Docstoc

BC Hydro Treaty Overview - Columbia Basin Water Management

Document Sample
BC Hydro Treaty Overview - Columbia Basin Water Management Powered By Docstoc
					Columbia
  River
               Treaty History & Requirements
 Treaty




            Too
           Much
             or     Vanport destroyed in 1948               Trail B.C. flood in 1948

            Too                                 Grand Coulee spill

           Little
           Water!
                               Draught



                                   30 January 2013                                     1
Columbia
  River
 Treaty
           Why did we need a Treaty?
                 About 1/3 of the Columbia
                 River water comes from Canada.
                          Canada has 15% of the basin
                           area, but 30% of 134 million
                           acre feet (Maf) average annual
                           flow at The Dalles.
                          50% of worst Columbia flood
                           flows (1894) at The Dalles
                           came from Canada.
                          Flow at border varies from
                           14,000 to 555,000 cubic feet per
                           second (cfs), much wider
                           variation (1:40) than
                           Mississippi or St. Lawrence.

                    30 January 2013                           2
Columbia
  River
               Year to Year Variation in Flow
 Treaty
                 About +/- 50% of Average




            Minimum = 53.5 maf, Average = 105.6 maf, Maximum = 173.8 maf
           Long-term trends are apparent over time, but year to year variations are
                    almost random, with no reliable next year forecast.
                                     30 January 2013                                  3
Columbia
                  Large Seasonal Variation in Flow
  River
 Treaty
               Comparison of 50-year Average Monthly Unregulated Flow
                   to Desired Regulated Flow at The Dalles in Kcfs

            Unregulated flow at      500
             The Dalles varies from 450
             36,000 to 1,240,000 cfs 400            Desired Regulated
             a 1:34 ratio, compared                 Unregulated
                                      350
             to the St. Lawrence 1:2
             & Mississippi 1:25 ratios300

            Reservoir storage        250
             converts spill, nonfirm, 200
             and unusable energy to 150
             firm energy and usable 100
             nonfirm energy.
                                       50
            Seasonal flow forecasts
             are poor. The 95%          0
             probability forecast error Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun   Jul

             for the January forecast of the Jan-July
             volume runoff at The Dalles is +/- 27 maf.

                                         30 January 2013                                    4
Columbia
                Columbia is the most powerful
  River
 Treaty
                   river in North America
            Hydropower is measured
             by river flow times
             change in elevation
             (called “head”)
            St. Lawrence and
             Mississippi have more
             flow, but much less head
            Grand Coulee has twice
             the head of Niagara Falls

                 Grand Coulee
                                                    Niagara Falls & Powerhouse




                                  30 January 2013                                5
                                            Average Annual Runoff
Columbia
  River
 Treaty                                   And Usable Reservoir Storage
                                           Major Western River Basins
                                   250
                                   240
                                   230
                                   220
                                   210
                                   200
           MILLIONS OF ACRE FEET




                                   190
                                   180
                                   170                                 Average Annual Runoff
                                   160
                                   150                                 Usable Reservoir Storage
                                   140
                                   130
                                   120
                                   110
                                   100
                                    90
                                    80
                                    70
                                    60
                                    50
                                    40
                                    30
                                    20
                                    10
                                     0
                                         Columbia        Colorado            Missouri
                                                    RIVER BASINS
                                                     30 January 2013                              6
Columbia
                                        Relief Map of B.C.
  River
 Treaty




                                                      Border with Alberta
                                                      runs along the
                                                      Columbia River
                                                      watershed boundary.
       Note that the river basins
       generally run North /
       South… more connections
       with the U.S. than with
       Alberta.

                                    30 January 2013                         7
Columbia



           Columbia / Kootenay System
  River
 Treaty




                  MCA




                        REV



                                          DDM




                              HLK



                                                LIB




                        30 January 2013               8
Columbia
  River
 Treaty
                 How did we get the Treaty?
            1954-60 negotiations led to signing of Columbia River Treaty by Prime
             Minister Diefenbaker and President Eisenhower on 1/17/61
            Treaty soon ratified by U.S. Senate, but not by Canada. B.C. needed
             money to build dams on both Columbia and Peace rivers, so needed to sell
             the downstream power benefits; the Canadian government initially opposed
             such a sale.
            1961-64 negotiations between U.S. & Canadian governments led to a
             Treaty Protocol, signed January 22, 1964, that allowed the sale of the
             Canadian Entitlement to the U.S., and clarified several issues, one of which
             increased the Canadian Entitlement to U.S. downstream power benefits
             from earlier estimates.
            1961-64 negotiations between Canada, British Columbia, the U.S.
             government, and U.S. mid-Columbia utilities led to an agreement on
             $254.4 million price for 30-year sale of the Canadian Entitlement.


                          Signing the            Proclamation and Exchange
                         Treaty in 1961       of Diplomatic Notes at Peace Arch
                                                        - 16 Sept. 1964
                                          30 January 2013                                   6
                                                                                            9
Columbia
  River
                            Columbia River Treaty Organization
 Treaty


                      CANADIAN GOVERNMENT                                           UNITED STATES
                    Ministry of Foreign Affairs & Trade                             GOVERNMENT
                       Ministry Natural Resources                                  Department of State
                                                              TREATY               Department of Army
                            BRITISH COLUMBIA                                      Department of Energy
                              GOVERNMENT




                                               PERMANENT ENGINEERING BOARD
                                                            *                                     *
                                                 CANADIAN  UNITED STATES                          Established by
            CANADIA                                                              United States
                             CANADIAN                                                             TREATY
                 N                                                                 ENTITY
                              ENTITY
             ENTITY                                                                    *
                                *
           for Art.XIV2j*                         PEB ENGINEERING COMMITTEE
                                                              ***
                      CANADIAN                     CANADIAN   UNITED STATES
                                                                                United States
                                                                                                  **
                    COORDINATOR                                                                   Established by
                                                     OPERATING COMMITTEE       COORDINATOR
                         &                                                                        ENTITIES
                                                              **                      &
                     SECRETARY
                                                   CANADIAN   UNITED STATES     SECRETARY
                         **
                                                                                      **

                                                                                                  ***
             Doug Robinson,                    HYDROMETEOROLOGICAL COMMITTEE                      Established by
                                                            **                                    PEB
             Canadian Entity                      CANADIAN  UNITED STATES
             Secretary
                                                           30 January 2013                                    10
Columbia
                        Agreed Design of
  River
 Treaty
                     Canadian Treaty Storage
            By 1960, 13.0 million acre-feet (MAF) of storage was in place in
             the US. A further 15.5 MAF was needed to limit the flow at The
             Dalles to a tolerable limit of 600 kcfs. This established the
             volume requested by the US.
            A multitude of potential project configurations were proposed: all
             included Duncan as built; high Arrow and low Arrow (Murphy)
             options were considered; and various Mica and East Kootenay
             options were considered.
            The eventual design included 7.0 MAF at Mica, 1.4 MAF at
             Duncan and 7.1 MAF at Arrow (the high Arrow option).
            The latter would raise the level of the Arrow Lakes by 40 feet
             above the natural high water line for a total rise and fall of 66
             feet. It would flood 20,000 acres of arable land, inundate 50
             miles of beaches and displace 2,000 residents.

                                     30 January 2013                              11
Columbia
  River
 Treaty
           What does the Treaty Do?

            The Treaty required Canada to construct and operate
             15.5 Maf of storage on the Columbia River and Duncan
             River in Canada for optimum power generation and
             flood control downstream in Canada and the U.S.
            U.S. must return to Canada one-half of the downstream
             power and flood control benefits this storage produces in
             the U.S.
            The Treaty allowed the U.S. to construct and operate the
             Libby project with 5 Maf storage on the Kootenai River
             in Montana for flood control and other purposes.

                              30 January 2013                            12
Columbia
  River
 Treaty




           Duncan (1968)                                          Mica (1973)
           Created the Duncan Reservoir                     Created the Kinbasket
                                                                        Reservoir




Keenleyside (1969)
Created the Lower Arrow Reservoir


                                          30 January 2013                           13
Columbia
  River
 Treaty




                                Revelstoke (1984)




                                           Libby (1973)
                                                Created the
                                                   Koocan
                                              usa Reservoir




           30 January 2013                             14
Columbia



           Treaty priority for water use
  River
 Treaty




           1. Domestic & consumptive uses - drinking water,
             irrigation, etc.
           2. Flood control - hard upper limit on reservoir levels
             … “trumps” all operations for energy production
           3. Firm energy - must draft reservoirs as far as is
             necessary to meet the specified firm energy
             requirement
           4. Reservoir refill - refill by 31 July to maximize firm
             energy capability for the following year
           5. Secondary energy - “less useful” energy, since it
             is not guaranteed in all years

                             30 January 2013                          15
Columbia
  River
                          Treaty Provisions for
 Treaty

                             Flood Control
            8.45 million acre feet (Maf) of storage at Arrow, Duncan, and Mica is
             assured for flood control operation.
            Additional 7 Maf of Treaty Storage and 5 Maf of Non-treaty storage
             available “on call” for large floods at cost of $1.875 million at each of the
             first four requests.
            $64,400,000 cash payment made to Canada by U.S. Government at the
             completion of the three Canadian projects for one-half of the estimated
             present worth of future flood damages prevented in the U.S.

                        Portland levels       Corps or Engineers estimates that Treaty
                        Bank full = 16’,       Storage prevented over $200 million ($1985)
                        Major flood = 26’
                                               in 1972 and 1974.
                             UnReg.   Reg.
                        1997= 28.4’   19’
                                              Treaty storage reduced 1997 peak flows at The
                        1996= 29’     27.2’    Dalles by 170,000 cfs , and prevented about
                        1974= 30.6’   21.1’    $197 million in flood damages.
                        1972= 31.5’   21.5‘
                        1964= 32.5’   27.7’
                        1948= 31’     31’
                        1894= 35.6’   35.6’    30 January 2013                                 16
Columbia
  River
 Treaty                 Runoff - Which Shape This Year?
      1200000                                                                 1200000
                    1 948 M AXIM UM                                                         1954 MAXIMUM
                STORAGE REQUIREMENTS                                                    STORAGE REQUIREMENTS


                                         1 0 0 5 .6 K C F S
      1000000                                                                 1000000




       800000                                                                 800000




                                                                                                   574 KCFS
       600000                                                                 600000

                                        2 9 .4 M A F
                                                                                                               9.5 MAF

       400000                                                                 400000




       200000                                                                 200000



                                 1 A PR FC S T = 10 0 M A F
                                                                                                       1 APR FCST = 103 MAF
            0                                                                       0
                  APR         MAY             JUN             JUL       AUG             APR         MAY         JUN           JUL   AUG

                                              1948
                                                                                                                1954
                                                                    30 January 2013                                                       17
                                                   Treaty Flood Control benefits in Canada
Columbia                                                              Kootenay Lake Levels (at Queens Bay)
  River
 Treaty                                                                   annual maximum & minimum

                                1765

                                                                                1761.95
                                                                                 1961
                                1760
                                                                                                     Duncan (1967) & Libby
                                                                                                    (1972) reservoirs reduce
                                                                                                    spring inflow to Kootenay
                                                                                                               Lake
                                1755
            Lake level (feet)




                                1750
                                                                             Maximum Levels



                                1745




                                1740                                                      Minimum Levels


                                                        1737.41
                                                         1944
                                1735
                                   1931   1936   1941   1946   1951   1956   1961   1966     1971     1976    1981     1986     1991   1996   2001   2006   2011
                                                                                             Year
           Note - Peak Kootenay Lake levels have been 5 to 8 ft lower since construction of the upstream
           Treaty dams (Libby and Duncan)      30 January 2013                                           18
Columbia
                  Treaty Provisions
                   for Hydropower
  River
 Treaty




            15 1/2 million acre feet of Canadian storage is operated for optimum
             power generation downstream in Canada and the US.
            Canada has Entitlement right to receive 1/2 of increased power
             generated downstream in the U.S. due to operation of Canadian Treaty
             storage.
            Power benefits from treaty storage are defined as dependable capacity
             and average annual usable energy.
            Downstream power benefits (DPB) resulting from Libby storage
             operation belong to the country where they are generated, ie U.S. or
             Canada.
            The hydroelectric operating plans provide a monthly reservoir balance
             relationship for the whole of Canadian storage, allowing Canada
             flexibility to operate individual projects for maximum Canadian benefit.

                                      30 January 2013                             19
Columbia



                    Types of Treaty studies
  River
 Treaty




            Assured Operating Plan (AOP)
              • done 6 years in advance (“planning” time horizon) … allows
                time for construction of new resources
              • downstream benefits calculated from AOP
            Detailed Operating Plan (DOP)
              • done just prior to the operating year … revises &/or confirms
                the operating rules that were agreed on in the AOP … only
                by mutual agreement
            Treaty Storage Regulation (TSR)
              • implements the DOP rules within the current operating year
                based on the actual & forecast runoff for each Columbia
                River project



                                   30 January 2013                              20
Columbia
  River
                   Determination of
               Downstream Power Benefits
 Treaty




            Determination of Downstream Power Benefits (DDPB) is
             based on the Assured Operating Plan, not the real storage
             operation.
            The Canadian Entitlement, which is one-half of the power
             benefits produced in the U.S., is calculated annually from
             the difference in Dependable Capacity and Average
             Annual Usable Energy for the 1961 U.S. Base
             Hydroelectric System, with and without the addition of
             Canadian Treaty storage.
            Using the 1961 U.S. Base System puts Canadian Treaty
             storage on a “first-added” basis ahead of coordination
             benefits from Libby and Dworshak dams and the PNW-
             California transmission intertie.
            Canadian Entitlement deliveries are not affected or
             adjusted to reflect actual or real power benefits.
                                     30 January 2013                      2113
Columbia
  River
                          Return of the
 Treaty


                       Canadian Entitlement
            The Treaty provided for Entitlement delivery to Canada at the U.S.-
             Canada boundary at a point near Oliver, B.C. unless otherwise agreed.
            Nov. 1996 Entity Agreement provides for delivery of the Entitlement to
             the Canadian border at existing points of inter-connection at Blaine and
             Selkirk and defines scheduling guide-lines.
            March 1999 agreements and exchange of Diplomatic Notes allows
             delivery and sale of Entitlement power directly within the U.S. to
             decrease Canadian transmission losses and BPA transmission costs.
            After losses U.S. Entity is currently delivering 486 average MW of
             energy at maximum hourly rates of 1296 MW capacity at the Canada-
             U.S. border.
            Transmission capacity for firm deliveries has occasionally been a
             problem in the past.

                                       30 January 2013                            22
Columbia
                                           Canadian Entitlement from the annual
  River
 Treaty                           Determination of Downstream Power Benefits (DDPB) and
           MW                   the 1964 Canadian Entitlement Exchange Agreement (CEEA)
           1600
           1500
           1400
           1300
           1200
           1100
           1000                                                                                                                     1964 forecast of
            900                                                                                                                     C.E. capacity
            800
            700
            600
            500
            400
                                               DDPB Capacity
            300
                                               CEEA Capacity
            200                                                                    1964 forecast
                                               DDPB Energy
            100                                                                    of C.E. energy
                                               CEEA Energy
              0
                  1969
                         1971
                                1973
                                       1975
                                               1977
                                                      1979
                                                             1981
                                                                    1983
                                                                           1985
                                                                                   1987
                                                                                          1989
                                                                                                 1991
                                                                                                        1993
                                                                                                               1995
                                                                                                                      1997
                                                                                                                             1999
                                                                                                                                    2001
                                                                                                                                           2003
                                                                                                                                                  2005
                                                                                                                                                         2007
                                                                                                                                                                2009
                                                                                                                                                                       2011
                                                                                                                                                                              2013
                                                                                                                                                                                     2015
                                                                                                                                                                                            2017
                                              Note: 1999 through 2003 CSPE results adjusted to take out expire of 30yr sale.
                                                                                  30 January 2013                                                                                           23
                Canadian Control / Flexibility
Columbia
  River
 Treaty




            The Treaty does not turn over control of Canadian reservoirs
             and rivers to U.S… it agrees to specific operations under
             specific conditions.
            Protocol 1 clarified that on-going Canadian flood control
             obligations after 2024 are subject to specific limits, and are only
             to be used after U.S. flood control is fully utilized.
            Protocol 7 clarified that the Treaty requirement was for a flow at
             the border, not a specific operation at each Treaty project
             (subject to maintaining Flood Control abilities at each project).
            Flood Control plans are developed to minimize flooding in both
             countries; Power plans are developed to optimize generation in
             both countries.
            The Mica project was built 5 MAF larger than required under the
             Treaty. This increased the ability to “flex” water within Canada
             to address domestic power, social and environmental needs.
                                     30 January 2013                               24
Columbia



                Treaty Benefits to Canada
  River
 Treaty




            Payment of US$64.4 million (1968 - 1973$) for ½ of U.S. Flood
             Control Benefits (avoided damages) for 60 years.
            50% of U.S. downstream power benefits (as agreed to 5 years
             in advance) = CAN Entitlement.
            30-year sale of CAN Entitlement for $254.4 million (1964$)
             funded the majority of the Treaty dam / reservoir costs.
            Additional payments for early completion of projects (~$7M).
            Flood control protection in Canada / B.C.
            Stream flow regulation and developed head at Mica provided
             low cost sources of electric power.
            Libby regulation increased electricity generation on the
             Kootenay River.
            MacLean's Magazine (Canadian version of “Time”) named the
             Columbia River Treaty 1 of the 25 greatest events to shape
             Canada in its first 100 years (i.e. to 1967).


                                   30 January 2013                           25
Columbia



                      Treaty Costs to Canada
  River
 Treaty




            2300 people along the Arrow Lakes, Koocanusa, Duncan and
             Kinbasket reservoirs were displaced (with market-based
             compensation).
            600 square kilometres of high value valley bottom land was flooded
             beneath 412 km of new reservoirs.
            Numerous First Nations archeological and burial sites were submerged
             and/or degraded by erosion.
            Federal – Provincial relations were seriously strained by Treaty
             negotiations (now fully corrected).
            On-going impacts from changing water levels, include:
               •   Reduced recreation opportunities.
               •   Loss of key wildlife habitat.
               •   Loss of fish habitat; Trapping of nutrients behind dams.
               •   Increased dust storms around reservoirs.
               •   Increased transportation problems.
               •   Reduced farming and forestry activities.
            Political Tensions: Residents in the region felt they carried the bulk of
             the Treaty costs, but did not fairly share in the Treaty benefits.


                                          30 January 2013                                26
Columbia



                              Treaty Term
  River
 Treaty




           The Treaty has no end date. Either government has the
           option to cancel the Treaty after 60 years (2024) with
           10 years’ advance notice. With termination:
             Mica, Duncan, Arrow may continue to operate subject
                to the 1909 Boundary Waters Treaty
             Libby may continue to operate for the useful life of the
                project
             Canada must provide some flood control operation for
              the U.S. as long as the need exists and projects exist, but
              U.S. must pay Canada’s operating costs and power
              losses
             Canada may continue any Kootenay Diversions
                                  30 January 2013                           27
Columbia
                    Reasons for
  River
 Treaty
                   Treaty Success
            Natural Synergies / Geography: The U.S. system included large
             generating projects, but relatively poor or expensive storage
             projects. The Canadian part of the basin presented a number of
             very attractive storage sites in the narrow and deep valleys.
             Win – win arrangements were therefore available.
            Technical Input: Engineers were brought into the issue very
             early on. Technical principles agreed to by IJC engineers
             helped to drive the political process (not the other way around).
            Mandated Agencies: Organizations were in place on both sides
             of the border that cut through political divisions: BC Province on
             the Canadian side; Corps (for basin-wide FC) and BPA (for
             basin-wide power) on the U.S. side; the IJC on both sides.
            Historical Relationship: The U.S. and Canada have a long
             history of addressing issues in a peaceful and constructive
             manner.
                                    30 January 2013                               28
Columbia



                    Future of the Treaty
  River
 Treaty




            Either the U.S. or Canada has the option of terminating many
             aspects of the Treaty as early as Sep 2024, with a minimum of
             10 years notice. Called Upon FC continues for life of projects.
            Many societal values have changed since the Treaty was
             finalized in 1964:
               •   Fisheries interests and legal support is greatly increased.
               •   Certain fish stocks have dropped dramatically since 1960’s.
               •   First Nations / Aboriginal issues are much more visible.
               •   Many more people live on or near the Columbia River.
               •   Environmental issues are much more prominent.
            Power and Flood Control remain very important to modern
             society, however, and the Treaty has successful delivered these
             while also addressing other issues.
            Personal belief that the coordinated win-win approach will
             continue over the long term.

                                       30 January 2013                           29
Columbia



                Canada – B.C. Agreement (1963)
  River
 Treaty




            Signed prior to the ratification of the Columbia River Treaty
            Effectively transfers the benefits and obligations of the
             Treaty to BC.
            Nation to nation representation remains with Canadian
             Government

           Under this agreement Canada is required to :
            Obtain the concurrence of British Columbia before
             terminating the Treaty.
            If requested by British Columbia, endeavour to obtain the
             agreement of the United States with respect to any proposal
             relating to the CRT which Canada and British Columbia
             agree is in the public interest.


                                   30 January 2013                           30
Columbia



                  CRT2014 Review Roles
  River
 Treaty




            The government of B.C. is leading the initiative

            Government of Canada is working closely with the
             Province

            BC Hydro is conducting joint technical studies with the
             U.S. Entity

            CBT will be an important partner in the consultation
             process.


                                30 January 2013                        31
Columbia



                            BC Hydro
  River
 Treaty




           Governance:
            BC Crown Corporation that reports to the B.C.
             Minister of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources
            BC Hydro's Board of Directors is appointed by the
             B.C. Government
            BC Hydro is an agent of the Crown (i.e. B.C.
             government)

           Canadian Entity:
            BC Hydro was appointed by the Canadian
             Parliament as the Canadian Entity responsible for
             construction and operation of the three Canadian
             Treaty Dams.

                              30 January 2013                    32
Columbia



              Columbia Basin Trust (CBT)
  River
 Treaty




           Governance:
            Crown Corporation that reports to the B.C. Ministry of
             Community and Rural Development.

           History:
            Created in 1995 to help address regional impacts of Treaty
            In recognition of the downstream benefits, CBT received an
              endowment from the Province of B.C. on behalf of Basin
              residents.
            Total provincial funding has been $353 million.

           Purpose:
            Invest capital and manage the assets of CBT, and spend the
             income earned from investments to deliver benefits to the
             residents of the Canadian Columbia Basin.
                                    30 January 2013                       33
Columbia



                            First Nations
  River
 Treaty




            First Nations who assert aboriginal title and rights
             within the Canadian portion of the Columbia Basin
             include:

              •   Ktunaxa Nation Council
              •   Okanagan Nation Alliance
              •   Secwepemc Nation comprised of Northern
                  Shuswap Tribal Council (NSTC), Shuswap Nation
                  Tribal Council (SNTC) and 3 Independent First
                  Nations


                                 30 January 2013                    34
Columbia
           First Nations Territories
  River
 Treaty




                  30 January 2013      35

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:0
posted:3/30/2013
language:Unknown
pages:35