State water officials explain proposed determination for Orem Subdivision, outline 90‑day objection process

Chase McDonald, assistant state engineer for the adjudication section at the Utah Division of Water Rights, told attendees at the final public meeting for the Orem Subdivision that the office published its proposed determination (PD) on June 25, 2026, and that anyone who disagrees with the Division’s recommendations must file a written objection with the 3rd Judicial District Court within 90 days. "If you look at our proposed determination and you think we got something wrong, this is how you file an objection with the court," McDonald said, pointing to the PD notice and the civil number on its title page.

The PD compiles staff field reviews, historical records and the Division’s hydrographic survey into a recommended priority schedule and set of water‑right descriptions for Area 55, Book 3 (the Orem Subdivision). McDonald described the documents that appear in the PD: the priority schedule (sources and water‑right numbers listed by priority date), quantities given as flow rates (cubic feet per second) or annual volumes (acre‑feet), point(s) of diversion, owner of record, nature and period of beneficial use (for example, irrigation is listed Apr. 1–Oct. 31 in many entries), and a place‑of‑use table tied to the public land survey system. The PD also lists renumbered rights (duplicates consolidated), forfeited rights (not used for seven or more years), and claims the Division found invalid under state law.

McDonald said the Division uploaded the PD and hydrographic survey maps to its website and filed them with the district court; hard copies are available from the office for a nominal fee. He demonstrated the adjudication status page and the mapping/search tools, showing how users can open a water‑right record, view scanned historical documents, and download the potentially affected party (PAP) form used to opt into notice lists for specific objections. "We will upload [the meeting recording] to our YouTube channel, probably tomorrow," he added.

Residents raised procedural and substantive concerns during a broad Q&A. One attendee charged that Orem City had previously been granted permission to drill five wells and said locals believe that action affected downstream rights; McDonald said he understood the frustration and flagged that the specific well permits are outside the scope of the adjudication process but that the attorney‑general representative present could discuss the matter after the meeting. Another resident asked whether the PD’s listed extents and quantities become permanent; McDonald replied that, absent successful objections or court action, the PD’s recommendations will form the basis of the court’s decree.

Why it matters: the adjudication formalizes which water rights exist, their priority and how they may be used. McDonald emphasized that the adjudication can remove or reduce rights that have been forfeited through nonuse, a statutory safeguard the Division uses to protect active water users and prevent speculation.

What to do next: file a written objection to the 3rd Judicial District Court within the 90‑day window from PD publication and serve a copy on the Division’s counsel as instructed in the PD notice. The Division will list objections on its website; staff will issue a final summons to seek any claimants not yet on the record, and later move the court for an interlocutory decree once objections are resolved. Staff remained available after the recorded session to answer individual questions about specific water rights.