Utah Code

Utah Code § 73-3-12 (2026)

Time limit on construction and application to beneficial use -- Extensions -- Procedures and criteria

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section UT-LEGle.utah.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

As used in this section:

"Public water supplier" is as defined in Section 73-1-4.

"Wholesale electrical cooperative" is as defined in Section 54-2-1.

Within the time set by the state engineer under Subsection 73-3-10(5), an applicant shall:

construct works, if necessary;

apply the water to beneficial use; and

file proof with the state engineer in accordance with Section 73-3-16.

Except as provided by Subsection (4), the state engineer shall extend the time in which an applicant shall comply with Subsection (2)(a) if:

the date set by the state engineer is not after 50 years from the day on which the application is approved; and

the applicant shows:

reasonable and due diligence in completing the appropriation; or

a reasonable cause for delay in completing the appropriation.

An applicant shall file a request for an extension of time with the state engineer on or before the date set for filing proof.

The state engineer may grant an extension of time authorized by Subsection (2)(b) if the state engineer sets a date:

no later than 14 years from the day on which the application is approved if the applicant meets the requirements of Subsection (2)(b); and

after 14 years from the day on which the application is approved if:

the applicant meets the requirements of Subsection (2)(b); and

the state engineer publishes notice as provided in Subsection (2)(e).

The state engineer shall publish a notice of the request for an extension of time:

once a week for two successive weeks, in a newspaper of general circulation, in the county:

in which the water source is located; and

where the water will be used; and

in accordance with Section 45-1-101 for two weeks.

The notice shall:

state that a request for an extension of time has been made; and

specify where an interested party may obtain additional information relating to the request.

A person who owns a water right or holds an application from the water source referred to in Subsection (2)(e) may file a protest with the state engineer:

within 20 days after the notice is published, if the adjudicative proceeding is informal; and

within 30 days after the notice is published, if the adjudicative proceeding is formal.

The approved extension of time is effective so long as the applicant continues to exercise reasonable and due diligence in completing the appropriation.

The state engineer shall consider the holding of an approved application by a public water supplier or a wholesale electrical cooperative to meet the reasonable future water or electricity requirements of the public to be reasonable and due diligence in completing the appropriation for the purposes of this section for 50 years from the date on which the application is approved.

If the state engineer finds unreasonable delay or lack of reasonable and due diligence in completing the appropriation, the state engineer may:

deny the extension of time; or

grant the request in part or upon conditions, including a reduction of the priority of all or part of the application.

Except as provided by Subsection (4), an application upon which proof has not been filed shall lapse and have no further force or effect after 50 years from the date on which the application is approved.

If the works are constructed with which to make beneficial use of the water applied for, the state engineer may, upon showing of that fact, extend the time in which to file proof by setting a date after 50 years from the day on which the application is approved.

The state engineer may extend the time in which the applicant shall comply with Subsection (2)(a) by setting a date after 50 years from the day on which the application is approved if the applicant:

is a public water supplier or a wholesale electrical cooperative; and

provides information that shows the water applied for in the application is needed to meet the reasonable future requirements of the public.

The information provided by a public water supplier shall be in accordance with the criteria listed in Subsection 73-1-4(2)(f).

A wholesale electrical cooperative shall provide the information described in Subsection (4)(b)(i)(B) in a report that forecasts:

the need for the water to produce power; and

the power output of the project for the wholesale electrical cooperative within the next 40 years.

The state engineer shall extend the time in which to file proof by setting a reasonable date after 50 years from the day on which the application is approved if the applicant:

meets the requirements in Subsection (4)(b); and

has:

constructed works to apply the water to beneficial use; or

made substantial expenditures to construct the works.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 6 cases, 1967–2020 · leading case: Longley v. Leucadia Fin. Corp., 2000 UT 69 (Utah 2000).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Longley v. Leucadia Fin. Corp., 2000 UT 69 (Utah 2000). · cites it 21× “We hold that, because the public notice given regarding Leucadia's fifth extension request did not strictly comply with the statutory requirements pursuant to Utah Code Ann. § 73-3-12 (2)(f)(ii), the notice was invalid and the statutory time period within which Longley was…”

Carbon Canal Co. v. Sanpete Water Users Ass'n, 425 P.2d 405 (Utah 1967). · cites it 21× “The court also directed the respondent to form a conservancy district with taxing authority, which it did, or to otherwise submit satisfactory evidence of its ability to proceed without the necessity of forming such taxing authority. If it be said that when the court "retained…”

Longley v. Leucadia Fin. Corp., 960 P.2d 907 (Utah Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 17× “” Utah Code Ann. § 73-3-12 (l)(d) (1989). Section 73-3-12(1) further provided as follows: (e)(i) The state engineer shall publish notice once a week for three successive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation in the county in which the source of supply is located.”

Rocky Ford v. Kents Lake, 2020 UT 47 (Utah 2020). “Irrigation Changes and Rocky Ford’s Lawsuit Beginning in the 1970s, Beaver River water users began to gradually convert from flood irrigation to sprinkler systems—more efficient watering mechanisms that require less water and produce less return flows.”

Rocky Ford v. Kents Lake, 2019 UT 31 (Utah 2019). “UTAH CODE § 73-3-12 (1953). In this stage, the applicant can “proceed and perfect the appropriation by applying 11 ROCKY FORD v.”

Blake v. Lambert, 590 P.2d 351 (Utah 1979). · cites it 2× “Section 73-3-12 required diligent prosecution of the work to develop water within the time allowed in the application, failing completion of which within the time period allowing extensions, not exceeding 50 years.”

— Utah Code § 73-3-12(1) — 1 case

Longley v. Leucadia Fin. Corp., 960 P.2d 907 (Utah Ct. App. 1998). “” Utah Code Ann. § 73-3-12 (l)(d) (1989). Section 73-3-12(1) further provided as follows: (e)(i) The state engineer shall publish notice once a week for three successive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation in the county in which the source of supply is located.”

— Utah Code § 73-3-12(2)(a) — 1 case

Longley v. Leucadia Fin. Corp., 2000 UT 69 (Utah 2000). “We hold that, because the public notice given regarding Leucadia's fifth extension request did not strictly comply with the statutory requirements pursuant to Utah Code Ann. § 73-3-12 (2)(f)(ii), the notice was invalid and the statutory time period within which Longley was…”

— Utah Code § 73-3-12(2)(d) — 1 case

— Utah Code § 73-3-12(2)(e) — 1 case

— Utah Code § 73-3-12(2)(f)(ii) — 1 case

— Utah Code § 73-3-12(2)(g) — 1 case

— Utah Code § 73-3-12(l)(d) — 1 case

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.