Posted on August 8, 2016
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ recent response to Sanpete’s application to build the Narrows Project was considerably less than encouraging.
“But it’s about what we’ve come to expect,” said Edwin Sunderland, Chairman of the Sanpete Water Conservancy District. “Fortunately, their response isn’t a deal-killer for the Narrows.”
The good news is that the Corps is fully willing to continue considering the application.
The bad news is that they are asking for information that Sanpete provided years ago. And more of it.
For decades, Sanpete County has been trying to get all the permissions necessary to build the dam and reservoir it was promised nearly 80 years ago. The most recent hurdle that needed to be cleared was to secure a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Sanpete Water Conservancy District submitted a very complex and thorough 404 Permit application to the Corps of Engineers early this year, after two full years of preparation. Many friends of the Narrows Project, residents and non-Sanpete residents alike, submitted favorable comments on the application during March and April.
Unfortunately, the Corps of Engineers seems to have gone to sleep about the Narrows. That, or they’d really like to just kill the project altogether.
In a letter dated May 27, 2016, to the Water Conservancy District, the Corps of Engineers told Sanpete three things:
1. That the number of alternatives to the Narrows that Sanpete has considered is insufficient.
2. That the purpose and need for the Narrows remain unclear and problematic, and
3. That Sanpete needs to prepare a supplement to the Final Environmental Impact Statement that the Bureau of Reclamation prepared for Sanpete in 2012.
The problem with the first two of those requests is that the Corps of Engineers itself acknowledged, in writing, that Sanpete’s analysis of alternatives, and its clarification of purpose and need were adequate. This was stated in a letter from the Corps dated December 3, 2001.
The problem with the third of the above-mentioned requests is that it was the Corps’ sister federal agency, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, that prepared the Environmental Impact Statement, carefully and meticulously, over a two-year period (at Sanpete’s expense, incidentally).
“It seems to us a little odd that one federal agency, the Corps of Engineers, would have to request information to supplement the huge, extensive EIS prepared by their sister agency, the Bureau of Reclamation,” said Greg Soter, spokesman for the Narrows Project.
“The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation is the nation’s premier water agency. They understand water projects and exactly how those projects impact the environment. During the two years that Reclamation was putting together the environmental information having to do with the Narrows, they were asking the Corps of Engineers to participate and be part of the process. But the Corps said nothing. Quiet. Not a peep, in spite of being invited multiple times by Reclamation to share their opinions,” continued Soter.
“For the Corps to now question Reclamation’s EIS seems a little ridiculous,” said Soter. “Particularly since the Corps is asking for a huge amount of additional information, mostly answering questions that have been answered before. Gathering the kind of information they’re requesting isn’t cheap or fast.”
Wanting an answer to the seeming inconsistency, multiple Sanpete County leaders met on July 27, with Jason Gipson, Chief of the Corps of Engineers’ Utah/Nevada Branch Regulatory Division, and Julia McCarthy from the Environmental Protection Agency’s Denver office. EPA has a major voice in 404 Permit decisions.
“We pointed out to the Corps that we had long ago satisfied the points raised in their May 27, letter, and that they had acknowledged such. We made it very clear that Sanpete shouldn’t have to spend the time and money to do it again,” fumed Soter.
“We also asked why the Corps didn’t ask Reclamation about these same issues five years ago while Reclamation was working on our EIS, and asking the Corps to participate. Mr. Gipson didn’t seem to have answers for those questions.”
The Sanpete group asked the Corps and EPA personnel outright if it was the Corps’ or EPA’s intent to eventually kill the Narrows Project. Both insisted that such was absolutely not their intent, and that they did not believe that dams should no longer be built.
“It is extremely frustrating that while the Corps didn’t have any good answers to our frustrations, they’re still insisting that we provide the information they requested. What they’re asking is going to be expensive and time-consuming. But Sanpete really has no choice. We either get to work providing what they want, or we fold up the Narrows tent entirely, and forget the dam and reservoir we need so badly. The latter simply isn’t an option,” said Soter.
In an effort to strengthen its position at last week’s meeting with the Corps, Sanpete’s leaders met several weeks earlier with representatives from the Bureau of Reclamation, various elected officials, and representatives from the offices of Mia Love, Senators Hatch and Lee, and Governor Herbert.
“That was a powerful group of people,” said Soter. “I find it almost unbelievable that none of them had any suggestions about how to resolve what seems to be such an unreasonable situation. But they didn’t. They are universally frustrated that both the Corps of Engineers and the EPA are pretty much bulletproof and aloof from elected-official oversight.”
So the Sanpete Water Conservancy District will simply forge ahead, do the mountains of research, and provide the information the Corps of Engineers is requesting.
“It’s easy to get angry over situations like this, and at first, we were furious,” commented Edwin Sunderland. “But anger seldom solves problems, so we’ll just knuckle down and do what we’ve always done: push ahead. Sanpete desperately needs the water storage the Narrows Project will provide. The drought we’re in right now is ample proof of that. Quitting isn’t an option,” said Sunderland. “Providing the requested information may take another two or more years. But our conclusion is that we’ve got to jump through their hoops. So we’ll jump.”
Obviously, good things don’t come easy. Not for Sanpete, anyway.
Source: thePyramid
