Debate over highway culverts and watershed impacts surfaces in hearing on drainage bill

Representative Mike Brandenburg opened the hearing on House Bill 1201, which would amend statute related to drains that intersect roadways in the state highway system and add provisions to allow restrictor valves or other control features at culvert crossings under certain watershed conditions.

Brandenburg told the committee that a 2013 North Dakota Department of Transportation (DOT) replacement of culverts on State Highway 13 increased culvert capacity (he said the new pipes were five times larger than the originals) and has contributed to sustained high water and flooding of county and township roads and farmland downstream. Local witnesses from Sargent County, including water board members and farmers, testified that the change created persistent flooding, imposed safety risks and triggered expensive litigation for local drainage work. Farm testimony described county roads and farmland remaining underwater for months and cited a roughly $830,000 legal bill related to Drain 11.

The bill would put the agriculture commissioner and the water commission into a consultative and oversight role and would authorize restrictor valves on culverts in some situations, according to sponsor testimony and a submitted amendment. Supporters said the amendment aims to get state agencies working together to address system‑wide conveyance rather than piecemeal fixes.

Officials from the North Dakota Department of Transportation and the Department of Water Resources testified in opposition. Matt Lineman, deputy director for engineering at DOT, said placing control valves on culverts would turn highway crossings into dams and would conflict with the state’s stream crossing standards and highway‑design practice. He said highway embankments are not constructed to dam standards and could be subject to seepage and piping if used to impound water; he also said federal and state highway funds would be ineligible to construct or maintain dam‑like features.

Aaron Carranza, director of the Department of Water Resources’ regulatory division, also opposed the bill and said the proposed change could reclassify many crossings as medium or high hazard dams, which would require significant permitting, geotechnical design, inspection and agency resources. Carranza noted the department already provides cost‑share support for conveyance projects such as Drain 11 and that water districts can request hydrologic determinations from the Department of Water Resources.

Committee members asked DOT to check project files and outreach records for the 2013 culvert work and asked how control structures are operated when they exist as part of flood control projects. DOT said control structures do exist but are part of flood control projects managed by other sponsors, with operating plans and responsible entities defined in those projects.

The committee closed the hearing on House Bill 1201 after supporters and opponents presented competing technical and policy perspectives; the transcript does not record committee action that day.