The Saga of Snake Valley. Facts Drainage Basin – 244,000 sq mi Average Annual Flow – 16.5 maf The Colorado River ranks only 6 th in total volume.

The Saga The Saga ofof

Snake ValleySnake Valley

Facts

Drainage Basin – 244,000 sq mi

Average Annual Flow – 16.5 maf

The Colorado River ranks only 6th in total volume of flow

Provides M&I Water to 24 million people in the US

Provides irrigation water to over 2 million acres in the US

Total Storage – 60 maf

4,000 MW of hydro electric generation capacity

Mexico supplies M&I water to about 2.0 million people & irrigation water to 500,000 acres

Utah - 1.369

Arizona - 0.05

Arizona - 2.8

Nevada - 0.3

California - 4.4

Mexico - 1.5 2

New Mexico - 0.669

Wyoming - 0.833

Colorado - 3.079

Compact and Treaty ApportionmentBased on Current Hydrology

(in million acre-feet per year [MAF])

LB - 7.5 3UB - 6.0 1

TOTAL - 15.0 MAFY1 The Upper Basin supply of 6.0 maf is based on a firm supply during an extended drought2 It is the position of the Upper Basin States that there is adequate water in the Lower Basin tributaries

to meet the majority of the treaty allocation to Mexico and the Upper Basin is only required to provide half of any shortage

3 The Colorado River Compact allows the Lower Basin States to use an additional maf per year from the Lower Basin tributaries

Utah's Colorado River Allocation 1.369 MAF Current Use 1.0 MAF UNUSED ALLOCATION .369 MAF

Future use Navajo Nation 81 KAF

Ute Tribe Reserve Water (compact) 105 KAF New Ag Uses 25 KAF New M&I Uses 5 KAF Lake Powell Pipeline 86 KAF Total 302 KAF

* Balance* * 67 KAF*

ADDITIONAL PENDING APPLICATIONS: 400,000+ KAF

ADDITIONAL ApprovedADDITIONAL Approved

San Juan County WCD 30,000 San Juan County WCD 30,000 Kane County WCD 30,000Kane County WCD 30,000 Deseret Generation 12,000Deseret Generation 12,000 Central Utah WCD 29,500Central Utah WCD 29,500 Sanpete County WCD 5,600Sanpete County WCD 5,600 Wayne County WCD Wayne County WCD 49,00049,000** Partial Total Partial Total 156,100156,100

Unapproved ApplicationsUnapproved Applications

250,000 Board of Water 250,000 Board of Water Resources (White River)Resources (White River)

1,400,000 USBR1,400,000 USBR

50 Years Ago…50 Years Ago…we asked these questions:we asked these questions:

How will we ever use 1,700,000 Acre How will we ever use 1,700,000 Acre Ft.?Ft.?

How can we encourage beneficial How can we encourage beneficial use?use?

Should we consider leasing or Should we consider leasing or renting?renting?

Today these are the Questions:Today these are the Questions:

How will we get by with only 1.369 MAF. ?How will we get by with only 1.369 MAF. ? When we reach full allocation, what about the When we reach full allocation, what about the

outstanding applications?outstanding applications? How do we get optimum points of diversion?How do we get optimum points of diversion? How do we guarantee delivery in dry cycles?How do we guarantee delivery in dry cycles? How do we keep peace with Sister States?How do we keep peace with Sister States? What will Sensitive Species requirements be?What will Sensitive Species requirements be? Can the legislature refrain from changing rules?Can the legislature refrain from changing rules?

1989 1989

SNWA applicationsSNWA applications

60%

40%

Millard County files Millard County files timely Protest timely Protest

to SNWAto SNWASnake Valley Snake Valley ApplicationsApplications

Lincoln County Conservation, Recreation, and Lincoln County Conservation, Recreation, and Development Act of 2004, Section 301 (b)Development Act of 2004, Section 301 (b)

(b) Rights-of-Way(b) Rights-of-Way.—(1) In general.—.—(1) In general.—Notwithstanding sections 202 and 503 of the Notwithstanding sections 202 and 503 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1711, 1763), and subject to valid and (43 U.S.C. 1711, 1763), and subject to valid and existing rights, the Secretary shall grant to the existing rights, the Secretary shall grant to the Southern Nevada Water Authority and the Lincoln Southern Nevada Water Authority and the Lincoln County Water District nonexclusive rights-of-way County Water District nonexclusive rights-of-way [2,640 feet wide] to Federal land in Lincoln [2,640 feet wide] to Federal land in Lincoln County and Clark County, Nevada, for any roads, County and Clark County, Nevada, for any roads, wells, well fields, pipes, pipelines, pump stations, wells, well fields, pipes, pipelines, pump stations, storage facilities, or other facilities and systems storage facilities, or other facilities and systems that are necessary for the construction and that are necessary for the construction and operation of a water conveyance system.operation of a water conveyance system.

Lincoln County Conservation, Recreation, Lincoln County Conservation, Recreation, and Development Act of 2004 (Public Law and Development Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-424), Section 301 (d)108-424), Section 301 (d)(d) State Water Law.—Nothing in this title (d) State Water Law.—Nothing in this title

shall—shall—(1)(1) Prejudice the decisions or abrogate the Prejudice the decisions or abrogate the

jurisdiction of the Nevada or Utah State jurisdiction of the Nevada or Utah State Engineers with respect to the appropriation, Engineers with respect to the appropriation, permitting, certification, or adjudication of permitting, certification, or adjudication of water rights;water rights;

(2)(2) Preempt Nevada or Utah State water law; orPreempt Nevada or Utah State water law; or(3)(3) Limit or supersede existing water rights or Limit or supersede existing water rights or

interest in water rights under Nevada or interest in water rights under Nevada or Utah State law.Utah State law.

Lincoln County Land Bill…Lincoln County Land Bill… Residents of Snake Valley approach Residents of Snake Valley approach

Utah Legislative Water Task force for Utah Legislative Water Task force for HelpHelp

Task Force recruits Senator Bennett’s Task Force recruits Senator Bennett’s helphelp

Senator Bennett inserts language Senator Bennett inserts language requested by Utah into Lincoln requested by Utah into Lincoln County Land BillCounty Land Bill

Lincoln County Conservation, Recreation, Lincoln County Conservation, Recreation, and Development Act of 2004and Development Act of 2004

(3) Agreement(3) Agreement.—Prior to any transbasin .—Prior to any transbasin diversion from ground-water basins located diversion from ground-water basins located within both the State of Nevada and the within both the State of Nevada and the State of Utah, State of Utah, the State of Nevada and the the State of Nevada and the State of Utah shall reach an agreementState of Utah shall reach an agreement regarding the division of water resources of regarding the division of water resources of those interstate ground-water flow those interstate ground-water flow system(s) from which water will be diverted system(s) from which water will be diverted and used by the project. The agreement and used by the project. The agreement shall allow for the maximum sustainable shall allow for the maximum sustainable beneficial use of the water resources and beneficial use of the water resources and protect existing water rights.protect existing water rights.

Be Careful what you ask for…Be Careful what you ask for…you might get it.you might get it.

What happens if Utah rejects an agreement?What happens if Utah rejects an agreement?

1. A potential State to State Supreme Court action1. A potential State to State Supreme Court action2. Question as to if and when Supreme Court would 2. Question as to if and when Supreme Court would

accept a filingaccept a filing3. Apportionment of water rights only3. Apportionment of water rights only4. Political Backlash from Colorado River States.4. Political Backlash from Colorado River States.5. No interbasin transfer of water from Snake Valley5. No interbasin transfer of water from Snake Valley6. Likely repeal of “Agreement Language”6. Likely repeal of “Agreement Language”

What Positives could an Agreement What Positives could an Agreement Bring?Bring?

1. Agreed upon division of water1. Agreed upon division of water 2. Environmental protections2. Environmental protections 3. Mitigation process and resources3. Mitigation process and resources 4. Flexible Bi-State aquifer 4. Flexible Bi-State aquifer

managementmanagement

Agreement TimelineAgreement Timeline

December 2005: Utah and Nevada begin December 2005: Utah and Nevada begin preliminary discussions about preliminary discussions about Utah/Nevada AgreementUtah/Nevada Agreement

Spring/Summer 2006: State Engineers Spring/Summer 2006: State Engineers conduct inventory of Water Rights and conduct inventory of Water Rights and groundwater depletions in their groundwater depletions in their respective Statesrespective States

March 2007: Millard County requests March 2007: Millard County requests that Dean Baker is added to Utah’s that Dean Baker is added to Utah’s Negotiating TeamNegotiating Team

Timeline continued…Timeline continued…

August 14, 2009: Draft Agreement August 14, 2009: Draft Agreement released for public commentreleased for public comment

October 2009: Comment review beginsOctober 2009: Comment review begins January 2010: Final Draft Agreement January 2010: Final Draft Agreement

releasedreleased January 28, 2010: Nevada Supreme Court January 28, 2010: Nevada Supreme Court

rules that Nevada State Engineer had erredrules that Nevada State Engineer had erred February 2010: Nevada Legislature meets February 2010: Nevada Legislature meets

in Special Session feeling pressure to in Special Session feeling pressure to overturn Supreme Courtoverturn Supreme Court

Highlights of Utah/Nevada Highlights of Utah/Nevada Agreement:Agreement:

Apportions amount of Water owned by Apportions amount of Water owned by each Stateeach State

Proposes amounts for sustainable Proposes amounts for sustainable yield and maximum withdrawlyield and maximum withdrawl

Creates environmental protocol and Creates environmental protocol and protection protection

Obligates Nevada State Engineer to Obligates Nevada State Engineer to include Environmental Protections and include Environmental Protections and a delayed application time frame in a delayed application time frame in SNWA approvalsSNWA approvals

What is Snake Valley’s Sustainable What is Snake Valley’s Sustainable Yield?Yield?

Several studies have concluded there Several studies have concluded there is 105,000-111,000 acre feet of is 105,000-111,000 acre feet of sustainable yieldsustainable yield

BARCAS suggests 132,000 available BARCAS suggests 132,000 available ETET

Agreement sets sustainable yield at Agreement sets sustainable yield at 108,000 acre feet108,000 acre feet

Agreement limits Snake Valley Agreement limits Snake Valley withdrawal to 88,000 Acre Feetwithdrawal to 88,000 Acre Feet

The agreement creates The agreement creates three categories of three categories of Snake Valley waterSnake Valley water

Category 1: AllocatedCategory 1: Allocated

Category 1 was created to protect Category 1 was created to protect existing rightsexisting rights

Allocated water has priority dates prior Allocated water has priority dates prior to October 17, 1989to October 17, 1989

It includes Fish Springs water rights It includes Fish Springs water rights Allocated has Allocated has highesthighest priority of priority of

protection protection

Category 2: UnallocatedCategory 2: Unallocated

Unallocated water has priority dates on Unallocated water has priority dates on or after October 17, 1989or after October 17, 1989

Approvals of 1,000 AFY require a Approvals of 1,000 AFY require a hydrologic monitoring and hydrologic monitoring and management planmanagement plan

Category 3: ReservedCategory 3: Reserved

Is only available upon agreement of Is only available upon agreement of both State Engineers that Category 1 both State Engineers that Category 1 and Category 2 will not be and Category 2 will not be unreasonably affectedunreasonably affected

Proposed Water DivisionProposed Water Division

NevadaNevada Utah Utah

Category 1-Allocated Category 1-Allocated 12,000 ac/ft 12,000 ac/ft 55,000 55,000 ac/ftac/ft

Category 2-Unallocated 35,000 ac/ftCategory 2-Unallocated 35,000 ac/ft 6,000 6,000 ac/ftac/ft

Category 3-ReservedCategory 3-Reserved 19,000 ac/ft 19,000 ac/ft 5,000 5,000 ac/ftac/ft

TotalTotal 66,000 ac/ft 66,000 ac/ft 66,000 66,000 ac/ftac/ft

Agreement protects existing users by:

Creating procedures to identify and Creating procedures to identify and mitigate adverse impacts from SNWA mitigate adverse impacts from SNWA withdrawals. withdrawals.

Establishing Interstate Panel to Establishing Interstate Panel to resolve disputes rising between resolve disputes rising between existing users and SNWA.existing users and SNWA.

Maintaining a monitoring and Maintaining a monitoring and mitigation account of $3 million.mitigation account of $3 million.

The State Engineers will The State Engineers will confer as necessary to confer as necessary to evaluate water availability in evaluate water availability in light of new data.light of new data.

All collected data will be All collected data will be made available for public made available for public review. review.

Nevada agrees to hold SNWA Nevada agrees to hold SNWA Snake Valley water applications Snake Valley water applications

in abeyance until in abeyance until September 2019September 2019. .

Additional hydrologic and Additional hydrologic and biologic data may be gathered biologic data may be gathered

before any decisions are made.before any decisions are made.

Section 5.4Section 5.4

Agreement prohibits:Agreement prohibits: Ground-water miningGround-water mining Impairment of water qualityImpairment of water quality Compaction of aquifers or Compaction of aquifers or

surface instabilitysurface instability

Section 5.4 Section 5.4 (continued)(continued)

States agree to re-consult anytime States agree to re-consult anytime in the future to redetermine in the future to redetermine available ground-water supply. If available ground-water supply. If withdrawals exceed supply, State withdrawals exceed supply, State Engineers must act to reduce Engineers must act to reduce withdrawals by withdrawals by priority..

Environmental AgreementEnvironmental Agreement

Utah and SNWA enter into the Utah and SNWA enter into the “Snake Valley Environmental “Snake Valley Environmental Monitoring and Management Monitoring and Management Agreement.” Agreement.”

Objective #1 is to understand the Objective #1 is to understand the baseline conditions for biology, baseline conditions for biology, hydrology and air quality.hydrology and air quality.

Objective #2 is to provide for a plan Objective #2 is to provide for a plan of operation and a definitive, binding of operation and a definitive, binding process for resolving disputes.process for resolving disputes.

Environmental Agreement Environmental Agreement (continued)(continued)

Terms of this agreement Terms of this agreement become a condition of any become a condition of any water application approval water application approval

made by Nevada State made by Nevada State Engineer.Engineer.

Environmental Agreement Environmental Agreement (continued)(continued)

Counters adverse effects Counters adverse effects by avoiding problem by avoiding problem initiallyinitially

Minimizes adverse effectsMinimizes adverse effects Mitigates for adverse Mitigates for adverse

effectseffects

Environmental Agreement Environmental Agreement (continued)(continued)

SNWA agrees to participate with SNWA agrees to participate with Utah in the “Columbia Spotted Frog Utah in the “Columbia Spotted Frog Conservation Agreement” and the Conservation Agreement” and the “Least Chub Conservation “Least Chub Conservation Agreement.”Agreement.”

Expands scope of monitoring to Expands scope of monitoring to adjacent valleys downgradient and adjacent valleys downgradient and requires air quality monitoring.requires air quality monitoring.

Utah/Nevada Agreement:Utah/Nevada Agreement:LIMITSLIMITS use of Snake Valley water resources 61,000 use of Snake Valley water resources 61,000

af (Utah) to 47,000 af (Nevada).af (Utah) to 47,000 af (Nevada).POSTPONESPOSTPONES SNWA water right applications before SNWA water right applications before

the Nevada State Engineer until 2019.the Nevada State Engineer until 2019.DEFINESDEFINES environmental protocol to protect air quality environmental protocol to protect air quality

and sensitive species.and sensitive species.INCLUDESINCLUDES environmental protections in Utah as a environmental protections in Utah as a

condition of any SNWA water right granted by the condition of any SNWA water right granted by the Nevada State Engineer.Nevada State Engineer.

PROVIDESPROVIDES a simplified mitigation process for any a simplified mitigation process for any Utah water user impacted by SNWA.Utah water user impacted by SNWA.

DOES NOTDOES NOT sell or give water to Las Vegas or sell or give water to Las Vegas or authorize any Nevada pumping or pipeline in Utahauthorize any Nevada pumping or pipeline in Utah..

In the meanwhile…In the meanwhile…

Great Basin Water Network et. al. sue Great Basin Water Network et. al. sue Nevada State Engineer. Among other Nevada State Engineer. Among other things, GBWN claim State Engineer things, GBWN claim State Engineer ignored NRS 533.37(2) which requires ignored NRS 533.37(2) which requires State Engineer to take action on State Engineer to take action on applications within one year after the close applications within one year after the close of protest period. of protest period.

Suit is dismissed in district court and Suit is dismissed in district court and appealed to Nevada Supreme Courtappealed to Nevada Supreme Court

Nevada Supreme Court Intercedes!Nevada Supreme Court Intercedes!

…” …”we conclude that the State Engineer we conclude that the State Engineer violated his statutory duty by failing to take violated his statutory duty by failing to take action within one year after the final protest action within one year after the final protest date. Thus, we reverse the order of the date. Thus, we reverse the order of the district court and remand for a district court and remand for a determination of whether SNWA must file determination of whether SNWA must file new groundwater appropriation applications new groundwater appropriation applications or whether the State Engineer must re-or whether the State Engineer must re-notice SNWA’s 1989 applications and notice SNWA’s 1989 applications and reopen the period during which appellants reopen the period during which appellants may file protests.”may file protests.”

SNWA re-files all their SNWA re-files all their applications January 29, 2010applications January 29, 2010

Pressure is applied to Pressure is applied to Nevada Governor and Nevada Governor and Legislature to “fix” the Legislature to “fix” the Supreme Court Decision Supreme Court Decision in a special sessionin a special session

Nevada Legislature doesn’t want Nevada Legislature doesn’t want this HOT Potato…this HOT Potato…

They pass intent language urging the They pass intent language urging the Nevada State Engineer to, “Hold hearings Nevada State Engineer to, “Hold hearings on potential resolutions of the issues on potential resolutions of the issues presented by the Great Basin Water presented by the Great Basin Water Network decision…to take all appropriate Network decision…to take all appropriate steps to implement recommendations steps to implement recommendations arising out of such hearings which may arising out of such hearings which may include but not be limited to: “convene a include but not be limited to: “convene a special session” or drafting a bill for the special session” or drafting a bill for the 2011 Legislative Session.2011 Legislative Session.

Until Nevada answers some big Until Nevada answers some big questions,questions,

That’s where we That’s where we areare today.today.