Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12- Amicus Brief Nine Circuit BMW w/Exhibits No. 14-35069 (cross-appeal No. 14-35123) IN THE UNITED STATES COURT O FOR THE NINTH CIRCUI ALLIANCE FOR WILD, NATIVE ECOSYSTEM Plaint V. FAYE KRUEGER, Regional Forester; AGRICULTURE, and U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, Defendants — Appellants. ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA Civil Case No. 12-55 UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE CITY OF BOZEMAN AND BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF FEDERAL DEFENDANTS Greg S. Sullivan BOZEMAN CITY ATTORNEY P.O. BOX 1230 Bozeman, MT 59771-1230 Telephone: (406) 582-2309 Fax: (406) 582-2302 gsulIivanCc bozeman.net MOTION Pursuant to Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure 27 and 29, The City of Bozeman (City) respectfully moves for leave to file an amicus curiae brief in support of Defendants/Appellants, The United States Forest Service (USFS). Pursuant to Ninth Circuit Rule 29-3, counsel for the City contacted counsel for each of the parties in this case to ascertain their positions on the filing of an amicus curiae brief by the City. All parties have stated they consent to the filing of the City's brief. The City has an interest in this proceeding which justifies its appearance as amicus curiae. The City is directly influenced by and related to the Bozeman Municipal Watershed Project (Bozeman Project); one of the two projects challenged by Plaintiffs/Appellees. The two watersheds located within the Bozeman Project, Sourdough Creek and Hyalite Creek watersheds, collectively provide 80% of the source water for the City. The City owns approximately 4,000 acres scattered throughout ten sections of land in a checkerboard pattern within the Sourdough Creek Watershed. The remaining land is federally owned and managed by Defendants/Appellants. Defendants/Appellants have worked collaboratively with the City on the Bozeman Project to address fuel reductions in these watersheds to reduce the imminent risk of catastrophic wildfires to insure the City's ability to uphold its legal obligation to provide safe, adequate and reliable 1 potable water to its citizens. The City's interest in the Bozeman Project and the injunction on appeal is paramount. The proposed amicus brief attached herein is desirable because it will assist to inform and provide context to the Court of the harms facing the City and its residents, and that these harms and the public interest should be strongly considered when weighing competing interests when considering an injunction of the Bozeman Project. Therefore, proposed amicus curiae City of Bozeman, respectfully requests that the Court grant its' motion for leave to file the accompanying amicus curiae brief. TABLE OF CONTENTS STATEMENT REGARDING FUNDING AND AUTHORSHIP ...........................3 INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................4 INTERESTS OF AMICUS CURIAE .......................................................................5 ARGUMENT ............................................................................................................6 1. The City has a legal duty to provide water to its residents, businesses, and civicinstitutions. ........................................................................................... 6 I1. Hyalite and Sourdough Creeks have been and will continue to be the City's primary source of water................................................................................ 7 2 III. Real threats exist to the City of Bozeman's Sourdough Water Treatment Plant. .............................................................................................................9 A. Recent fire activity in the area of municipal watersheds. ............................. 9 B. Plan for fuel reduction on City lands within watersheds........................8 IV. It is in the public interest to actively engage in fuels reduction in the forests around the municipal watersheds and the public interest should be weighed when deciding to issue an injunction of the project. .............................. 134-2 CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................... 15 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Cases Hecht Co. v. Bowles, 321 U.S. 321, 329-30 (1944)............................................................................. 10 Tenn. Valley Auth. v. Hill, 437 U.S. 153 (1978).......................................................................................... 10 United States ex rel. Greathouse v. Dern, 289 U.S. 352 (1933).......................................................................................... 10 Federal Statutes 42 U.S.C. § 300 ......................................................................................................... 7 State Statutes Mont. Code Ann. § 7-13-4402 .................................................................................. 6 Mont. Code Ann. § 7-13-4406 ..................................................................................6 Mont. Code Ann. § 75-6-101 .................................................................................6,7 STATEMENT REGARDING FUNDING AND AUTHORSHIP The City is a municipal government located within the State of Montana and thus no Corporate Disclosure Statement pursuant to Rule 26.1 is required. 3 Pursuant to Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure 29(c)(5), neither party or party's counsel authored the City's Brief of Amicus Curiae in whole or in part. Neither party nor party's counsel contributed money that was intended to fund preparing or submitting of the City's Brief of Amicus Curiae. No individuals or entities contributed money that was intended to fund preparing or submitting of the City's Brief of Amicus Curiae. The Bozeman City Commission, by duly authorized motion on June 2, 2014, authorized the undersigned to file this brief and the motion it accompanies on behalf of the City of Bozeman. INTRODUCTION One of the most critical services the City of Bozeman (City) provides to its over 39,000 residents, businesses, and civic institutions is the provision of adequate and safe potable water. Through this Brief the City will provide information that: (i) the watersheds located within the enjoined Bozeman Project area are the City's primary source of potable water; (ii) illustrates the City's legal duty to provide water; (iii) establishes that real threats to these watersheds exist potentially impacting the City's ability to provide water; and (iv), given the reasons previously listed, the threats to the City's water supply should be strongly considered and given deference when weighing the harms in the context of the Endangered Species Act (ESA). 4 INTERESTS OF AMICUS CURIAE The Bozeman Municipal Watershed Project (Bozeman Project), one of two projects challenged and enjoined by the pending litigation, involves a plan to reduce fuels within the national forest that encompass the City's municipal watersheds. The Bozeman Project will occur within the Sourdough Creek (aka "Bozeman Creek") and Hyalite Creek watersheds which lie to the south of the City in the northern end of the Gallatin Range. Collectively, these watersheds provide approximately 80% of the source water for the City's municipal water system. The City has made significant investments over time in water collection, storage, and treatment in Sourdough and Hyalite, which indicates these watersheds have been, are, and will continue to be critical sources of water for the City for decades to come. The City's interest in the Bozeman Project is grounded in the concept that because the City has taken on the responsibility to provide water for consumption and fire protection to its residents, businesses, and institutions, the City has a legal duty to take necessary and reasonable steps to ensure the water it provides is both adequate in volume and safe for consumption. The largest threat to the watersheds and the City's ability to meet its' legal obligation to provide an adequate and safe potable water supply, is wildfire. The forests in these watersheds are in need of fuel reduction treatment to help avoid a 5 catastrophic wildfire. The City believes the Bozeman Project is necessary to address this threat. ARGUMENT I. The City has a legal duty to provide water to its residents, businesses, and civic institutions. The City has a legal duty to take necessary and reasonable steps to ensure the water it provides is both adequate in volume and safe. See, e.g., Mont. Code Ann. § 7-13-4402 (2011) ("The city or town council has power to adopt, enter into, and carry out means for securing a supply of water for the use of a city or town or its inhabitants"); Mont. Code Ann. § 7-13-4406(1)(c) ("(1) Cities and towns have jurisdiction and control: (c) over the source of streams from which water is taken for the enforcement of its sanitary ordinances, the abatement of nuisances, and the general preservation of the purity of its water supply") (emphasis added); and Mont. Code Ann. § 75-6-101 ("It is the public policy of this state to protect, maintain, and improve the quality and potability of water for public water supplies and domestic uses"). In Montana, municipalities must acquire water rights to meet their growth and the City has proactively acquired rights in Sourdough and Hyalite watersheds due to the quality of the water and the proximity to existing infrastructure. 6 Moreover, the Safe Drinking Water Act (42 U.S.C. § 300(f) et seq.), as enforced by the State of Montana, places strict standards on the quality of potable water. See Mont. Code Ann. § 75-6-101 et seq. These Montana statutes, when read together, clearly demonstrate the City's duty under the law to take proactive steps to protect its source water supply in the Sourdough and Hyalite watersheds. Il. Hyalite and Sourdough Creeks have been and will continue to be the City's primary source of water. Sourdough Creek and Hyalite Creek lie to the south of the City in the northern end of the Gallatin Range. The vast majority of both watersheds are in federal ownership; the City, however, owns 4,000 acres scattered throughout ten sections of land in a checkerboard pattern within the Sourdough Creek watershed. Amicus Exhibit 1, Declaration of Craig Woolard, ¶16. Collectively, these watersheds provide approximately 80% of the source water for the City's municipal water system. Id., ¶7. The City's remaining water source is located on the City's north side in the Bridger Mountains. Id. The City's interest is based on the value its citizens place in Hyalite/Sourdough watersheds for recreation, wildlife, clean air, and, perhaps most critically, clean water. To protect and enhance the City's interests, it has made significant investments in water collection, storage, and treatment in Sourdough and Hyalite which reflect just how critical these sources of water for the City will 7 be for decades to come. The City first began collecting and treating water from Sourdough Creek in 1917 and from Hyalite Creek in the mid 1950s. Id., ¶8. Over time, the City has invested in excess of$55,000,000.00 of tax and ratepayer dollars in infrastructure to collect and treat water sourcing in these watersheds. Id., ¶9. Moreover, over the last 20 years the City has invested upwards of a total of $2,000,000.00 in securing and protecting water rights in the Sourdough watershed and water shares in the Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation's Hyalite Dam project. Id. The City treats the water collected from these watersheds at the Sourdough Water Treatment Plant (SWTP) located adjacent to Sourdough Creek. In 2011, the City began construction on a $43,000,000.00 project to make significant improvements to the SWTP. Improvements to the SWTP included addressing potentially severe decrease in source water quality caused by wildfire and filtration of water significantly impacted by wildfire debris and run-off. See generally Amicus Exhibit 2, Declaration of Dan Harmon, 2012, as filed in United States District Court Civil Case No. 12-55. The improved SWTP is now fully operational; however the ability of the SWTP to handle wildfire impacted water is not unlimited. Id. Finally, the City recently completed an Integrated Water Resource Plan (IWRP) the purpose of which is to explore, evaluate, and prioritize the range of 8 alternatives available to address anticipated water supply challenges for the City. Amicus Exhibit 1, ¶10. The IWRP, in conjunction with the historic use of these watersheds and the investments the City has made clearly demonstrate the City intends these watersheds to be a primary source of the City's water, and a primary factor in ensuring the City's economic vitality, and providing for the health and safely of the citizens. Id. III. Real threats exist to the City of Bozeman's Sourdough Water Treatment Plant. A. Recent fire activity in the area of municipal watersheds. The current state of the forest, fuel conditions, and risk of wildfire are accurately described in the Defendant/Appellant's First Brief on Cross-Appeal. (See First Brief on Cross-Appeal for the Federal Defendants (Fed. Def. First Brief) pg. 18-20). Excerpts from the Record cited by Defendant/Appellants include findings from a risk assessment of the Bozeman Municipal Watershed in 2003. This assessment indicates "fuel conditions within the Municipal watershed posed risks to the municipal water supply in the event of a wildfire." Id. at 19 citing ER 13.1. In August, 2012, the Millie Fire started from a lightning strike in the Storm Castle Creek drainage, an east to west running drainage in the northern Gallatin Range less than 20 miles south of the City. Amicus Exhibit 1, ¶13. The upper eastern reaches of the Storm Castle drainage share several miles of a subalpine 9 ridge with the Hyalite Creek watershed. In total, the Millie Fire burned 10,515 acres including lands adjacent to the boundary of the Hyalite Creek watershed. Id., ¶14.; See Amicus Exhibit 3 (illustrating the relationship between the 2012 Millie Fire perimeter, 2013 fire perimeters, and the Hyalite and Sourdough watersheds). Two smaller wildfires started the following year in 2013: one within the Hyalite Creek watershed, the other on the southern edge of the Sourdough/Bozeman Creek watershed. Amicus Exhibit 1, ¶15. While conditions allowed for the fires of 2013 to be contained quickly, they illustrate just how vulnerable the watersheds are to wildfire. As noted, the improvements to the SWTP were made with wildfire in mind; however, the ability of the SWTP to handle wildfire affected water is not unlimited. Amicus Exhibit 2, ¶¶11-15. Wildfire can cause increases in sediment load and turbidity of water, amongst other issues. Id., ¶8. While the SWTP has been improved to handle turbidities up to 1,000 NTU (nephelometric turbidity units), studies have shown in the western United States, levels of turbidity in waters affected by sedimentation caused by wildfire can increase to a possible range of 3,500 to 31,000 NTUs. Id., ¶9, 12. Following a fire, water quality changes to source water can last for five to ten years. Id., ¶11. The City has done what it can to prepare for catastrophic wildfire by improving the SWTP, but addressing fuel reduction is essential. 10 It is clear runoff from fires such as the Millie fire can have a detrimental effect on the City's ability to treat source water. Id., ¶¶ 10 - 17. These fires, so close to the City's watersheds, demonstrates the critical nature of the Bozeman Project. It is not a question of if wildfire will occur in the watersheds within the Bozeman Project, but rather a question of when and how severe. B. Plan for fuel reduction on City lands within watersheds. The City's effort to address the buildup of hazardous fuels in Sourdough and Hyalite watersheds involvement began in 2003 and continues today. In 2004, the City, concerned about increasing population growth and changing forest conditions in the Hyalite and Sourdough watersheds, completed a Source Water Protection Plan (Plan) for the Sourdough and Hyalite watersheds. Amicus Exhibit 1, ¶11. The most important and useful finding of the Plan was clear identification of the severity of the risk posed by wildfire in the Sourdough and Hyalite watersheds. Id. The Plan determined rainfall-runoff in the watersheds will result in heavy sediment loads that could not be treated by the City's then existing water treatment plant which is one of the reasons why substantial funds were invested to improve the SWTP. Id. The Plan determined the times of heavy runoff could last from a few days to weeks, and for several years following a major fire event the City would be incapable of meeting water demand, resulting in a serious water 11 supply crisis. Id. The Plan called for the City to take proactive steps to protect these source watersheds. Id. It was this Plan that prompted the City to step up its efforts to work with the Gallatin National Forest (GNF) to develop a 2005 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). ER 353; ER359. The purpose of the MOU, which was updated by the City and GNF in 2011, is to "document the cooperation between the [City and GNF] to maintain (in the long term) a high-quality predictable water supply for Bozeman through cooperative efforts in implementing sustainable land management practices."Id. The City and GNF agreed upon numerous objectives, including: • Implementing vegetation management projects that will begin to reduce the severity and extent of wildland fires in the Bozeman and Hyalite Municipal Watersheds; and • Focusing on treatments that will begin to reduce the risk of excess sediment and ash reaching the municipal water treatment plant in the event of a severe wildland fire. Id. The Bozeman Project arose out of the 2005 MOU. In addition to the effort to work with the GNF, the City recognizes it has an obligation to address hazardous fuels on its own lands in the Sourdough watershed and has taken proactive steps to do so. The City owns approximately 4,000 acres scattered throughout ten sections of land within the Sourdough watershed which will be managed in conjunction with the Bozeman Project. Should the Bozeman 12 Project move forward, the City will seek to contract for the management of its lands in conjunction with the GNF's process. Amicus Exhibit 1, ¶ 16. IV. It is in the public interest to actively engage in fuels reduction in the forests around the municipal watersheds and the public interest should be weighed when deciding to issue an injunction of the project. While in the context of issuing an injunction under a claim of a violation to the ESA, the Court is not entirely stripped of its discretion to take into account harms to anything other than the endangered species. As the Defendant/Appellants argue, the district court interpreted Tenn. Valley Auth. v. Hill as prohibiting a court from exercising any discretion to consider the public interest when determining whether to issue an injunction. Fed. Def. First Brief pg.62, Tenn. Valley Auth. v. Hill, 437 U.S. 153 (1978). What the district court did not consider is how this reading of Hill fails to consider the various levels of impact a project can have on a species. In his dissenting opinion in Hill, then Associate Justice William Rehnquist stated, This Court has specifically held that a federal court can refuse to order a federal official to take specific action, even though the action might be required by law, if such an order"would work a public injury or embarrassment" or otherwise "be prejudicial to the public interest." Id. at 213, citing United States ex rel. 13 Greathouse v. Dern, 289 U.S. 352, 360. Justice Rehnquist directed the Court to Hecht Co. v. Bowles: "The essence of equity jurisdiction has been the power of the Chancellor to do equity and to mould each decree to the necessities of the particular case. Flexibility rather than rigidity has distinguished it. The qualities of mercy and practicality have made equity the instrument for nice adjustment and reconciliation between the public interest and private needs as well as between competing private claims." Hecht Co. v. Bowles, 321 U.S. 321, 329-30 (1944). In Hill, an entire species would have been eliminated had the Court not issued an injunction. Irreparable harm was imminent. Here, the biological opinions concluded the enjoined projects would have short-term adverse impacts on a small portion of the area designated as lynx critical habitat. Fed. Def, First Brief pg. 65, citing ER 388, 972-73 (emphasis added). The interests of the public are adequate and safe potable water, as well as forests that are properly managed to reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfires. These interests benefit the health and safety of the citizens of Bozeman. The City agrees the scales should be tipped in the species favor when irreparable harm is certain. However, when the harm is minimal and temporary, as is the case here, courts can and should consider the harm to other public interests if an injunction is issued. The scales may be tipped in favor of protected species, but they must still be weighed against the public interest. This Court can and should, as has been suggested by other parties to other 14 courts, "view the endangered species act `reasonably' and hence shape a remedy `that accords with some modicum of common sense and the public weal."' Hill, 437 U.S. at 194. In the present case, it is clearly common sense to allow the Bozeman Project, because of its limited, short-term, adverse affect on lynx habitat, to move forward due to the need for the citizens of Bozeman to have adequate and safe potable water. Further delay of only increases the need for the Bozeman Project as fuel conditions worsen each season. Amicus Exhibit 1, ¶17. As such, the City encourages the Court to consider the public interests of health and safety for which the Bozeman Project has been planned and balance the scales in favor of the public health and safety by lifting the injunction on the Bozeman Project. CONCLUSION The City has taken significant steps on its own to ensure it can meet its legal obligation and provide its citizens with adequate and safe potable water. The City has invested millions of dollars to acquire rights, improve its ability to treat the water gathered with improved infrastructure, and by working collaboratively with the GNF to address reducing fuels threatening the municipal watershed in a coordinated way. These efforts and the need for the Bozeman Project to allow for the City to provide for its citizens cannot and should not be ignored. Too much is at stake to not move forward with the Bozeman Project. For the foregoing 15 reasons, the City of Bozeman as Amicus Curiae respectfully request this Court reverse the district court as to the injunction of the Bozeman Project and allow the project to proceed without further review. Respectfully submitted on this, the 19th day of August, 2014. lsl Gregory S. Sullivan GREGORY S. SULLIVAN Bozeman City Attorney CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE I certify that pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(7)(c) that this motion and brief are proportionately spaced, have a typeface of 14 points or more and contain 3,432 words. I used Microsoft Word 2007. lsl Gregoa S. Sullivan GREGORY S. SULLIVAN Bozeman City Attorney P.O. BOX 1230 Bozeman, MT 59771-1230 Telephone: (406) 582-2309 Fax: (406) 582-2302 gsullivan@bozeman.net 16 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on August 19, 2014, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court for the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit using the appellate CM/ECF system. I certify that to my knowledge all participants in this case are registered CM/ECF users and service will be accomplished by the CM/ECF system. ls/ Gregry S. Sullivan GREGORY S. SULLIVAN Bozeman City Attorney P.O. BOX 1230 Bozeman, MT 59771-1230 Telephone: (406) 582-2309 Fax: (406) 582-2302 gsullivan@bozeman.net 17 No. 14-35069 (cross-appeal No. 14-35123) AMICUS EXHIBIT 1 Gregory S. Sullivan BOZEMAN CITY ATTORNEY P.O. Box 1230 Bozeman, MT 59771-1230 Tel: (406) 582-2309 Fax: (406) 582-2302 gsullivan@bozeman.net Attorney for Amicus Curiae City of Bozeman, MT UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS, NINTH CIRCUIT ALLIANCE FOR THE WILD ) ROCKIES; and NATIVE ) No.: 14-35069 ECOSYSTEM COUNCIL, ) Plaintiffs - Appellees, ) DECLARATION OF CRAIG CRAIG WOOLARD, Ph.D., P.E. vs. ) FAYE KRUEGER, ) Regional Forester, U.S. ) DEPARTMENT OF ) AGRICULTURE, U.S. FISH AND ) WILDLIFE SERVICE, ) Defendants —Appellants.) Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746, I, Craig Woolard, declare under penalty of perjury that the following is true and correct: 1. I am a resident of Bozeman, Montana. 2. I am 1989 graduate of Montana State University's College of Engineering and in 1993 I received a doctorate from the University of Notre Dame's DECLARATION OF CRAIG WOOLARD 1 Department of Civil Engineering and Geological Sciences. I am currently a registered professional engineer under the laws of the State of Alaska. 3. I am employed as the Director of Public Works for the City of Bozeman. My duties include supervision and oversight of the City's Water Treatment Plant Division which operates the Sourdough Water Treatment Plant (SWTP). I also am responsible for general oversight of the improvements nearing completion at the SWTP. Prior to my employment with the City of Bozeman I served six years as the Treatment Division Director of the Anchorage Water and Wastewater Utility and one year as General Manager of that organization. 4. In 2010, I served as President of the American Water Works Association, the world's largest scientific professional organization devoted to the delivery of safe drinking water. AWWA has over 54,000 members. 5. From 1994-2006, I served as Professor of civil engineering at the University of Alaska's (Anchorage) School of Engineering where I conducted research into water and wastewater treatment operations. 6. Based on my education and experience I reviewed the design for the SWTP and have concluded the improvements being constructed at the SWTP have been designed to increase the plant's overall efficiency, to provide for increased treatment capacity, and to improve the ability of the SWTP to DECLARATION OF CRAIG WOOLARD 2 handle elevated sediment loading occurring in Sourdough and Hyalite creeks caused by wildfire. 7. The City collects water from both Sourdough (aka "Bozeman") Creek and Hyalite Creek for distribution to the SWTP. These watersheds provide approximately 80% of the City's source water for the SWTP. The City also operates the Lyman Creek water source on the City's north side at the foot of the Bridger Mountains. 8. The City first began collecting and treating water from Sourdough Creek in 1917. The City first began collecting water from Hyalite Creek in the mid 1950s. 9. Over time, the City has invested in excess of$55,000,000.00 of its citizens' tax and ratepayer dollars in infrastructure to collect and process water from these watersheds. In addition, over the past 20 years the City has invested upwards of a total of$2,000,000.00 in securing and protecting water rights in the Sourdough watershed and water shares in the Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation's Hyalite Dam project. 1 O.The City recently completed an Integrated Water Resource Plan (IWRP) the purpose of which is to explore, evaluate, and prioritize the range of alternatives available to address anticipated water supply challenges for the City. The IWRP, in conjunction with the historic use of these watersheds DECLARATION OF CRAIG WOOLARD 3 and the investments the City has made, clearly demonstrate the City intends these watersheds to be a primary source of the City's water, and a primary factor in ensuring the City's economic vitality, for decades. 11.The first studies I am aware of which discussed the need to address hazardous fuel conditions in the Sourdough and Hyalite watersheds occurred in 1980. Overtime, the city has been monitoring hazardous fuel conditions in these watersheds. Recently, in 2004, the City, concerned about its rapidly accelerating population growth and changing forest conditions in the Hyalite and Sourdough watersheds, completed a Source Water Protection Plan (Plan) for the watersheds. The most important and useful finding of the Plan was clear identification of the severity of the risk posed by wildfire. The Plan determined rainfall-runoff in the watersheds will result in heavy sediment loads that cannot be treated by the City's then existing water treatment plant. The Plan determined the times of heavy runoff could last from a few days to weeks, and for several years following a major fire event the City would be incapable of meeting water demand, resulting in a serious water supply crisis. The Plan called for the City to take proactive steps to protect these source watersheds. DECLARATION OF CRAIG WOOLARD 4 12.In 2011, the City began construction of significant improvements to the SWTP after years of engineering and financial planning. The improvements were completed earlier this year and the SWTP plant is now online. 13.On August 28, 2012, the Millie Fire started from a lightning strike in the Storm Castle Creek drainage, an east to west running drainage in the northern Gallatin Range less than 20 miles south of the City. 14.The upper eastern reaches of the Storm Castle drainage share several miles of a subalpine ridge with the Hyalite Creek watershed. In total, the Millie Fire burned 10,515 acres including and burned forest up to the boundary of the Hyalite Creek watershed. 15.In 2013, two smaller wildfires burned in the vicinity of the watersheds; one within Hyalite Creek Watershed, the other on the northern border of the Sourdough Creek Watershed. 16.The City owns approximately 4,000 acres scattered through ten sections of land in a checkerboard pattern within the Sourdough watershed. In 2010, Peck Forestry, Inc. on behalf of the City completed a forest management plan for these lands which calls for managing these lands for the primary purpose of reducing the risk for severe wildfire to protect source water quality. Should the BMW Project move forward, or should the BWM DECLARATION OF CRAIG WOOLARD 5 Project continue to see any delay, the City will seek to contract for the management of its lands in conjunction with the GNF's process. 17.Continued delay of the Project is counter to the interests of the City of Bozeman because continued delay means the risks associated with wildfire in these watersheds, specifically fuel levels, will continue unabated. 18.As Public Works Director for the City is it my responsibility to ensure the adequate and safe provision of potable water to the City's residents, businesses, and institutions. EXECUTED ON this 19t" day of August, 2014 in Bozeman, Montana. CraigAloolard, Ph.D, P.E., City of Bozeman Public Works Director DECLARATION OF CRAIG WOOLARD 6 No. 14-35069 (cross-appeal No. 14-35123) AMICUS EXHIBIT 2 �:t' �� .r ►►�` 4� ';t �k "JCL'` f � ��• •,f� t -- '°sly' � - �> > ' • � `fEii.lAfiFri i. •.v:19•'s°rw�`/'� !��SJM�' 7'� ..�E�;f � � �_�nxni�iy[���u {,a �_ � Y r 'gS•y�..0.. OR CW�y.i �i �11 �� ��.°aE�y .CS f{'i3'y,S T_2� o �•_'Y ` ;j� !l,g° ... ► _,ire sii: J ,' ,` .A '[Y-, �,�• I M• �°rR� a ��, �> is ��• _,' - � i t•.� ' (( {` T�'1• 3 j• [�..-•� it _ t.° = /i _•��, - < � �� .�Yr�� ',�`�%r'r"-fir- iEir. � ;i•-••r ,b • . • �� .. � �! ?►� �� e, r fir. - - - - -- ,s �^ 3 I,' S. N 'e it ♦ i ..� d+ �' / e.�( ra .• c f ¢���:I.'st, i s� fur • ,� .� ,r ;'4.?!'e' a . _ _ 9• t Y d1:. ��•y No. 14-35069 (cross-appeal No. 14-35123) AMICUS EXHIBIT 3 Gregory S. Sullivan BOZEMAN CITY ATTORNEY P.O. Box 1230 Bozeman, MT 59771-1230 Tel: (406) 582-2309 Fax: (406) 582-2302 gsullivan@bozeman.net Attorney for Amicus Curiae City of Bozeman, MT IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA MISSOULA DIVISION ALLIANCE FOR THE WILD ) ROCKIES & ) NATIVE ECOSYSTEM COUNCIL, ) Case No.: CV-12-55-M-DLC Plaintiffs, ) DECLARATION OF DAN VS. ) HARMON, P.E. FAYE KRUEGER, et al., ) Defendants ) AM l W5 E�x Al b lr 3 Declaration of Dan Harmon 1 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746, I, Dan Harmon, declare under penalty of perjury that the following is true and correct: 1. I am a resident of Hamilton, Montana. 2. I am 1984 graduate of Montana State University and have been a professional engineer for 28 years. Currently, I am licensed as an engineer under the laws of the States of Montana, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington. 3. I am employed as a professional engineer by HDR, Inc., at offices located at 1715 South Reserve, Suite C, Missoula, Montana. HDR, Inc. is HDR, Inc. is a global employee-owned firm founded in 1917 to provide architecture, engineering, consulting, construction and related services throughout Montana, North America and the world. 4. I have experience designing and overseeing construction of municipal water treatment facilities throughout Montana and the Northwestern United States. 5. HDR, Inc. was contracted by the City of Bozeman (City) to design and oversee construction of improvements to the City's Sourdough Water Treatment Plant located at 7022 Sourdough Canyon Road, Bozeman, Montana. I am the principal engineer for the design and construction of these improvements. 6. The improvements being constructed at the Sourdough Water Treatment Plan (S WTP) have been designed to increase the plant's overall efficiency, Declaration of Dan Harmon 2 to provide for increased treatment capacity, and to improve the ability of the SWTP to handle elevated sediment loading occurring in Sourdough and Hyalite creeks caused by wildfire. 7. The improvements include pretreatment procedures designed to remove debris and sediment with final filtration of preliminarily treated water occurring through the use of a membrane filtration system. I designed the pretreatment system using published industry standard performance parameters in conjunction with historic water quality data and in compliance with the Montana Department of Environmental Quality's Design Circular DEQ-1: Design Standards for Water Works. 8. Information from scientific literature on forest fire impacts to surface water indicates that immediate changes to water quality occur after a wildfire and are significant in both magnitude and consequences for water treatment. These changes include increases in sediment and turbidity, changes to pH, and increases to phosphorous, cyanide, ammonium, nitrates, organic carbons, iron, manganese, and other chemical compounds for which treatment is required. All of the above affect the ability of a facility to convert source water to potable water suitable for human consumption. 9. Of particular significance to the ability of a water treatment facility to produce potable water is the potential increase in turbidity in affected Declaration of Dan Harmon 3 watersheds following a wildfire. Scientific studies conducted in the western United States indicate levels of turbidity in waters affected by sedimentation caused by wildfire can increase to a possible range of 3,500 up to 31,000 NTUs (nephelometric turbidity units). 1 O.Based on the information in the scientific literature, the impacts to the water quality of the SWTP's sources can be expected to be particularly severe during the first runoff season following a wildfire. 11.Water quality changes to source water can be expected to persist for at least five years and for some wildfires may last up to ten years. Although the magnitude and particular parameters affected may vary from year to year and depend directly on the severity of weather events, changes in water quality, especially changes in turbidity, will pose a significant challenge to the SWTP should Sourdough Creek or Hyalite Creek, or both, experience a significant wildfire. 12.The SWTP is designed to handle turbidities up to 1,000 NTU. This is a significant improvement over current SWTP capabilities and represents a treatment capability greater than many public water treatment facilities. At this level, the SWTP's preliminary treatment facilities are expected to remove most large particulate grit and are designed to produce post- Declaration of Dan Harmon 4 preliminary treatment turbidities of 5-10 NTU for introduction to the membrane filtration system. 13.At source water turbidities above 1,000 NTU, however, performance of the preliminary treatment facilities will be diminished, and will likely produce water of a quality unacceptable for introduction to the membrane filtration system. The result will be a shutdown of the SWTP and the inability of the SWTP to produce potable water. The preliminary treatment facilities being constructed will likely reduce the amount of time the SWTP will be shut down during periods of high turbidity. However, it will likely only enable the City to reduce required shutdown duration and will not completely avoid treatment plant shutdowns. 14.Following significant wildfires, I have observed at other facilities that the raw water is essentially not treatable for time periods of high runoff with any conventional treatment process due to high color, high TOC, and elevated iron and manganese levels. The improvements at the SWTP will reduce the amount of time any shutdown may need to occur but will not eliminate the risk that total plant shutdowns will occur due to wildfire related runoff. 15.Wildfire may cause additional challenges to the City's water collection system. First, the initial flushes of debris and ash created by a wildfire, along with any sediment originating from newly vulnerable hillsides, could Declaration of Dan Harmon 5 potentially overwhelm the City's existing raw water intakes on Sourdough and Hyalite creeks. Second, the impoundment pool behind the dam on Hyalite Creek could potentially be filled with sediment, ash and debris, restricting flow to the intake. In addition, the fish ladder on Hyalite Creek maybe clogged by debris in quantities that cannot be removed by the existing flushing system. 16.Over time, sedimentation of the source water will decrease, but the problem will persist until the forest vegetation can be restored. This process can take up to a decade or longer. 17.The magnitude of water quality changes will be dependent on the extent of the fire in the watersheds and the intensity of the burn, as well as the severity and frequency of runoff events subsequent to the fire. 18.To most effectively minimize impact to the SWTP operations, I recommend the City support management of the City's watersheds to minimize the risk, potential, and severity of wildfire events severe enough to create significant sediment, colors, and metals loading in the raw water supply. EXECUTED on this 5t' day of December, 2012, in Missoula, Montana. an H rmon, P.E., HDR, Inc. Declaration of Dan Harmon 6