Relating to a State Water Resources Management Plan
HB5008 amends the Water Resources Protection Act to expand the State Water Resources Management Plan and add a new reporting framework for underground water extracted in certain growth counties with majority karst terrain. The bill keeps and restates the secretary’s duty to maintain a statewide water resources plan, including inventories of surface water and groundwater, identification of aquifers and watersheds, assessments of safe yield, drought and flood concerns, water-use conflicts, floodplain and stormwater issues, and reviews of water-related statutes, policies, and management alternatives. It also requires the secretary to report annually to the Joint Legislative Oversight Commission on State Water Resources on implementation of the plan.
A central feature of the bill is a new subsection directing the secretary to establish reporting requirements for underground water extracted in growth counties. The plan must include limits on commercial extraction that could harm underground water supplies or reduce water available to residents and farmers with wells. It also prioritizes groundwater use by individual residents, farmers, and activities on the land where the water was drawn, including use on the property owner’s land or on a separate parcel owned or leased by the owner. The bill defines “extracted” to mean water taken from subsurface wells for commercial sale or shipment outside West Virginia, directly or indirectly.
The bill’s impact on state law is to strengthen state oversight of water withdrawals and groundwater management, especially in areas where karst geology can make aquifers more vulnerable to depletion or contamination. It would add a specific administrative duty for the secretary to create reporting rules for underground water extraction in growth counties and would reinforce existing annual reporting obligations for large-quantity users. In practical terms, the bill could affect commercial water haulers, bottling or export operations, and other large users, while also providing additional protection for domestic well users, farmers, and local groundwater supplies.
Overall sentiment appears supportive and precautionary, with the bill framed as a water-management and resource-protection measure rather than a restriction on ordinary use. Because no committee transcript or recorded votes were provided, there is no documented floor or committee debate to show broader support or opposition. The bill text itself suggests a policy goal of balancing water use while preventing commercial extraction from undermining local water availability.
The main point of contention likely concerns the scope of commercial groundwater extraction limits and the potential effect on businesses that withdraw water for sale or transport outside the state. Another possible issue is how the secretary would define and enforce reporting requirements in growth counties, and how those rules would interact with property rights, agricultural uses, and existing water-use reporting systems. The bill also raises broader policy questions about prioritizing local residential and farm use over commercial extraction in karst regions.
HB5008 would amend §22-26-8 of the West Virginia Code within the Water Resources Protection Act, expanding the State Water Resources Management Plan framework and adding a new groundwater extraction reporting mandate for growth counties with majority karst terrain. It would require the secretary to develop reporting rules and potential limits for commercial underground water extraction, while prioritizing resident, farmer, and on-site property uses. The bill would primarily affect the Department of Environmental Protection, large-quantity water users, commercial groundwater extractors, and users dependent on private wells in vulnerable counties.
No committee transcript or vote record was provided, so there is no documented legislative debate or recorded partisan split. Based on the bill text, the measure appears to be presented as a water-conservation and local-protection bill, with an emphasis on safeguarding groundwater supplies and improving reporting. The overall tone is protective and regulatory, suggesting likely support from lawmakers concerned about water scarcity and well impacts, though the absence of recorded discussion means opposition cannot be confirmed from the available materials.
The likely areas of contention are the new reporting and limitation authority over underground water extracted in growth counties, especially for commercial users whose operations involve selling or shipping water outside West Virginia. Businesses that rely on groundwater extraction may view the bill as burdensome or restrictive, while residents, farmers, and local governments in karst areas may support stronger protections for wells and aquifers. Another possible dispute is how broadly the secretary may define and enforce the reporting plan, and whether the bill could affect property owners’ ability to use groundwater across multiple parcels or for commercial purposes.