The South Dakota Board of Water Management at its July meeting in Pierre, South Dakota, on July 8, 2026. From left to right: board members Kelly Hepler, Jim Hutmacher, board counsel David McVey, board members Rodney Freeman and Peggy Dixon. (Photo by Meghan O’Brien/South Dakota Searchlight)
MILBANK, S.D. (South Dakota Searchlight) – The City of Milbank was granted a future use permit from the South Dakota Water Management Board on Wednesday, despite opposition from a neighboring rural water system and concerns about drying the aquifer.
The state’s water management board, whose members are appointed by the governor, makes decisions on the appropriation of the state’s water resources, in addition to reviewing streamgage data and data on groundwater levels and water use.
The vote in Milbank’s favor was unanimous.
The future use permit reserves water rights but won’t give the Milbank the ability to use additional water immediately. The city would need to return to the board with a water permit application once it’s identified a specific “beneficial use,” which under state law means a use that is “consistent with the interests of the public.”
Future use permits are also subject to review every seven years to determine if there’s a continuing need for reserved water.
Growth drives Milbank request
Milbank is a city of 3,500 in a section of northeastern South Dakota that’s experienced significant growth in recent years. The city got a $2.5 million grant from the U.S. Economic Development Administration in 2024 to expand its industrial park, and it’s also seen a milk storage operation expand to serves a local cheese factory that’s increased its processing capacity.
A city leader didn’t point to a specific project or development that would need a certain amount of water during Wednesday’s board meeting, but rather pointed to stress on the city’s current infrastructure.
Milbank City Administrator Steve Pendergrass said the city’s experiencing an increased demand for water and issues with treating water and wastewater.
“We’ve got to start looking at alternative routes, so that’s why we’re looking at this future water use,” Pendergrass said.
Milbank uses a yearly average of 1.1 million gallons of water per day, pulled mostly from the Veblen and Revillo aquifers. It’s asking for the right to draw more from the Antelope Valley Aquifer, which rests underneath Grant, Deuel and Codington counties. The permit will allow Milbank to claim an additional 1,120 acre-feet of water per year from that aquifer in the future.
The U.S. Geological Survey describes an acre-foot as “the amount of water that would cover a football field in one foot of water,” or about 325,900 gallons.
Opposition: Aquifer could be strained
The additional 1,120 acre-feet per year withdrawal by Milbank could have a “unique and detrimental effect” on the Grant-Roberts Rural Water System’s existing wells, as well as on the Antelope Valley Aquifer recharge rate, according to the rural water system’s complaint against the permit.
Engineers at the Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources budget available water by subtracting the water already appropriated from an aquifer from the amount added back each year.
The Antelope Valley Aquifer’s recharge rate is an estimated 6,700 acre-feet per year. A little more than 3,500 acre-feet is already reserved for irrigation, drinking water and future use, according to the engineer’s report on Milbank’s application.
There’s enough water in the aquifer to satisfy the permit, according to the department’s report. But an engineer with DGR Engineering told board members there’s a “significant difference” in water availability on either side of Punished Woman Lake, a body of surface water in the aquifer on the northern side.
“Recharge that occurs in the southern half of the aquifer is not available for withdrawal in the northern one-third of that aquifer,” said Matthew Oedekoven of DGR, who questioned the way the state’s hydrologic budget was prepared.
The rural water system uses DGR for engineering expertise. Oedekoven said he has “significant concerns” about whether the aquifer has enough readily accessible water to offer Milbank the 1,120 acre feet annually that the city requested in its permit application.
“There may be some available, but I am concerned that there is the full 1,120,” Oedekovan said.
The Grant-Roberts water system serves about 2,050 customers across Grant, Roberts, Codington and Deuel counties in South Dakota, and LacQui Parle County in Minnesota. It draws water from the Antelope Valley Aquifer. It’s also spending about $600,000 this year to drill two additional wells, General Manager Brent Hoffmann told board members Wednesday.
In the past decade, the system has started supplying water to Big Stone City and Corona. It’s currently building lines into the city of Marvin and is looking to add the city of Summit within coming years.
“We have growth every year,” Hoffmann said. “You have the small communities, we seem to be losing people, but a lot of people want to move up to the Big Stone Lake area and that’s where a lot of growth is.”
Milbank’s future use might impact other areas, Hoffmann said.
“I think Milbank should should have their future water rights,” he said. “I just don’t feel that this permit would be appropriate at this point in time, based on the data as we read it.”
Board member Rodney Freeman acknowledged those concerns before his vote.
“There were some interesting points and issues raised, but I believe those issues will be addressed if and when the city of Milbank comes in and wants to put it into beneficial use,” Freeman said.
The permit put Milbank in line for water, Pendergrass said, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t also looking for water from other sources than the Antelope Valley Aquifer.
“We aren’t putting all our eggs in one basket,” Pendergrass said.
Comments