MT · rules
Mont. Water Right Claim Examination R. 9
Means of Diversion
Rule 9(a). Identifying means of diversion. Facts and
information concerning the means of diversion of a water right will
be identified using the information in the claim, aerial
photographs, topographic maps, Water Resources Survey
information, and other sources available to the department.
Rule 9(b). Examining means of diversion. When the means
of diversion 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.
Rule 9(c). Changing means of diversion. The claimed
means of diversion of a water right will not be changed during the
department's examination unless:
(1) amended by the claimant; or
(2) clarified by the department to identify similar means
of diversion consistently.
Rule 9(d). Summary report. In the summary report to the
water court, the department shall provide on each abstract the
following data and facts concerning the means of diversion:
(1) the claimed or clarified means of diversion;
(2) identification of unique aspects or features of the
means of diversion;
(3) a notation of changes made during the department's
examination; and
(4) remarks concerning unresolved issues or questions
about the means of diversion, such as “the means of diversion
cannot be identified.”
Provenance
- Source
- courts.mt.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-09-15
- Edition
- 2026-09-15
- Content hash
17a88c39b3737d1d6882697e359b5c373c7112b413f8ce14ccb9ee9c74320845
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.