MT · rules
Mont. Water Right Claim Examination R. 8
Point of Diversion (POD)
Rule 8(a). Identifying point of diversion. The claimed POD
will be identified and described by the nearest reasonable and
concise legal land description.
(1) The information in the claim, aerial photographs,
topographic maps, Water Resources Survey information, county
land ownership records, and other sources available to the
department may be used to review the claimed POD.
(2) When the claimed POD cannot be substantiated, the
department will gather further facts and data pertaining to the
specific claim. The claimant may be contacted pursuant to Rule
44, W.R.C.E.R. In addition, an on-site visit may be requested
pursuant to Rule 44, W.R.C.E.R.
(3) A diversion structure used for more than one claim
will have a consistent legal land description specified on all
respective claims.
Rule 8(b). Reviewing basin codes. Claims having diversions
within a common drainage basin or subbasin will be identified
with a common basin code. The basin code will be reviewed to
confirm that the claim has been grouped in the correct basin.
(1) If the department finds that a claim was omitted from
a basin where a decree has been issued, the water court shall be
notified.
(2) If the department finds that a claim was omitted from
a basin where a decree has not been issued, the department will
change the basin code in the claim file and in the centralized
record system.
Rule 8(c). Identifying interbasin transfers. When the POD
is in one basin and the place of use, or a portion thereof, is in
another basin, an interbasin transfer shall be identified for the
basin of the POU as well as the basin of the POD.
Rule 8(d). Changing point of diversion. The claimed point
of diversion of a water right will not be changed during the
department's examination unless:
(1) amended by the claimant;
(2) clarified by the department to the nearest reasonable
and concise legal land description; or
(3) revised to identify and describe a POD used by more
than one claim consistently.
Rule 8(e). Summary report. In the summary report to the
water court, the department shall provide on each abstract the
following data and facts concerning the point of diversion:
(1) the basin code designated by the department;
(2) the claimed or clarified legal land description;
(3) additional legal land descriptions identified by the
department such as government lots, subdivisions, certificates of
survey, homestead entry surveys, and mineral surveys;
(4) identification of named ditches or canals;
(5) identification of unique aspects or features of the point
of diversion;
(6) a notation of changes made during the department's
examination;
(7) a remark identifying an interbasin transfer of water;
Examples:
THIS APPROPRIATION OF WATER TAKES WATER FROM THE
_____ RIVER DRAINAGE (BASIN _____) AND USES IT IN THE
_____ RIVER DRAINAGE (BASIN _____). ANY OBJECTION TO
THIS RIGHT MAY BE FILED DURING THE OBJECTION
PERIODS FOR EITHER THE POINT OF DIVERSION OR PLACE
OF USE BASIN.
THIS APPROPRIATION OF WATER TAKES WATER FROM THE
_____ RIVER DRAINAGE (BASIN _____) AND USES IT IN THE
_____ RIVER DRAINAGE (BASIN _____) AND THE _____ RIVER
DRAINAGE (BASIN _____). ANY OBJECTION TO THIS RIGHT
MAY BE FILED DURING THE OBJECTION PERIODS FOR
EITHER THE POINT OF DIVERSION OR PLACE OF USE
BASIN.
and
(8) remarks concerning unresolved issues or questions
about the claimed point of diversion such as the point of diversion
legal land description could not be refined.
Provenance
- Source
- courts.mt.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-09-15
- Edition
- 2026-09-15
- Content hash
b53f4e063f0f37c22275dc66237408614d7b6abd19b7c58bb125bfe7b92ef785
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.