Montana Legislature

Face-Off Continues Over Groundwater Bill

By Dan Testa, 4-10-07

UPDATE: 4-16-07 2:30pm
Sidney Republican Walter McNutt’s House Bill 831 passed the Senate Natural Resources Committee, 5 to 4, along party lines with Democrats in support.

The Committee passed a number of minor amendments to the bill as well.

The bill moves on to the Democrat-controlled Senate for a hearing later this week.

Stay tuned to this space for coverage of the Senate debate.

Two House Republicans continued their face-off Tuesday over the future of groundwater development in Montana.

Debby Barrett of Dillon attacked a bill by Walter McNutt of Sidney to set forth guidelines for the Department of Natural Resources on how to issue permits for groundwater in closed basins.

“(The bill) makes vast changes to Montana water policy without a study, without all interested parties, and without exploring whether the proposed changes to Montana water law are even reasonable or feasible,” Barrett told the Senate Natural Resources Committee. “A lot of input went into this, but it was all funneled through one individual.”

Barrett’s comments come in the wake of her opposing bill getting killed in the House last week.

McNutt’s House Bill 831 allows the DNRC to again issue groundwater development permits in Montana’s five closed basins so long as there is no harm to current or “senior” water rights holders.

If studies show a new well would harm senior water rights, the applicant would have to compensate for the water lost by purchasing part of a surface right or somehow restoring the water used through “aquifer recharge.” Water from aquifer recharge would have to meet drinking water purity standards.

McNutt introduced an amendment to address the plight of those groundwater permit applicants who had spent thousands of dollars on hydrologic studies when the April 2006 Supreme Court so-called “Trout Unlimited” decision came down, ceasing the DNRC from issuing any further permits in closed basins.

Those applicants caught in limbo by the TU decision, under the amendment, would essentially retain their “place in line” and be able to continue in the permitting process before later applicants. 

Tuesday’s testimony continued a hearing on the bill that began before the Easter break last Wednesday and ran until 1 a.m.

Supporters and critics of the bill lined up to voice now-familiar arguments. Those who favor the bill say it protects senior water rights holders while allowing the state to go forward with responsible groundwater development.

Opponents said the bill puts policy before adequate research has been done on the differing degrees of ground-surface water connectivity throughout the state.

The bill came under attack mainly for two sections: one imposing the drinking water quality standards, and the other section which says municipalities are exempt from the basin closures, but private entities providing municipal uses don’t qualify for the exemption.

The municipal use exemption is in-line with a district court ruling on a lawsuit from the Four Corners area of the Gallatin Valley which basically said private water districts cannot claim to be municipalities.

Committee Chair Greg Lind, D-Missoula, said a vote on the bill is scheduled for Friday. 

Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.