UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION Utah Board of Water Resources ) Project No. 12966-005 REPLY OF THE UTAH BOARD OF WATER RESOURCES AND WASHINGTON COUNTY WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT TO COMMENTS, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND PRELIMINARY TERMS AND CONDITIONS January 18, 2019 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION Utah Board of Water Resources ) Project No. 12966-005 TABLE OF CONTENTS GLOSSARY OF TERMS .................................................................................................. vi I. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................2 A. Background ................................................................................................. 2 1. Project History and Description .......................................................2 2. Other Necessary Approvals .............................................................4 3. Procedural Determinations...............................................................5 B. Overview of NEPA Requirements .............................................................. 6 C. Summary of Responses to REA Notice ...................................................... 9 II. LPP PURPOSE AND NEED .................................................................................10 III. PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES ..................................................12 A. The Proposed Action................................................................................. 12 B. Alternatives Included in the Application .................................................. 13 C. Expansion of the Temporary Construction ROW ..................................... 14 D. Local Waters Proposal .............................................................................. 15 IV. UBWR REPLY TO COMMENTS, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND PRELIMINARY TERMS AND CONDITIONS ...................................................16 A. DOI Agency Comments ............................................................................ 16 1. FWS Comments .............................................................................16 2. NPS Comments Regarding Glen Canyon National Recreation Area ................................................................................................16 B. Appropriate Lead Agency ......................................................................... 17 C. Flawed Alternatives .................................................................................. 18 ii 1. The Existing Highway Alternative and the Southeast Corner Alternative Have Insurmountable Legal Barriers. .........................20 2. The “Local Waters Proposal” Is Flawed ........................................24 D. Connected and Cumulative Actions.......................................................... 25 1. BOR Will Give Appropriate Consideration to the UBWR/BOR Exchange Contracts. ......................................................................25 2. RMPA for Kanab Creek ACEC .....................................................28 3. Sand Hollow Regional Pipeline and Cove Reservoir Are Not Connected Actions. ........................................................................30 E. Requests to Delay the EIS or to Address Otherwise Irrelevant Issues Should Be Rejected. .................................................................................. 31 1. Litigation Regarding the Boundaries of Grand Staircase Escalante National Monument Does Not Render the EIS Premature. ......................................................................................31 2. Requests for Additional Information Gathering Should Be Rejected..........................................................................................33 3. A Completed ROW Application Is Not Required to Evaluate the Existing Highway Alternative. .................................................33 4. The Southern Nevada Water Authority’s Groundwater Development Proposal Is Not a Connected Action. ......................34 5. Development of Utah’s Ultimate Phase Central Utah Project Is Not a Purpose of the Action. ..........................................................35 F. Water Conservation Measures Alone Cannot Meet the Projected Demand. .................................................................................................... 37 G. Water Supply ............................................................................................ 41 1. Physical Water Availability ...........................................................41 a. Effects of Climate Change on Water Availability Are Adequately Addressed in the License Application. ...........41 b. Effect of the Upper Basin DCP on Water Availability ......45 c. The Impact of Potential Future Curtailment of Water to the Lower Basin Is Too Speculative to Consider in this Proceeding..........................................................................48 iii 2. Legal Water Availability................................................................49 a. UBWR’s Water Rights Are Not the Proper Subject of NEPA. ................................................................................49 b. There Is No Reason to Conclude Senior Water Rights Will Materially Affect the Availability of Water for the Project. ...............................................................................50 c. Colorado River Compact Interpretations and Applications Are Outside the Purview of NEPA. ..............51 d. A Permit to Export Water from Arizona Is Not Required. ............................................................................51 H. Environmental Effects of the Project ........................................................ 52 1. Climate Impacts on Recreation and Infrastructure ........................52 2. Climate Impacts on Lake Powell Ecosystems ...............................52 3. Water Temperature Impacts ...........................................................52 4. Impacts to Listed Species...............................................................52 5. Impacts of the Project on Power Generation .................................52 6. Sand Hollow to Dixie Springs Transmission Line Route ..............53 7. Impacts to Cultural Resources and Traditional Cultural Properties .......................................................................................54 I. Project Cost and Repayment ..................................................................... 55 J. The Need for Project Power Has Been Adequately Demonstrated. ......... 58 K. The Kaibab Tribe’s Legal Issues Regarding BLM Legal Compliance Are Misdirected, Premature, and Speculative........................................... 59 1. Trust Responsibility Generally ......................................................60 2. BLM Consultation with the Kaibab Tribe Has Been and Continues to Be More than Sufficient. ..........................................62 3. Legislation and Executive Orders ..................................................63 4. The Kaibab Tribe Misunderstands the Reasons for the RMPA. ....63 L. The Kaibab Tribe ROW Conditions for Reservation Lands ..................... 66 iv M. The Kaibab Tribe Recommended Conditions for BLM Lands Outside the Kaibab Tribe Reservation. .................................................................. 67 V. CONCLUSION ......................................................................................................68 ATTACHMENTS v GLOSSARY OF TERMS Defined Term Definition 1922 Compact Colorado River Compact of 1922 ACEC Area of Critical Environmental Concern AF acre-feet BIA U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs BLM U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management BOR U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation CEQ Council on Environmental Quality Coalition Lake Powell Pipeline Coalition Commission Federal Energy Regulatory Commission CUP Central Utah Project CWA Clean Water Act DCP Drought Contingency Plan DOI U.S. Department of the Interior EA Environmental Assessment EIS Environmental Impact Statement ESA Endangered Species Act of 1973 FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission FLPMA Federal Land Policy and Management Act FPA Federal Power Act FWS U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service GBWN Great Basin Water Network GCNRA Glen Canyon National Recreation Area GW Gigawatt ILP Integrated Licensing Process KCWCD Kane County Water Conservancy District Kaibab Tribe Kaibab Band of Paiute Indians vi Defined Term Definition LPP Lake Powell Pipeline Project MFP Management Framework Plan MW Megawatt NEPA National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 NGOs Non-Governmental Organizations NHPA National Historic Preservation Act NPS U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service NRHP National Register of Historic Places Project Lake Powell Pipeline Project REA Notice December 11, 2017 Notice of Application Accepted for Filing, Soliciting Motions to Intervene and Protests, Ready for Environmental Analysis, and Soliciting Comments, Recommendation, Preliminary Terms and Conditions, and Prescription RMP Resource Management Plan RMPA Resource Management Plan Amendment ROD Record of Decision ROW Right-of-Way SHRP Sand Hollow Regional Pipeline SNWA Southern Nevada Water Authority SPAC Southern Paiute Advisory Committee SPAC Report Southern Paiute Advisory Committee’s Avoidance and Mitigation Report TCP Traditional Cultural Property UBWR Utah Board of Water Resources Upper Basin