Laserfiche WebLink
<br />(8) the effect upon access to navigable or public water. (Alaska Stat., <br />46,15.080) <br /> <br />Nebraska likewise has a comprehensive definition of public interest criteria in its <br />statute affecting interbasin transfers. The statement of legislative intent preceding the <br />substantive provisions "recognizes the need to delineate factors for consideration by the <br />Director of Water Resources when evaluating an application made pursuant to section 46. <br />233 which involves an interbasin transfer of water in order to detennine whether denial of <br />such application is demanded by the public interest." (Neb. Rev. Stat., 46-289) The <br />considerations include the following factors: <br />(1) The economic, environmental, and other benefits of the proposed <br />interbasin tranSfer; <br />(2) Any adverse impacts of the proposed interbasin transfer and use; <br />(3) Any current beneficial uses being made of the unappropriated water <br />in the basin of origin; <br />(4) Any reasonably foreseeable future beneficial uses of the water in the <br />basin of origin; <br />(5) The economic, environmental, and other benefits ofleaving the water <br />in the basin of origin for current or future beneficial uses; <br />(6) Alternative sources of water supply available to the applicant; and <br />(7) Alternative sources of water available to the basin of origin for future <br />beneficial uses. <br /> <br />California combines environmental criteria and economic considerations--neither of <br />which provide clear direction to a regulatory agency because of a "reasonableness <br />qualification".-in its water transfer statute. The Water Resources Control Board may only <br />approve a transfer if it finds, in addition to nonimpairment, that the change can be made <br /> <br />11 <br />