Columbia River Treaty Review. PNWA Summer Meeting LaConner, WA June 24, 2013

Transcription

1 PNWA Summer Meeting LaConner, WA June 24,

2 Treaty Basics Purpose of 2014/2024 Treaty Review Mechanics of Treaty Review Summary of Iteration 2 Navigation Impact Assessment Stakeholder involvement and input Next steps 2

3 Originates in Canada Flows over 1,240 miles through h 2 countries 259,000 square mile drainage area 15% of basin area in Canada with 38% average annual flow from Canada. Over 60 large dams and reservoirs owned and operated by many different entities for multiple purposes. 3

4 Flood risk management Hydropower Fish and wildlife Navigation Water supply Recreation 4

5 An agreement to manage water for flood risk management and power Between Canada and the U.S. Implemented in 1964 Relating to International Cooperation in Water Resource Development in the Columbia River Basin Treaty monument at Libby Dam (Montana) 5

6 Capture the spring snowmelt in Canada to refill the reservoirs and manage peak flood flows along the Columbia and specifically at Portland, OR. Vanport, OR Release water from Canadian Treaty reservoirs for power production at all Columbia River dams from Mica in British Columbia through Bonneville, east of Portland 1948 flood devastated homes, farms, and levees from Trail, British iih Columbia to Astoria, Oregon 6

7 Kcfs is a flow rate measured by 1000 cubic feet of water per second 7

8 Treaty Duncan, Arrow, Earliest analyses Mica and Libby possible date to begins dams completed terminate Major flooding advances regional discussions Treaty ratified by both countries Latest date for 10 year notice if either country desires termination by

9 Canadian storage 51% of total basin capacity Infrastructure and governance Power coordination agreements 9

10 Canada must operate 15.5 million acre feet of Treaty storage to optimize power generation downstream in both nations. U.S. must deliver power to Canada equal to onehlf half the estimated US U.S. power benefits from the operation of Canadian Treaty storage, This Canadian Entitlement currently worth about $250 $350 million annually. British Columbia owns Canadian Entitlement Five Mid Columbia non federal hydro projects deliver 27.5% of Canadian Entitlement to BPA for delivery to B.C. 10

11 Canada obligated to operate 8.95 million acre feet of storage to help eliminate or reduce flood damages in both Canada and the US U.S. Canada must also operate all additional storage in these dams on an on call basis (as requested and paid for). This has never been used to date. U.S. paid Canada $64.4 million for expected future flood damages prevented in U.S. US from 1968 through h U.S. purchase of assured flood flood storage expires in Portland 1996 an acre-foot is 1 acre of water to a depth of 12 inches 11

12 CANADIAN GOVERNMENT Ministry of Foreign Affairs & Trade Ministry Natural Resources BRITISH COLUMBIA GOVERNMENT TREATY UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT Department of State Department of Army Department of Energy CANADIAN ENTITY UNITED STATES ENTITY U.S. Entity: Bonneville Power Administration Administrator U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Northwestern Division Engineer Canadian Entity: B.C. Hydro, a province owned electric utility Province of British Columbia (disposal of Canadian Entitlement) 12

13 While Treaty has no specified end date, either nation can unilaterally terminate most provisions as early as September 2024 with 10 years written notice is the latest date for either nation to declare its intentions to terminate at the earliest possible date of Important changes in flood risk management provisions in

14 Enable the U.S. Entity to provide an informed and regionally supported recommendation to the U.S. Department of State by end of Determine if the United States better off with the Treaty or without the Treaty 14

15 A National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process An Endangered Species Act (ESA) process The development of a detailed tild operational plan or implementation plan for the Columbia Basin 15

16 The world has changed since Opportunity to modernize the Treaty to reflect regional values and priorities. Opportunity to re evaluate the value of Canadian Entitlement in terms of today s power benefits. 16

17 What are the possible impacts and benefits from different Treaty futures on: Water supply Navigation Recreation How might these be improved or hindered with a modified Treaty? What if Treaty terminates? Can the Treaty be modified to be resilient and adaptable to future conditions such as climate change? 17

18 How might the Treaty be changed to better reflect ecosystem needs? What are impacts and benefits of various Treaty futures on ecosystems in the Basin? How would these impacts and benefits change if the Treaty were modified or terminated? 18

19 Changes in 2024 In Treaty Review Assured flood control procedures end in 2024 with What is the level of flood risk certainty for the US U.S. when this or without the Treaty. assured protection expires? The U.S. must call upon Canada for flood management assistance and pay associated costs. The U.S. must make effective use of its reservoirs before calling on Canada. How often will we have to call upon Canada for flood risk protection? How much will it cost? How effective use impact U.S. reservoirs and ecosystems? 19

20 Current Treaty U.S. delivers power in exchange for water storage in Canadian reservoirs. Currently 536 average annual mw; $ million per year. Power payments are higher h than actual benefits produced in the U.S. today. Mid Columbia utilities deliver 27.5% of power. Remainder delivered by BPA s regional electricity customers. In Treaty Review What are the actual power benefits to the U.S. from the operation of the Canadian projects? Is the Canadian Entitlement a true reflection of the power benefits resulting from Treaty operation? If not, what is a more equitable payment? What should the Canadian Entitlement look like post 2024? 20

21 Understand Impacts and benefits of current Treaty Today s regional needs and priorities. Possible future needs & priorities Ask Can the current Treaty meet those needs? Does the Treaty need to be changed? Modify current Treaty or develop new one? Analyze & Answer Collect information Evaluate policies, options and potential results Assess impacts Provide Informed, regionally supported recommendation 21

22 Advance 3 alternatives from Iteration 1 for full impact assessment 1A TC: Treaty Continues with 450 kcfs flood flow 2B TC: Treaty Continues with 600 kcfs flood flow 1A TT: Treaty Terminates with 450 kcfs flood flow RC CC (Reference Case, Current Condition) This is how the system is now under current Treaty provisions and current US U.S. operations All alternatives and components are compared to the current condition 22

23 Ecosystem E1 Natural Spring Hydrograph Store and release water from U.S. and Canadian reservoirs to meet a natural flow based on the type of water year, no system flood control, no operation specifically for power E2 Reservoirs as Natural Lakes Generally hold reserves full and pass inflows through, no system flood control, no operation specifically for power Hydropower H1 Optimize Canadian and U.S. hydropower system Optimize i Canadian and US U.S. hydropower systems using current projects H2 Optimize Canadian and U.S. power system with Biological Opinion operations included Including fish operations, optimize the Canadian and U.S. hydropower system using current system projects 23

24 Flood risk F1 Full use of authorized storage Maximize use of authorized U.S. storage (full draft as needed) F2 No Called Upon flood storage No use of Canadian storage for U.S. flood risk management F3 Modify U.S. levees to perform to authorized levels Evaluate ability to reduce U.S. flood risk if all U.S. levees perform to authorized level 24

25 Ecosystem based function Water quality Resident fish Anadromous fish Estuary Wildlife Cultural resources Flood risk management Hydropower Water supply Recreation Navigation Sediment and toxics Climate change 25

26 Compared relative frequency of flow thresholds for Treaty alternatives against current conditions Flow thresholds that impact commercial navigation High flows at Snake and Columbia River dams Low flows on Columbia River below Bonneville Used input from commercial navigation stakeholders (December 2012 and April 2013) 26

27 Very little difference in the alternatives and components for navigation on the lower Snake River. For the lower Columbia River, Alternatives that attempt to create higher spring/summer flows for ecosystem (E 1 and E 2) generally resulted in increase in the average number of days that lower Columbia River high and low flow thresholds are exceeded. If the Treaty is terminated (2A TT) after 2024, loss of proportional draft of Canadian reservoirs for hydropower resulted in increase in the average number of days that lower Columbia River flows fall below the low flow threshold. 27

28 Small changes in river flow can cause large changes in Sediment transport 2A TC & 2A TT cause moderate increases in erosion relative to the RC CC for the Federal Navigation Channel (FNC), and mixed erosion and deposition in off channel areas E1 & E2b cause large increases in erosion in FNC, and larger increases in erosion and deposition in off channel areas relative to RC CC Relative to RC CC, all alternatives and components can cause: Erosion, resulting in sediment grain size getting larger Deposition, resulting in sediments getting smaller, like in side channels and bays Active sediment transport in the FNC, resulting li in growth of large sand waves on the bottom that may require dredging 28

29 Mode ling and Docum mentation Iteration 3 Modeling Drafting Technical Appendices (60%) Drafting Technical Appendices Drafting Technical Summary (500 page) Review and finalize all technical material Recommen ndation Development and Review (2) (4) Drafting and Review Finalization and Review of Recommendation (5 page) and Recommendation Recommendation Report (50 page) and Recommendation (Government and Internal Review) Report (1a) (1b) (3) Development of Development of Public Release and Comment Working Draft of Working Draft of Period of Draft Recommendation Regional Regional Recommendation and Recommendation Report Recommendation (Stakeholders and (Regional Briefings and Workshops) (SRT) SRT) May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec SRT meetings 29

30 Release Working Draft Recommendation for Stakeholder Review and Comment Targeted for release on June 27 Basis for further regional discussions with stakeholders and sovereigns Work will continue to develop and refine the draft recommendation through summer

31 Complete Iteration 3 Hydroregulation Modeling by Mid July for 3 final Alternatives Integrated Ecosystem Based Function (3E) Planned Storage for Flood Risk and Flow Augmentation with 1.5 to 2 maf storage in Canadian Reservoirs (3PRS ) Planned Storage for Flood Risk and Flow Augmentation with ih with ih 4.4 maf storage in Canadian Reservoirs (3PRS 4.4) Impact Assessment by end of August Incorporate Iteration 3 results and findings into the draft recommendation 31

32 Sovereign Review Team (SRT) 4 States t 15 Tribes (5 representatives) US Entity Federal Agencies SRT 4 Sovereign Technical Team Technical leads and staff representing SRT members Tribes 11 Federal Agencies Each team has been meeting at least monthly ysince Fall 2010 Influence and advise on every aspect of Treaty Review States 32

33 Make sure we are accountable and transparent Frequent involvement opportunities Over 70 meetings, presentations and discussions with a wide variety of interests throughout the four state region U.S. Department of State Monitoring and engaged gg in Treaty Review Interagency Policy Committee (IPC) Regional federal agency coordination Congressional delegation 33

34 Ongoing Treaty implementation Separate but parallel l Treaty Review process Communication on possibilities within current Treaty framework The ultimate decision to terminate certain provisions or pursue negotiations to modify the Treaty rests with the U.S. Department of State and the White House. 34

35 Visit review.gov Read Treaty Review fact sheets Call Bonneville Power Administration, Corps of Engineers,