Environment committee wades into groundwater permitting changes

Lawmakers waded into the often controversial issues of water use and regulation in rural Minnesota Thursday as the House Environment and Natural Resources Policy and Finance Committee debated a bill that would make a number of changes to the state’s groundwater permitting process.

Sponsored by Rep. Jim Newberger (R-Becker), HF1387 would direct the Department of Natural Resources to allow water use permits to be transferred between owners and calculate 2.5 percent per year depreciation costs when determining well-interference claims, among other changes.

The bill was laid over for possible omnibus bill inclusion. The companion, SF1290, is sponsored by Sen. Andrew Mathews (R-Milaca) and awaits action by the Senate Environment and Natural Resources Policy and Legacy Finance Committee.

Newberger said HF1387 is a response to the “marked change” in the regulatory environment and how the DNR interacts with farmers that he believes has taken place since 2013, with inconsistent rulings and a playing field tilted toward the interests of rural homeowners at the expense of agriculture.

“We think having some guard rails in statute will even the balance here,” Newberger said.

The bill would also require:

• temporary groundwater reductions that might impact a rare type of wetland known as a calcareous fen;
• economic impact estimates when water appropriation management plans change; and
• that applicants, in some cases, receive all the information the DNR used when making a permit determination.

Interference issue

While objections were raised to several sections of the bill, the issue of well interference and who must pay when a well is depleted or outdated, received the most debate.

Disputes sometimes arise between farmers and rural homeowners who each have their own wells but must share groundwater.

Alan Peterson, a farmer and president of the Irrigators Association of Minnesota, told the committee well-interference expenses have been a burden to some farmers and said the bill would “give the DNR a direction” on how to value those wells.

“Sometimes it gets frustrating when I get different answers from different DNR people,” Peterson said. “I’d like at least that they could be on the same page.”

However, Bob Meier, DNR assistant commissioner, said there is inconsistency because “our groundwater resources are not consistent throughout the state.”

Rep. Peter Fischer (DFL-Maplewood) noted that using the 2.5 percent yearly depreciation formula in the bill, a homeowner who wins a well-interference claim would still be obligated to pay 25 percent of the replacement cost on 10-year-old well, and 100 percent of the cost once a well is 40 years old.

Meier said it is better to deal with interference claims “on a case-by-case” basis because wells depreciate differently. Newberger said he would be willing to continue discussions on that issue.

Meier also defended permitting work the DNR does, saying that of the “thousands and thousands” of permits the DNR issues, they only hear complaints about a handful.

“Those that are denied, it’s for the good of the resource,” Meier said. “It’s not to penalize anyone.”