Nebraska Revised Statutes

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 46-613.01 (2026)

Ground water; transfer to another state; permit; Chief Water Officer; issuance; conditions

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NE-LEGnebraskalegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

The Legislature recognizes and declares that the maintenance of an adequate source of ground water within this state is essential to the social stability of the state and the health, safety, and welfare of its citizens and that reasonable restrictions on the transportation of ground water from this state are a proper exercise of the police powers of the state. The need for such restrictions, which protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of this state, is hereby declared a matter of legislative determination.

Any person, firm, city, village, municipal corporation, or other entity intending to withdraw ground water from any water well located in the State of Nebraska and transport it for use in another state shall apply to the Chief Water Officer for a permit to do so. In determining whether to grant or deny such permit, the Chief Water Officer shall consider:

(1) The nature of the proposed use and whether it is a beneficial use of ground water;

(2) The availability to the applicant of alternative sources of surface or ground water;

(3) Any negative effect of the proposed withdrawal on ground water supplies needed to meet present or reasonable future demands for water in the area of the proposed withdrawal, to comply with any interstate compact or decree, or to fulfill the provisions of any other formal state contract or agreement;

(4) Any negative effect of the proposed withdrawal on surface water supplies needed to meet present or reasonable future demands within the state, to comply with any interstate compact or decree, or to fulfill the provisions of any other formal state contract or agreement;

(5) Any adverse environmental effect of the proposed withdrawal or transportation of ground water;

(6) The cumulative effect of the proposed withdrawal and transfer relative to the matters listed in subdivisions (3) through (7) of this section when considered in conjunction with all other transfers subject to this section; and

(7) Any other factors consistent with the purposes of this section that the Chief Water Officer deems relevant to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the state and its citizens.

Issuance of a permit shall be conditioned on the applicant's compliance with the rules and regulations of the natural resources district from which the water is to be withdrawn. The applicant shall be required to provide access to his or her property at reasonable times for purposes of inspection by officials of the district or the Chief Water Officer or the Chief Water Officer's representatives.

The Chief Water Officer may include such reasonable conditions on the proposed use as he or she deems necessary to carry out the purposes of this section.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 7 cases, 1981–2017 · leading case: Sporhase v. Nebraska Ex Rel. Douglas, 458 U.S. 941 (1982).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Sporhase v. Nebraska Ex Rel. Douglas, 458 U.S. 941 (1982). · cites it 12× “Previous owners of the land registered the well with the State of Nebraska in 1971, but neither they nor the present owners applied for the permit required by Neb. Rev. Stat. § 46-613.01 (1978). That section provides: "Any person, firm, city, village, municipal corporation or…”

Ponderosa Ridge Llv v. Banner Cnty., 554 N.W.2d 151 (Neb. 1996). · cites it 16× “Law Claim Ponderosa Ridge’s claim that the director’s order of denial is contrary to law rests on three premises: Neb. Rev. Stat. § 46-613.01 (Reissue 1993) unlawfully delegates legislative power to the director, in violation of Neb.”

State Ex Rel. Douglas v. Sporhase, 305 N.W.2d 614 (Neb. 1981). · cites it 24× “However, neither the defendants nor their predecessor in title applied to the Nebraska Department of Water Resources for a permit to transport ground water from the Nebraska well across the border into Colorado as required by Neb.Rev.Stat. § 46-613.01 (Reissue 1978).”

Estermann v. Bose, 892 N.W.2d 857 (Neb. 2017). · cites it 5× “Estermann also asserts that N-CORPE was required to obtain a permit from the DNR to transfer ground water pursu- ant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 46-613.01 (Reissue 2010) in order to construct and operate the project.”

State Ex Rel. Douglas v. Sporhase, 329 N.W.2d 855 (Neb. 1983). · cites it 8× “2d 1254 (1982), reversed the judgment of this court and remanded the matter to this court, holding that since the reciprocity requirement of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 46-613.01 (Reissue 1978) violates the commerce clause, “[w]e leave to the state courts the question whether the invalid…”

Fort Gratiot Sanitary Landfill, Inc. v. Michigan Dep't of Nat. Resources, 504 U.S. 353 (1992). · cites it 2× “, at 944 (quoting Neb. Rev. Stat. § 46-613.01 (1978)). [6] "Moreover, in the absence of a contrary view expressed by Congress, we are reluctant to condemn as unreasonable, measures taken by a State to conserve and preserve for its own citizens this vital resource in times of…”

Estermann v. Bose, 296 Neb. 228 (Neb. 2017). · cites it 5× “Estermann also asserts that N-CORPE was required to obtain a permit from the DNR to transfer ground water pursu- ant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 46-613.01 (Reissue 2010) in order to construct and operate the project.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.