Laserfiche WebLink
outstandingly remarkable values. BLM would not yet have a water right, because the • <br /> segment would not have yet been designated by Congress. Once a segment is designated, <br /> BLM would then need to quantify, via analytical studies, the precise amount of flow <br /> needed to support the outstandingly remarkable values. <br /> • Would BLM be forced to become involved in future water rights applications to <br /> export water from basins, even if those exports are upstream from the suitable <br /> segments? <br /> Same answer as above. <br /> • Would BLM be forced to protest or recommend against land use authorizations by <br /> other federal agencies (especially Forest Service), if those authorizations are <br /> required to export water from upstream locations? <br /> Whenever another federal agency is writing an environmental impact statement for a <br /> proposed project, the agency is required to seek comments from other federal agencies <br /> whose management responsibilities could be affected. If BLM were to comment, BLM <br /> would likely note the existence of any downstream stream segments that had been <br /> determined to be suitable. However, it Congress had not yet designated the segment, <br /> BLM would not have conducted any quantification studies that would allow the BLM to <br /> comment about exact amount of water required to support outstandingly remarkable <br /> values. Since future water export and storage projects are likely to capture a small <br /> percentage of peak snowmelt runoff flows, it is likely that these proposed projects would <br /> not significantly affect outstandingly remarkable values. Even if the proposed project <br /> was certain to affect outstandingly remarkable values, the decision making agency would <br /> not be obligated to make a decision to protect those values. NEPA processes require <br /> only that the decision-making agency is aware of the impact, but does not require that <br /> impacts be avoided. <br /> • If a proposed water project were located within a suitable segment,would BLM <br /> be forced to deny land use authorization for the proposed project? <br /> BLM would refer to the land use plan currently in effect for guidance in how to respond <br /> to the proposal. If the current land use plan determined that the stream segment is <br /> "suitable,"BLM is obligated to not impair the free-flowing conditions of the segment by <br /> allowing dams, diversions,rip-rap and other water control infrastructure to be constructed <br /> in the river channel. BLM would likely deny a land use application to build the project. <br /> However, if stakeholders believed that construction of the project was absolutely <br /> essential for future water supplies, the stakeholders could request that BLM amend its <br /> land use plan. At that time, stakeholders could offer additional facts and rationale for <br /> BLM to change its determination from suitable to "non-suitable." <br /> • Would a determination of suitability affect operations of currently existing water <br /> infrastructure in the segment? <br />