Glen Canyon Dam Long-Term Experimental 

and Management Plan Draft Supplemental 

Environmental Impact Statement 

Draft SEIS Public Meeting

February 2024

1 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
Glen Canyon Dam Long-Term Experimental 

and Management Plan Draft Supplemental 

Environmental Impact Statement 

(LTEMP SEIS)

Virtual Public Draft SEIS Meetings – February 16, 20, and 22, 2024

For technical support, please contact Jessica Sams: jessica.sams@swca.com

2 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
Draft SEIS Public Meeting Agenda

• Introductory Remarks and Welcome

• Presentation

• Question and Answer Session 

• Closing Remarks

3 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
Zoom Orientation

Webinar is being recorded

Microphones are muted 

Chat feature is turned off

Submit questions using Q&A during at any 

time during the presentation or Q&A 

session

4 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
Questions about the Presentation

How to submit a question

• Click the Q&A button

• A box will pop up

• Type your question

• Click send

• Responses to questions will appear 

in the Q&A box

Questions about the Presentation? 

Questions are not part of the 

project record

5 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting
Welcome

6 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 

Wayne Pullan, Regional Director

Bureau of Reclamation

Upper Colorado Basin Region
Presentation

7 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 

Background

Project Overview

Alternatives

Analysis of Impacts
Background

8 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
LTEMP Record of Decision

December 2016 - Reclamation published the 

Long- Term Experimental and Management Plan 

(LTEMP) Record Of Decision

• Provides a framework for adaptively managing Glen Canyon 

Dam operations consistent with the Grand Canyon 

Protection Act (GCPA). 

• Identifies specific options for dam operations based on timing 

of hourly, daily, and monthly release patterns.

• Identifies appropriate experimental and management actions 

that meet the GCPA's requirements, hydropower production, 

and improving downstream resources, including those 

important to American Indian tribes. 

9 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
Warm Water Non-Native Species

• The prolonged drought in the Colorado River 

Basin is resulting in lower reservoir elevations.

• The epilimnion (upper layer of water) where 

most fish reside is closer to the Glen Canyon 

dam’s intakes.

• Nonnative fish in Lake Powell are now more 

likely to pass through the dam and 

downstream into the Colorado River.

• Water below the dam is now warmer making 

conditions suitable for warmwater nonnative 

fish including smallmouth bass.

• Smallmouth bass and other predatory nonnative fish pose a threat to federally listed fish 

species and other native fish downstream.

10 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
The Invasion Curve from DOI Invasive Species Strategic 

Plan (2021-2025)

11 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
High Flow Experiments (HFEs)

• HFEs are experiments to further understanding of incorporating high water 

releases into future dam operations to maintain or improve beaches, sandbars, 

and associated habitat. 

12 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
Relationship of the LTEMP SEIS to other Colorado 

River planning activities

PLANNING 

EFFORT

NEAR-TERM 

COLORADO RIVER 

OPERATIONS 

(Interim Guidelines 

SEIS)

Glen Canyon Dam LongTerm Experimental and 

Management Plan 

(LTEMP SEIS)

LONG-TERM COLORADO 

RIVER OPERATIONS 

(Post-2026 Process)

Limited sections of the 

2007 Interim 

Guidelines 

Focused on annual 

releases

RANGE OF 

OPERATIONS

Limited sections of the 

2016 LTEMP ROD;

Sub-annual flows – timing 

of hourly, daily, monthly 

releases from Glen 

Canyon Dam 

Revisit all sections of the 

2007 Interim Guidelines 

and other operating 

agreements that expire in 

2026.

Focused on annual releases

DURATION 2024 – 2026

(3 YEARS)

2024 – 2027 (Flow 

Alternatives)

2024 – 2036 (HFE protocol)

2026 AND BEYOND

13 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
Project Overview

14 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
LTEMP Supplemental Environmental Impact 

Statement

• June 19, 2023 – Reclamation was directed to prepare a Supplemental 

Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) to the December 2016 Record of 

Decision for the Glen Canyon Dam Long-Term Experimental and Management 

Plan (LTEMP) Final Environmental Impact Statement

• October 4, 2023 - Notice of Intent was published in the Federal Register

announcing the LTEMP SEIS and requesting scoping input

• February 9, 2024 – Notice of Availability was published in the Federal Register

announcing the draft LTEMP SEIS and starting 45-day public comment period

15 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
Lees Ferry (RM 

-15 to 0)

Glen Canyon 

Dam

Humpback 

Chub core 

population 

(RM 64)

SMB Spawning

16 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
Proposed Federal Action

• Analyzing range of reservoir releases with 

varying combinations of temperature and 

release volumes to assess effectiveness in 

disrupting smallmouth bass spawning and 

preventing recruiting populations from 

expanding. 

• Examines the sediment accounting periods 

associated with the HFE protocol analyzed in 

LTEMP

Humpback Chub

17 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
Purpose and Need

• The purpose of the LTEMP SEIS is for Reclamation to analyze additional flow 

options at Glen Canyon Dam in response to the nonnative smallmouth bass and 

other warmwater nonnative species recently detected directly below the dam. 

• The need is to disrupt the establishment of smallmouth bass below Glen Canyon 

Dam by limiting additional recruitment, which could threaten populations of 

threatened humpback chub below the dam. 

• The LTEMP SEIS also considers the HFE protocol in the LTEMP FEIS by including the 

latest scientific information to improve Reclamation's ability to implement HFE 

releases. Specifically, Reclamation is considering adjusting sediment accounting 

periods and HFE implementation windows.

18 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
Cooperating Agencies

• Federal cooperating agencies include:

• National Park Service

• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

• Bureau of Indian Affairs

• Western Area Power Administration

• Twelve additional state, Tribal, and public utility agencies

• U.S. Geological Survey is providing scientific and modelling 

support

19 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LTEMP SEIS: Schedule 

Reclamation publishes 

NOI to Prepare SEIS -

initiates NEPA Process -

Begins public Scoping 

Period 

Sep 2023 

Public Scoping Period – 

opportunity for public to provide 

input on scope of SEIS and Purpose 

and Need for Proposed Action 

Oct – Nov 2023 

Reclamation develops Scoping 

Summary Report with 

anticipated Purpose & Need 

Nov 2023 

Refinement of SEIS Operational 

Alternatives by Reclamation, 

partners, and stakeholders 

Nov-Dec 2023 

Reclamation prepares 

Draft EIS 

Jan 2024 

Publication of Draft SEIS 

with public comment 

period to follow 

Feb 2024 

Publication of 

Final SEIS 

May 2024 

30-Day Public Review 

of Final SEIS 

May 2024 

Publication of 

Record of Decision 

June 2024 

Key NEPA Process milestones – Opportunities for Tribal, State, Partner, Stakeholder, and Public engagement 

20 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
Alternatives Analyzed

21 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
Alternatives

• No Action – Glen Canyon Dam operations will continue as defined in 

the 2016 LTEMP ROD.

Cold Water 

Alternatives

• Cool Mix Alternative

• Cool Mix with Flow Spike Alternative

• Cold Shock Alternative

• Cold Shock with Flow Spike Alternative

• Non-Bypass Alternative

*HFE Protocol Update is Common to all Action Alternatives*

22 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
Cool Mix Alternative

• Strategic water releases from both the 

penstocks and river outlet works to 

maintain a daily average water 

temperature below 15.5°C (60°F) as far 

down as the Little Colorado River (RM 

61).

• Bypass release quantity would vary 

based on predicted temperatures and 

monthly water volumes, ensuring the 

minimum necessary release to meet the 

water temperature goal

• Implementation would occur weekly.

23 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
Cool Mix with Flow Spike Alternative

• Operate in a manner similar to the Cool 

Mix Alternative, by disrupting 

smallmouth bass spawning.

• Includes up to three 8-hour flow spikes 

in addition to those under the Cool Mix 

Alternative.

• Flow spikes would release water 

through penstocks and river outlet 

works to maintain the target 

temperature in margin habitats such as 

the minus 12-mile slough.

24 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
Cold Shock Alternative

• Induce a cold shock, targeting 

temperatures of 13°C (55°F) as far down 

as the Little Colorado River (RM 61).

• Triggered when temperatures rise 

above 15.5°C (60°F) and would occur 

for 48 hours on a weekly schedule for 

12 weekends.

• Release amount would vary based on 

temperature conditions and capacity 

considerations.

25 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
Cold Shock with Flow Spike Alternative

• Combining cold shocks and flow spikes

• Initiated when daily water temperatures 

at either Lees Ferry or the Little 

Colorado River reach 15.5°C (60°F).

• Includes weekly 48-hour cold-shock 

releases and up to three 8-hour flow 

spikes.

• Release quantity based on predicted 

temperatures, with flow spikes aiming 

to disrupt spawning in margin habitats.

26 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
Non-Bypass Alternative

• Focus on disrupting smallmouth bass 

nests and spawning activities below 

Glen Canyon Dam

• Once-weekly, short-duration, low-flow 

release (~2,000 cfs) immediately 

followed by a short-duration high flow 

(up to 27,300 cfs)

• Repeated weekly once water 

temperatures are forecasted to rise 

above 15.5°C (60°F) in areas where 

smallmouth bass are observed 

spawning (for example, the 12-mile 

slough) to disrupt renesting.

27 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
Common to All Action Alternatives

28 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 

Operations would continue pursuant to the 

continued implementation of existing 

agreements that control operations of Glen 

Canyon Dam. 

HFE Sediment Accounting Window

• Reclamation would implement changes to 

the sediment accounting period and 

implementation windows. 

• Changes would consist of adjusting the 

semiannual sediment accounting period to 

an annual period with the option for a 

spring and/or a fall High Flow Event (HFE).
Analysis of Impacts

29 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
Resources Analyzed in Detail – Chapter 3

• Energy and Power

• Geomorphology/Sediment

• Aquatic Resources

• Special Status Species

• Tribal Resources

• Cultural Resources

• Environmental Justice

• Hydrologic Resources

• Climate

• Socioeconomics

• Recreation

• Water Quality

• Terrestrial Resources and Wetlands

• Wildlife

• Air Quality

• Visual Resources

30 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
Energy and Power – Section 3.3

31 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 

Issue Areas:

• Generation

• Economic Analysis
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Energy and Power – Section 3.3 

No-Action Alternative - Power generation and revenue from power sales 

would continue, similar to historical levels, depending on hydrologic and grid 

conditions 

Generation: 

• All cold-water alternatives estimate a loss of power generation ranging from 

1.6% to 0.5%; greatest loss under Cool Mix, smallest loss under Cold Shock 

and Cold Shock with Spike Flow 

• Non-Bypass alternative shows small gain of power generation of 0.1% to 0.3% 

Economic Analysis 

• All cold-water alternatives estimate a loss of economic value ranging from 

2.2% ($26.2 million) to 0.6% ($6.5 million); greatest loss under Cool Mix, 

smallest loss under Cold Shock 

• Non-Bypass alternative shows small gain of economic value of 0.1% 

(~$1million) 

32 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
Geomorphology and Sediment – Section 3.4

33 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 

Issue Areas:

• Sediment transport

• Erosion

• Deposition

• Beach-building conditions
Geomorphology and Sediment – Section 3.4

34 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
Geomorphology and Sediment – Section 3.4

35 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 

Flow Spike Alternatives

• In some years, flow spikes would cause sand export in the lead up to HFE 

implementation, which would reduce the resulting HFE duration. 

• Flow spikes would decrease mass balance at Marble Canyon to a slightly 

greater extent relative to the alternatives without flow spikes, while 

contributing slightly more volume to sandbars.
Aquatic Resources & Status Species

Section 3.5, 3.7, 3.8

Issue Areas:

• Fish

• Threatened and Endangered species

• State and Tribal sensitive species

• Foodbase

36 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
37 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 

Aquatic Resources & Status Species (Fish)

Section 3.5, 3.7, 3.8

No-Action Alternative

• Under lower Lake Powell elevations Smallmouth bass would likely continue to pass 

through the dam and temperatures below the dam would be suitable for spawning 

increasing the risk of predation on native fish.

Cold Water Alternatives

• Cool temperatures could delay or disrupt maturation and spawning by smallmouth 

bass

• Other fish species and the aquatic food base have experienced cool releases; 

therefore, they are not expected to be negatively affected.

Non-Bypass Alternative

• The Non-Bypass Alternative could disrupt smallmouth bass spawning by changing the

water velocity.

• This could lead to nest abandonment and mortality of smallmouth bass eggs and 

larvae.
Aquatic Resources & Status Species (Fish)

Section 3.5, 3.7, 3.8

No Action: 17% of traces show smallmouth bass population growth through 2027.

Cool Mix: 0% of traces show smallmouth bass population growth through 2027.

Cool Mix with Flow Spike: 0% of traces show smallmouth bass population growth 

through 2027.

Cold Shock: 10% of traces show smallmouth bass population growth 

through 2027.

Cold Shock with Flow Spike: 10% of traces show smallmouth bass population 

growth by 2027.

Non-Bypass: 17% of traces show smallmouth bass population growth by 2027, 

however growth is smaller compared to no action.

38 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
Aquatic Resources & Status Species (Aquatic Foodbase) 

Section 3.5, 3.7, 3.8

39 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 

All Cold-Water Alternatives

• The cooler temperatures are not expected to negatively affect the 

aquatic food base.

• Short-term spike flows would scour the benthos, but the food base 

reduction would be temporary.

Non-Bypass Alternative

• High flows within the powerplant’s capacity are not expected to 

negatively affect the food base in the Lees Ferry reach or farther 

downstream. However, weekend flows of 2,000 cfs would desiccate 

much of the river bottom.
 

 

 

 

Tribal Resources – Section 3.13 

Issue Areas: 

• Mortality of fish, which are contributing 

elements to traditional cultural properties (TCPs) 

• Exposure and increased visitation to sacred sites 

and archaeological sites 

• Changes in vegetation important to Tribes 

40 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
Tribal Resources – Section 3.13

41 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 

No Action Alternative

• Operations at Glen Canyon Dam would not change; no change in fish 

mortality. 

• No additional impacts on archaeological or sacred sites. 

• Riparian vegetation would follow current trends.

All Cold-Water Alternatives

• No additional impacts on archaeological or sacred sites.

All Action Alternatives

• Differences in vegetation communities would be minor.
Tribal Resources – Section 3.13

42 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 

Cool Mix Alternative

• Would not result in fish mortality. 

Cool Mix with Spike Flow Alternative

• May result in fish mortality. 

Cold Shock and Cold Shock with Flow Spike Alternatives

• May result in egg or larval fish mortality. 

Non-Bypass Alternative

• Would result in the loss of life of eggs and fry. 

• Low flows could result in the exposure of archaeological sites or sacred 

sites. 
Cultural Resources – Section 3.12

43 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 

Issue Areas:

• Exposure of and increased 

visitation to resources (historic 

properties) as river levels 

fluctuate

• Sediment availability for windborne transport to protect 

resources downstream of the 

dam.
Cultural Resources – Section 3.12

44 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 

No Action and All Action Alternatives

• No additional positive or negative impacts beyond those analyzed 

in the LTEMP FEIS for archaeological sites; no changes to available 

sediment for aeolian deposits on archaeological sites.

Non-Bypass Alternative

• Low flows may expose previously inundated historic properties. 
Environmental Justice – Section 3.16

45 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 

Issue Area:

• Disproportionate effects on minority and lowincome populations
Environmental Justice – Section 3.16

46 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 

No Action Alternative

• Operations at Glen Canyon Dam would not change; no impacts on 

environmental justice communities because of changes to power generation.

All Cold-Water Alternatives

• Reduced energy generation and increased replacement energy would result in 

financial impacts, changes to air quality, changes to tribal resources, changes 

to regional economic activity, and changes to use and nonuse values.

Non-Bypass Alternative

• Least impacts on hydropower generation and the least financial impacts. 

• Gain in economic value of electric power that could benefit communities, 

including environmental justice communities. 

• Most potential impacts on recreation and Tribal resources (through fish 

mortalities); a potential disproportionate adverse impacts for environmental 

justice communities.
Hydrologic Resources – Section 3.2

47 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 

Issue Areas:

• Reservoir elevations

• Reservoir releases

• River flows
Hydrologic Resources – Section 3.2

48 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 

No Action Alternative

• Operations at Glen Canyon Dam would not change; there would be no 

changes to the hydrology. Reservoir elevations and release volumes 

would follow current trends.

Cool Mix and Cold Shock Alternatives

• Hydrology impacts (reservoir elevations, releases, river flows) would be 

temporary and would not exceed the cumulative impacts on water 

resources as identified in the LTEMP FEIS.
Hydrologic Resources – Section 3.2

49 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 

Cool Mix and Cold Shock with Flow Spike Alternative

• Increased flow rates from the flow spikes would temporarily decrease 

water surface elevations in Lake Powell.

• No long-term impacts on hydrology are anticipated.

Non-Bypass Alternative

• The minimum and maximum proposed flows would exceed the 

maximum daily range as developed in the LTEMP ROD.

• Monthly and annual release volumes would be the same as those 

under the cold-water alternatives.
Climate – Section 3.17

50 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 

Issue Area:

• Greenhouse gas (GHG) 

emissions from 

alternative power sources
Climate – Section 3.17

51 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 

No Action Alternative

• Operations at Glen Canyon Dam would not change hydropower 

generation; no change in climate trends as a result of GHG emissions that 

would occur from replacing any portion of electric generation with power 

generated from sources that emit GHGs (for example, coal, oil, and 

natural gas).

All Cold-Water Alternatives

• Hydropower generated at the Glen Canyon Dam Powerplant would be 

reduced and need to be replaced by other sources within the 11-state 

Western Interconnection region. 

• Replacement sources, including higher-cost sources such as coal, natural 

gas, and oil, would result in increased GHG emissions.

• Cool Mix shows largest increase and Cold Shock with Flow Spike shows 

lowest increase.
 

 

Socioeconomics – Section 3.15 

Issue Areas: 

• Net value from recreation 

activities 

• Environmental nonuse value 

52 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Socioeconomics – Section 3.15 

No Action Alternative 

Recreation Value: Estimated net value for 50-month analysis period 

calculated at $366.76 million for whitewater boaters and $19.03 million for 

anglers. 

Nonmarket Values may differ for different groups. 

• Humpback chub: non-market value decrease in the long term.

• Sandbars: HFE releases could continue to impact sandbar development and

the associated values.

All Cold-Water Alternatives 

Recreation Value: Impacts vary by alternative; from minimal changes to small 

increases in the net value for anglers and whitewater boaters for all reaches. 

Nonmarket Values Potential for benefits to long term values associated with 

humpback chub existence and environmental values associated with 

sandbars. 53 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
Socioeconomics – Section 3.15

54 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 

Non-Bypass Alternative

Recreation Value

• Short-term impacts for angler satisfaction.

• The high and low fluctuations of water could impact the boater experience in 

both the Glen Canyon and Grand Canyon reaches. This could adversely impact 

the associated value.

Non-Market Value

• Short-term impacts on humpback chub juveniles from flow changes; however, 

the effect of these high flows is expected to be minimal; no long-term changes.

• Trends in sandbar building similar to other action alternatives. 

• Trends in sandbar building would be similar to those produced under other 

action alternatives. As a result, no long-term changes to associated values 

are anticipated.
Recreation – Section 3.14

55 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 

Issue Areas:

• Whitewater boating

• Fishing
Recreation – Section 3.14

56 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 

Whitewater Boating

No Action and All Action Alternatives

• Disruption of Glen Canyon rafting opportunities for concessionaire rafting visitors.

• HFE releases would result in a potential increase in camping areas for boaters in the Grand 

Canyon. 

Flow Spike Alternatives

• Likely improve whitewater boating conditions in the Grand Canyon but could temporarily 

limit beach usability for camping during implementation.

• Flow spikes have the highest potential to increase camping areas in the Grand Canyon. 

Non-Bypass Alternative

• The low flows could limit the ability of boats to freely navigate in the Glen Canyon reach, 

which would adversely impact boating and the rafting concessionaire in the short term.

• In the Grand Canyon, minimum flows would be below the safe whitewater minimum, which 

would adversely affect whitewater boating
Recreation – Section 3.14

57 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 

Fishing

No Action - Implementation of HFE releases would continue to result in reduced 

short-term angler satisfaction in Glen Canyon

Cool Mix - Reduced water temperatures would improve water quality for rainbow 

trout. 

Cold shock – Likely adverse impacts on fry and early juveniles; Cooler water 

temperatures would likely improve the water quality for rainbow trout in the long 

term.

Flow Spikes - Reduced water temperatures would improve water quality for rainbow 

trout; reduced catchability during the peak fishing months.

Non-Bypass - Fry and juveniles would be negatively affected by both the high and 

low flows; rapid fluctuations in water levels could disrupt fishing; less likely to benefit 

the rainbow trout fishery by reducing water temperatures as compared with the coldwater alternatives. 
Ways to Comment

Send an email: LTEMPSEIS@usbr.gov

By mail to:

Bureau of Reclamation

Attn: LTEMP SEIS Project Manager

125 South State Street, Suite 800

Salt Lake City, UT 84138

45-day comment period closes

March 25, 2024

58 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
Need Information? 

Project Website: https://www.usbr.gov/uc/progact/amp/index.html

• Slide Presentation available on the Project Website

Send questions to: LTEMPSEIS@usbr.gov

Kathleen Callister, Adaptive Management and Water Quality Division 

Manager, Bureau of Reclamation: (801) 524–3867

59 – LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
Question and Answer 

Session

60 LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
Question and Answer Guidelines

• This is a period to ask clarifying questions about the 

presentation. Questions are not part of the official record.

• Please keep questions as focused and brief as possible so we 

have time to answer as many questions as we can. 

• Please speak respectfully and remember that this virtual 

event is designed to be viewed in homes across the country 

in real time. 

• Profanity is not acceptable.

61 LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
Question and Answer

To ask a WRITTEN question

• Click the Q&A button

• A box will pop up

• Type your question

• Click send

• Question may be responded to live 

or in the Q&A box

To ask a VERBAL question

• If joining by phone, 

press *9 to raise your 

hand to ask a verbal 

question

• Facilitator will call your 

name

• Click unmute to speak

Telephone

62 LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
Additional Questions?

Send questions to: LTEMPSEIS@usbr.gov

Kathleen Callister, Adaptive Management and Water Quality Division 

Manager, Bureau of Reclamation: (801) 524–3867

Or attend a future Public Meeting:

Tues, February 20, 2024, 5:30 p.m. – 7:00 p.m. Mountain time

Thurs, February 22, 2024, 12:00 p.m. – 1:30 p.m. Mountain time

63 LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting 
Closing Remarks

64 LTEMP Draft SEIS Public Meeting