Assured water supply; legislative intent
If enacted, HCR2039 would impact regulations regarding water supply management in Arizona by reinforcing the state's definitions and expectations set out in the 1980 Groundwater Management Act. Specifically, it prevents the Arizona Department of Water Resources from denying or delaying applications for water supply certificates based on conditions not outlined within the existing legislative framework. This could lead to a more streamlined process for applicants seeking to obtain a certificate of assured water supply, facilitating development projects reliant on the assurance of long-term water availability.
House Concurrent Resolution 2039 (HCR2039) states the opposition to any policy that mandates an applicant for a certificate or designation of assured water supply to demonstrate more water than necessary. It asserts that any such requirement is contrary to the original intent of the 1980 Groundwater Management Act. The resolution emphasizes that the state’s statutory definition of 'assured water supply' requires only that sufficient groundwater, surface water, or effluent be continuously available to meet the applicant's needs for a hundred years, without imposing additional burdens related to water availability assertions from other users or past demands.
The sentiment surrounding HCR2039 appears to be supportive among legislators who aim to promote growth and development, viewing the resolution as a safeguard against overregulation that could inhibit potential water users. On the other hand, critics may argue that a less stringent approach to water supply assurances could lead to long-term resource management issues, particularly in water-scarce regions. The resolution reflects a divide in perspectives about how best to manage Arizona's water resources and address the needs of a growing population.
Notable contention arises over whether the current rules articulated by the Arizona Department of Water Resources align with the legislative intent of the 1980 Groundwater Management Act. Proponents of HCR2039 argue that the existing regulations requiring more proof of water availability than necessary impose unreasonable barriers to applicants. In contrast, opponents may caution that easing these regulations could overlook essential environmental considerations and lead to unsustainable water resource management practices.