Center for Biological Diversity v. U.S. Bureau of Reclamation

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment for the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and other defendants in environmental organizations’ suit seeking to require NEPA review and Endangered Species Act consultation for the conversion of Central Valley Project “water service contracts” with California water districts to “repayment contracts.” The Ninth Circuit agreed with the district court that the Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation (WIIN) Act, which created the mechanism for these conversions, did not allow Reclamation to consider environmental effects or to take actions to benefit protected species as part of the conversion process. The plaintiffs’ arguments had included contentions that a NEPA alternatives analysis “would allow meaningful consideration of the trade-offs between water deliveries and environmental harm as well as opportunities to reduce deliveries over time,” including, for example, “to limit the term of the contract so as reduce quantities over time to reflect worsening conditions caused by climate change.”

Center for Biological Diversity and two other organizations filed a lawsuit in the federal district court for the Eastern District of California asserting that the conversion of Central Valley Project “renewal contracts” into “permanent repayment contracts” was a major federal action that required compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The plaintiffs alleged that completed and pending conversions would obligate the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation to deliver more than two million acre-feet of water each year by diverting water from rivers and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, resulting in many significant adverse impacts on the watershed. The plaintiffs said a NEPA alternatives analysis “would allow meaningful consideration of the trade-offs between water deliveries and environmental harm as well as opportunities to reduce deliveries over time,” including, for example, “to limit the term of the contract so as reduce quantities over time to reflect worsening conditions caused by climate change.”