Water exchange approved by the State Engineer.
July 31, the State Engineer released his report and it looks like the Summit Group will be able to use water sufficient for the first phases of their development at Powder Mountain. Link to the State Engineer’s report.
It seems extremely unlikely the future of Powder Mountain will include well water for the 2,800 housing units extorted by the previous owners. Indeed, there may not be sufficient quality water for the original 1100 units the resort was entitled to.
Link to SE article Summit’s water ruling could come by August (7/9/2015)
Link to SE article Wolf Creek files eminent domain action against Summit (5/16/2015)
Link to a Summit Powder Mountain view of things by Paul Strange (COO) Summit viewpoint 5-14-2015
Link to SE article Eden water users challenge Summit with ‘signs of frustration’ (5/12/2015)
Link to letter to SE editor Summit has right to water purchased with land (5/12/2015)
Link to the SE article Summit pump test data provides clues about impacts (4/17/2015)
And here is a link to all the documents submitted to the state engineer regarding the dispute.
Link to the SE article Water experts take jabs at each other over Summit’s Hidden Lake Well. (4/23/2015)
Link to the SE article Powder Mountain ran low on drinking water in December (4/30/2015)
Link to the SE article Summit blames malfunctioning pump for water deficiency (5/1/2015)
Want to get into the legal documents involved in Summit’s water situation?
1. The Powder Mountain water right “approved” in 2006 (note the conditions: Powder Mountain Water and Sewer to distribute the water; new sources shall not impair
senior rights) Also note that the locations listed include no actual wells or springs, since with one exception all the listed locations are incorrect with respect to actual water courses and well locations – i.e. a relocation would always be needed). The exception is the Pizzel Spring house, for which Powder Mountain water and Sewer already has water right up to the approximate wet water flow of the spring. [link
Also search for water right 35-11995 at [link
2. Documents related to Drinking water and water systems can be found at [link
] or at [link]
on the tab EZ records search in the web page headers.
Under “Weber County” documents for all of the valley water companies can be located. FYI The scanned listings are not always complete, nor do they necessarily present in date order for a given water company.
One of the more detailed documents is LWA opinion that there is sufficient wet water at the Hidden Lake Well; [link
3. The current disputed water right exchange of Summit Mountain Holding Group is at [link
] and at [link
]. The second link accesses the full document folder with scans of all of the water right application details and the hundreds of pages of reports and protest documents.
A few key documents are as follows:
Document number/date; content details:
1 dated 4/8/14 Application by Summit – This application occurred after the Protestants pointed out that the Hidden Lake Well had not been drilled on an approved location in the 2006 exchange.
2 – 32 dated 4/22 to 5/27/14 protests to the new application by multiple water companies, individuals and Cache County.
33 – 47 dated 7/8/14 Documents related to the public hearing held on that date. This includes the presentations by Summit’s consultant (Loughlin Water Associates) at No 47 and the Protestants consultant (Cascade Water Resources) at No 43-46
Protest and rebuttal documents then follow, documenting the back and forth that occurred throughout the summer of 2014, including the request by the Protestants that a pump test occur (Doc 54 – 8/5/14) until the State Engineer ordered that a pumping test be completed (Doc 73 dated October 29, 2014)
Correspondence about planning and requirements for the pump test is documents 74 to 83, and document 90 dated 11/26/14, which was from the State Engineer allowing Summit to proceed. This letter also makes clear that Summit has the burden of proving that senior rights will NOT be affected. The pumping test occurred during December 2014, with the pump running from December 2 until December 16 (14 days).
Reports about the pumping test were then not submitted until the State Enginer ordered (Doc 117 dated 2/25/15) that the reports be submitted on March 27 2015, with rebuttals/comments submitted by April 17, 2015.)
Document 119 3/24/15 is Cache County’s thoughts on the matter
Document 120 and 121 3/27/15 is Summits consultants (Loughlin Water Resources) report.
Document 122-123 is the Protestants consultant’s (Cascade Water Resources) report on the pumping test.
Documents from 126-134; 137-151; 155-173 are letters of concern from multiple residents of Ogden Valley.
Document 152 dated 4/17/15 is Summit’s comments/rebuttal on the Cascade Water Resources report on the pump test.
Document 135 and 136 dated 4/14/15 (duplicate) is Cache County’s rebuttal to Loughlins report on the pump test.
Document 153 and 154 (duplicate) dated 4/17/15 is the Ogden Valley Protestants comments on Loughlins report on the pump test. This document includes a legal summary from Holland and Hart, with appended a supplemental report about the possible effects on valley groundwater and the protestant’s water flows by Wolf Creek Water and Sewer Improvement District and Wolf Creek Irrigation board members.
Again: all of the above documents can be accessed at the [link
Folks who are interested can click on “Track Folder” at the top of the 35-12848 indexing page, and receive notifications when a document is added. The State Engineers decision will presumably be added to this folder. There are appeals/hearing processes that can occur after that happens; then after that a dispute can potentially go to Utah courts for rehearing – an expensive process, which usually (but not always) confirms the State Engineer’s decision.