Utah water officials at a July 31 public meeting presented a draft Great Salt Lake Distribution Management Plan that would determine which mineral-extraction water rights may divert from the lake based on a priority schedule keyed to the mean daily south-arm elevation measured on June 15 of the previous year. "The concept is we measure that elevation June 15, and then the priority schedule comes into effect January 1 next year," said Blake Bingham, deputy state engineer for the Utah Division of Water Rights.

The plan implements a 2023 statute (House Bill 453) directing the state engineer to develop an apportionment and distribution framework and an accounting model. "The statute also requires us to incorporate the principle of multiple use sustained yield," Bingham said, explaining why lake elevation is used alongside priority date to regulate diversions.

Why it matters: the schedule sets hard cutoffs for when Great Salt Lake water rights are allowed to divert for mineral extraction. Under the draft table shown at the meeting, if the south-arm elevation measured on June 15 falls below 4,193 feet, "there will be no allowed diversion of any Great Salt Lake water rights," Bingham said. Higher elevation tranches add progressively more rights; the plan lists a sequence of elevation bands (below 4,193; 4,193–4,194.9; 4,195–4,197.9; 4,198–4,199.9; 4,200 and above) with cumulative availability of rights as elevation increases.

The plan also distinguishes between two categories of lake-related water: "Great Salt Lake water rights," a narrow class of rights associated with in-lake mineral extraction, and "dedicated water," meaning water rights moved or changed through the Utah in-stream flow statute for beneficial use on sovereign lands in the lake. Bingham said dedicated water is not available for diversion by mineral-extraction rights once it is placed in the lake.

Voluntary arrangements and change applications: the draft incorporates voluntary agreements between mineral operators and the Utah Division of Forestry, Fire and State Lands when those agreements have an approved change application. Bingham said Compass Minerals is currently the only operator with an approved change application tied to a voluntary arrangement; other agreements have been filed but were pending at the time of the meeting. Under the Compass Minerals arrangement, portions of a water-right portfolio are available at lower elevations than most other rights; Bingham said some tiers of Compass’s portfolio become available when the lake is near 4,190 feet, and that when Compass leaves water unused for mineral extraction a portion (for example, roughly 26,000 acre-feet in the example shown) is converted in situ to dedicated water.

Accounting tool and measurement: the Division demonstrated an interactive distribution-accounting model on its website that uses two United States Geological Survey gauges (to capture north- and south-arm elevations), USGS bathymetry, salinity inputs, and an evaporation method the presenters attributed to David Tarboton to calculate lake volume, evaporative loss and the dedicated-water balance. Bingham said the tool "uses the USGS bathymetry to evaluate the volume of the lake" and that the model will require physical measurement rather than estimates for diverted volumes; operators who had previously reported estimated pump hours will be required to provide physical measurement going forward. The division also plans to track salinity and to work with the Utah Geological Survey to improve data for the north arm.

Timing and next steps: the division mailed a notice of final adoption the morning of the July 31 meeting and said it is required to provide 60 days’ notice before adoption. Bingham said the plan would not become effective until Oct. 1, 2025, and that the Division will begin applying the priority schedule on Jan. 1, 2026 using the June 15, 2025 south-arm elevation to set the following year’s curtailments. After adoption there is a 60-day period in which an aggrieved party may file a complaint in district court. The division’s website hosts the draft plan, lists of Great Salt Lake water rights and dedicated water, documents describing voluntary arrangements, and the interactive accounting tool.

Questions and limits noted at the meeting: attendees asked how the elevation thresholds were derived and whether the plan creates a priority call upstream of the lake. Bingham said the threshold bands were informed by earlier voluntary arrangements and by the Great Salt Lake strategic reporting but acknowledged the specific logic tying particular priority dates to particular elevation bands is not fully documented in the plan materials. He also said the plan does not create a priority call upstream; it applies only to Great Salt Lake water rights and to dedicated water. Management of the berm and some other lake-management tasks fall under the statutory authority of the Utah Division of Forestry, Fire and State Lands and were not included in the state engineer’s plan.

No formal vote was taken at the meeting; the division sought public comment. The presentation and the accounting tool are available on the Division of Water Rights website for review and submission of written comments.