Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Permit Notice Appeals topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances bill clarifying notice and appeals for water-permit hearings
Summary
The House Energy and Natural Resources Committee voted to give Senate Bill 2059 a do-pass recommendation after Department of Water Resources officials described changes that standardize certified-mail notice and clarify appeal timing for drainage and construction permit complaints.
The House Energy and Natural Resources Committee gave Senate Bill 2059 a do-pass recommendation after receiving testimony from Department of Water Resources officials that the bill clarifies how the department notifies parties about hearings and reorganizes appeal steps for certain permit complaints.
Andrew Nygren, Water Appropriation Division director for the Department of Water Resources, told the committee the bill “clarifies the department will notify the necessary parties about the time and place of the hearing using certified mail, as the present language states service under the North Dakota rules of civil procedure.” He said the language makes explicit that certified mail will be used both for public hearings and for adjudicative proceedings when someone challenges the department’s recommendation on a conditional water permit application.
Nygren said sections 2 and 3 of the bill “add clarity to the process for appealing water resource district decisions” and reorganize existing text so the timing for requesting a departmental hearing and the department’s notification obligations are consistent between construction and drainage complaints.
Aaron Carranza, director of the Department of Water Resources’ regulatory division, explained the bill was drafted to remove ambiguity in the current code about when an administrative hearing is required before a district court appeal. He said the revised text does not change the appeals path but clarifies “when and how to file an appeal and also what to do when the department dismisses a complaint.”
Committee members asked whether certified-mail notice creates any deadline problems for parties who are absent when mail is delivered; Nygren said returned certified mail is rare and interested parties are typically aware they will be notified. Members also pressed whether the bill forces parties to exhaust administrative hearings before filing in district court; Carranza explained the bill clarifies the existing process and that district court appeals remain available.
The committee recorded a do-pass motion on Senate Bill 2059, which carried and the bill was later placed on the committee’s consent calendar for the next steps in the legislative process.
