KRS 382.850: Transfer of easement -- Effect on mining operations and on eminent

domain powers -- Definition of "feasible alternative location" -- Requirement

to demonstrate lack of feasible alternative location in certain eminent domain

actions.

(1) As used in this section, "feasible alternative location" means a location that:

(a) Impacts the same property but does not impact the conservation easement on

the property; and

(b) Does not materially increase the cost of the project.

(2) A conservation easement sh all not be transferred by owners of property in which

there are outstanding subsurface rights without the prior written consent of the

owners of the subsurface rights.

(3) A conservation easement shall not operate to limit, preclude, delete, or require

waivers for the conduct of coal mining operations, including the transportation of

coal, upon any part or all of adjacent or surrounding properties; and shall not

operate to impair or restrict any right or power of eminent domain created by

statute, and all s uch rights and powers shall be exercisable as if the conservation

easement did not exist.

(4) (a) Notwithstanding subsection (3) of this section, in a condemnation action

under the Eminent Domain Act of Kentucky, KRS 416.540 to 416.670,

involving privately owned property that is subject to a conservation easement,

the condemnor shall provide a sworn written report to the court justifying the

condemnation of the specific property at issue due to the lack of feasible

alternative locations to satisfy the purpo ses of the project unless the

condemnation action:

1. Is initiated by a city, county, municipal utility, investor -owned utility,

utility cooperative, water district, or water association; and

2. Involves eas ements for utilities that do not interfere with agricultural

operations or result in a taking of agricultural infrastructure.

(b) If the court, in its discretion, determines that the report does not demonstrate a

lack of feasible alternative locations to s atisfy the purposes of the project, the

condemnation action shall be dismissed in accordance with KRS 416.610(4).

(5) This section shall not prevent a property owner from:

(a) Challenging the necessity of condemnation for the project; or

(b) Offering additional feasible alternative locations to satisfy the purposes of the

project.