1. (a) Review. Information in the water conservation plan provided by a water right applicant shall be considered by the commission in determining whether any feasible alternative to the requested appropriation exists, whether the requested amount of appropriation as measured at the point of diversion is reasonable and necessary for the proposed use, the term and other conditions of the water right, and to ensure that reasonable diligence will be used to avoid waste and achieve water conservation. Based upon its review, the commission shall determine whether to deny or grant, in whole or in part, the requested appropriation.

2. (b) Burden of proof regarding need for appropriation. A water conservation plan submitted with an application requesting an appropriation for new or additional state water must include data and information which:

   1. (1) supports the applicant's proposed use of water with consideration of the water conservation goals of the water conservation plan;
   2. (2) evaluates conservation as an alternative to the proposed appropriation; and
   3. (3) evaluates other feasible alternatives to new water development, including, but not limited to, waste prevention, recycling and reuse, water transfer and marketing, reservoir system operations, and optimum water management practices and procedures. It shall be the burden of proof of the applicant to demonstrate that no feasible alternative to the proposed appropriation exists and that the requested amount of appropriation is necessary and reasonable for the proposed use.
3. (c) Implementation. Any water conservation measures prescribed by the commission shall be implemented as required by the terms and conditions of a commission order or water right, or by rule.

Source Note:The provisions of this §297.55 adopted to be effective May 3, 1993, 18 TexReg 2558.