The Grand County Council has gone on record opposing the transfer of water rights from the San Juan County Water Conservancy District to a proposed nuclear power plant in Green River. This week, the council voted 4-3 to send a letter of protest to the State Engineer.

In May, council members voted 4-3 to not file a protest against a similar transfer of water rights from Kane County to the power plant.

This time the majority changed when council member Chris Conrad joined members Chris Baird, Audrey Graham, and Bob Greenberg in favor of protest. Council members opposing the letter argued that one county should not interfere with the actions and decisions of another county.

“For us to stick our nose into another county’s business... technically, I think it’s inappropriate,” Conrad said, noting that he will vote as his constituents have urged him to do. “But I think we’re inviting [backlash] from our neighbors, who are going to tell us what we can do with our letter.”

Conrad said that he does not necessarily oppose nuclear power plants.

“I would prefer [that] my power come from a nuclear plant rather than a coal fired plant,” he said.

The motion to protest was made by Graham, who said it is not a matter of favoring nuclear power or not. Instead, she said, the issue is a nuclear power plant near the Grand County border that will impact county residents.

Council chairman Bob Greenberg called the water rights transfer by San Juan’s water district “un-neighborly.”

Neither Kane nor San Juan counties asked Grand County how it felt about a nuclear plant next door, council member Chris Baird said.

“We happen to be right in the middle of [the potential impact zone]. I oppose.... I will take every chance I can to make that clear,” Baird said.

Council member Gene Ciarus said he does not recall any county filing a protest when Grand County transferred a water right the county held to the Green River for use at the Atlas tailings repository near Crescent Junction. He called San Juan’s effort “merely a transfer of water rights”.

Council member Pat Holyoak expressed concerns that if this water right is not “proved up,” i.e. put to use, Utah will lose it to another state.

“It’s not our business,” council member Ken Ballantyne said, noting Grand County would not like it if another county protested, for example, a proposed wind farm in Cisco.

During a public hearing, county residents talked about how isolated waste storage and wind farms would not impact other counties. They also mentioned the potential loss of water for agriculture.

“Withdrawing the water [from an already oversubscribed Green River] would affect us. [And] we are in the radiation impact zone,” Moab resident Sarah Fields, director of locally-based Uranium Watch, said. She added that the water right would not be lost to another state.

The proposal would transfer the water rights from a public to a private entity, which is not necessary because San Juan County can keep the water right by filing for an extension of the time before the water must be put to beneficial use, Castle Valley resident David Erley said.