorporated into the state water law, and is reflected in NRS 533.380(l)(a) which requires that in his endorsement of approval upon an application for the appropriation of water the State Engineer shall “[s]et a time prior to which actual construction…”
Engelmann v. Westergard, 647 P.2d 385 (Nev. 1982).
· cites it 2× “Where a water permit is in poor standing or subject to cancellation, NRS 533.380(3) provides: The state engineer shall have authority, for good cause shown, to extend the time within which construction work shall begin, within which construction work shall be completed, or water…”
Sierra Pac. Indus. Vs. Wilson, P.E., 2019 NV 13 (Nev. 2019).
· cites it 32× “Intermountain has since applied for and received numerous extensions pursuant to NRS 533.380 to extend the time of construction and to put the water to beneficial use.”
Ansolabehere v. Laborde, 310 P.2d 842 (Nev. 1957).
“Prior to the Taylor Grazing Act federal permission to graze the public lands was not involved in the making of proof of application to beneficial use under stockwatering applications and could be made through the showing that a specified number of the applicant’s sheep, cattle,…”
Sierra Pac. Indus. Vs. Wilson, P.E., 2019 NV 13 (Nev. 2019).
· cites it 16× “Intermountain has since applied for and received numerous extensions pursuant to NRS 533.380 to extend the time of construction and to put the water to beneficial use.”
State Eng'r Vs. Happy Creek, Inc., 2019 NV 41 (Nev. 2019).
· cites it 4× “See NRS 533.380(3); NRS 533.410. On May 19, 2016, the State Engineer mailed Happy Creek notice that it needed to file the PBUs (or EOTs) within 30 days to avoid cancellation.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 533.380(3) — 5 cases
Sierra Pac. Indus. v. Wilson, 440 P.3d 37 (Nev. 2019).
“Intermountain has since applied for and received numerous extensions pursuant to NRS 533.380 to extend the time of construction and to put the water to beneficial use.”
Engelmann v. Westergard, 647 P.2d 385 (Nev. 1982).
“Where a water permit is in poor standing or subject to cancellation, NRS 533.380(3) provides: The state engineer shall have authority, for good cause shown, to extend the time within which construction work shall begin, within which construction work shall be completed, or water…”
Sierra Pac. Indus. Vs. Wilson, P.E., 2019 NV 13 (Nev. 2019).
“Intermountain has since applied for and received numerous extensions pursuant to NRS 533.380 to extend the time of construction and to put the water to beneficial use.”
Sierra Pac. Indus. Vs. Wilson, P.E., 2019 NV 13 (Nev. 2019).
“Intermountain has since applied for and received numerous extensions pursuant to NRS 533.380 to extend the time of construction and to put the water to beneficial use.”
State Eng'r Vs. Happy Creek, Inc., 2019 NV 41 (Nev. 2019).
“See NRS 533.380(3); NRS 533.410. On May 19, 2016, the State Engineer mailed Happy Creek notice that it needed to file the PBUs (or EOTs) within 30 days to avoid cancellation.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 533.380(3)(b) — 3 cases
Sierra Pac. Indus. v. Wilson, 440 P.3d 37 (Nev. 2019).
“Intermountain has since applied for and received numerous extensions pursuant to NRS 533.380 to extend the time of construction and to put the water to beneficial use.”
Sierra Pac. Indus. Vs. Wilson, P.E., 2019 NV 13 (Nev. 2019).
“Intermountain has since applied for and received numerous extensions pursuant to NRS 533.380 to extend the time of construction and to put the water to beneficial use.”
Sierra Pac. Indus. Vs. Wilson, P.E., 2019 NV 13 (Nev. 2019).
“Intermountain has since applied for and received numerous extensions pursuant to NRS 533.380 to extend the time of construction and to put the water to beneficial use.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 533.380(4) — 4 cases
Desert Irrigation, Ltd. v. State of Nevada, 944 P.2d 835 (Nev. 1997).
“The Court is more troubled with the State Engineer’s failure to address whether NRS 533.380(4) should apply as to a proposed transfer of the rights to a non-contiguous parcel and to which the petitioner sought to remove the water.”
Sierra Pac. Indus. v. Wilson, 440 P.3d 37 (Nev. 2019).
“Intermountain has since applied for and received numerous extensions pursuant to NRS 533.380 to extend the time of construction and to put the water to beneficial use.”
Sierra Pac. Indus. Vs. Wilson, P.E., 2019 NV 13 (Nev. 2019).
“Intermountain has since applied for and received numerous extensions pursuant to NRS 533.380 to extend the time of construction and to put the water to beneficial use.”
Sierra Pac. Indus. Vs. Wilson, P.E., 2019 NV 13 (Nev. 2019).
“Intermountain has since applied for and received numerous extensions pursuant to NRS 533.380 to extend the time of construction and to put the water to beneficial use.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 533.380(4)(a) — 1 case
Desert Irrigation, Ltd. v. State of Nevada, 944 P.2d 835 (Nev. 1997).
“The Court is more troubled with the State Engineer’s failure to address whether NRS 533.380(4) should apply as to a proposed transfer of the rights to a non-contiguous parcel and to which the petitioner sought to remove the water.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 533.380(4)(b) — 1 case
Desert Irrigation, Ltd. v. State of Nevada, 944 P.2d 835 (Nev. 1997).
“The Court is more troubled with the State Engineer’s failure to address whether NRS 533.380(4) should apply as to a proposed transfer of the rights to a non-contiguous parcel and to which the petitioner sought to remove the water.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 533.380(6) — 3 cases
Sierra Pac. Indus. v. Wilson, 440 P.3d 37 (Nev. 2019).
“Intermountain has since applied for and received numerous extensions pursuant to NRS 533.380 to extend the time of construction and to put the water to beneficial use.”
Sierra Pac. Indus. Vs. Wilson, P.E., 2019 NV 13 (Nev. 2019).
“Intermountain has since applied for and received numerous extensions pursuant to NRS 533.380 to extend the time of construction and to put the water to beneficial use.”
Sierra Pac. Indus. Vs. Wilson, P.E., 2019 NV 13 (Nev. 2019).
“Intermountain has since applied for and received numerous extensions pursuant to NRS 533.380 to extend the time of construction and to put the water to beneficial use.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 533.380(l)(a) — 1 case
Bailey v. State, 594 P.2d 734 (Nev. 1979).
“This principle has been incorporated into the state water law, and is reflected in NRS 533.380(l)(a) which requires that in his endorsement of approval upon an application for the appropriation of water the State Engineer shall “[s]et a time prior to which actual construction…”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 533.380(l)(c) — 1 case
Bailey v. State, 594 P.2d 734 (Nev. 1979).
“This principle has been incorporated into the state water law, and is reflected in NRS 533.380(l)(a) which requires that in his endorsement of approval upon an application for the appropriation of water the State Engineer shall “[s]et a time prior to which actual construction…”
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.