S-392-119
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
What it does
This bill would expand the Sloan Canyon National Conservation Area in Clark County, Nevada by approximately 9,290 acres. It would also require the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to grant rights-of-way to the Southern Nevada Water Authority (SNWA) to conduct geotechnical investigations and to construct, operate, and maintain a water transmission pipeline and related facilities through the conservation area and other BLM-administered land. The pipeline may not pass through or under designated wilderness areas, and construction may not permanently damage surface resources within the conservation area. The bill would also allow SNWA to excavate and dispose of materials encountered during tunneling, with disposal sites identified through a memorandum of understanding with the BLM.
Who benefits
Residents of the Las Vegas metropolitan area and other Southern Nevada communities who depend on SNWA for water supply, particularly as the region faces long-term water scarcity pressures. SNWA as an agency gaining a legally secured right-of-way it may not have been able to obtain otherwise. Construction and engineering contractors who would be hired to build the pipeline. Local governments and businesses in Clark County that rely on a stable water supply for growth and operations. Landowners and communities adjacent to the newly added 9,290 acres who may benefit from expanded conservation protections on neighboring land.
Who is hurt
Recreational users, hikers, and conservation advocates who may oppose industrial infrastructure within or adjacent to a national conservation area. Environmental groups concerned about habitat fragmentation or surface disturbance during construction. Existing rights-of-way holders or utility operators who may face coordination requirements. Taxpayers who may bear costs if BLM oversight and the memorandum of understanding process require additional federal resources. Wildlife dependent on undisturbed desert habitat in the expansion area, particularly species sensitive to construction activity.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that Southern Nevada faces a genuine and worsening water supply crisis — Lake Mead, the region's primary source, has experienced historically low water levels in recent years, and the region's population continues to grow. They contend that securing a dedicated pipeline right-of-way through federal land is essential infrastructure for long-term water reliability, and that the bill's built-in protections — prohibiting pipeline routing through wilderness, barring permanent surface damage, and allowing BLM to impose conditions — ensure the conservation area's core values are preserved while meeting a critical public need.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that routing an industrial water pipeline through a national conservation area sets a troubling precedent for allowing infrastructure development in lands specifically designated for resource protection. They contend that the bill's mandate that BLM "must" grant the rights-of-way removes the agency's discretionary authority to weigh environmental impacts on a case-by-case basis, and that construction activity — even with surface protections — could cause lasting harm to desert ecosystems, cultural resources, and wildlife habitat that the conservation area was established to protect.