DOCSLIB.ORG

Amisk Hydroelectric Project Executive Summary

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Amisk Hydroelectric Project Executive Summary PROJECT DESCRIPTION AMISK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Submitted to: Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA) October 2015 Amisk Hydroelectric Project Description of a Designated Project October 2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. General Information and Contacts ....................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Nature of Project ........................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Proponent Information ................................................................................................................. 1 1.3 Consultation Undertaken .............................................................................................................. 1 1.4 Regulatory Requirements ............................................................................................................. 1 1.5 Environmental Studies .................................................................................................................. 2 2. Project Information ............................................................................................................................... 3 2.1 General Description, Context and Objectives ............................................................................... 3 Project Context and Objectives ............................................................................................. 3 General Description of Project Components ........................................................................ 4 2.2 Project Activities ........................................................................................................................... 6 Construction .......................................................................................................................... 6 Operation .............................................................................................................................. 8 Decommissioning .................................................................................................................. 9 2.3 Emissions, Discharges and Waste ................................................................................................. 9 Atmospheric Emissions ......................................................................................................... 9 Liquid Discharges .................................................................................................................. 9 Waste Disposal .................................................................................................................... 10 3. Project Location .................................................................................................................................. 11 3.1 Description of Project Location and Site Plan ............................................................................. 11 Project Coordinates............................................................................................................. 11 Site Plan ............................................................................................................................... 11 Figure I: Project Overview ................................................................................................................... 12 3.2 Land and Water Use .................................................................................................................... 14 Zoning Designations ............................................................................................................ 14 Legal Land Descriptions....................................................................................................... 15 3.3 Relevant Planning Documents used for Consultation Purposes ................................................. 16 3.4 Use of Traditional Lands for Project Development ..................................................................... 16 4. Federal Involvement ........................................................................................................................... 17 4.1 Federal Financial Support ........................................................................................................... 17 4.2 Use of Federal Lands for Project ................................................................................................. 17 4.3 Federal Regulatory Requirements .............................................................................................. 17 5. Environmental Effects ......................................................................................................................... 18 5.1 Air, Noise and Climate ................................................................................................................. 18 Air Quality ........................................................................................................................... 18 Noise ................................................................................................................................... 18 Climate ................................................................................................................................ 18 Potential Project Effects on Air Quality, Noise and Climate ............................................... 18 5.2 Geology, Terrain and Soils .......................................................................................................... 19 Geology ............................................................................................................................... 19 AHP Development Corporation Page i Amisk Hydroelectric Project Description of a Designated Project October 2015 Terrain ................................................................................................................................. 19 Soils ..................................................................................................................................... 19 Potential Project Effects on Geology, Terrain and Soils ...................................................... 20 5.3 Vegetation ................................................................................................................................... 20 Potential Project Effects on Vegetation and Wetlands ...................................................... 20 5.4 Water .......................................................................................................................................... 21 Ice Processes ....................................................................................................................... 21 Surface Water Flows ........................................................................................................... 22 Sedimentation and Morphology ......................................................................................... 23 Water and Sediment Quality............................................................................................... 26 Wildlife ................................................................................................................................ 27 Aquatic Resources ............................................................................................................... 28 5.5 Changes to Fish, Fish Habitat and Wildlife under Federal Responsibility ................................... 31 Fish and Fish Habitat ........................................................................................................... 32 Migratory Birds ................................................................................................................... 32 Changes to Environment on Federal Lands in another Province ........................................ 32 5.6 Effects on Aboriginal Peoples ..................................................................................................... 32 Effects on Health ................................................................................................................. 32 Effects on Socio-economic Conditions ................................................................................ 32 Effects on Physical and Cultural Heritage Effects ............................................................... 33 Effects on the Current Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes ................... 33 Historical Resources ............................................................................................................ 33 6. Proponent Engagement and Consultation with Aboriginal Groups ................................................... 35 6.1 Aboriginal groups that may be interested in, or potentially affected by, the Project ................ 35 6.2 Engagement or consultation activities carried out to date with Aboriginal groups. .................. 35 6.3 Consultation Plan ........................................................................................................................ 36 6.4 Treaty Rights ............................................................................................................................... 36 6.5 Overlap of Project Area with Traditional Land Use under Treaty Rights .................................... 36 7. Consultation with The Public and Other Parties (other than Aboriginal consultation included above) 37 7.1 Key Comments and Concerns from Stakeholders......................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • DEHCHO - GREAT RIVER: the State of Science in the Mackenzie Basin (1960-1985) Contributing Authors: Corinne Schuster-Wallace, Kate Cave, and Chris Metcalfe
    DEHCHO - GREAT RIVER: The State of Science in the Mackenzie Basin (1960-1985) Contributing Authors: Corinne Schuster-Wallace, Kate Cave, and Chris Metcalfe Acknowledgements: Thank you to those who responded to the survey and who provided insight to where documents and data may exist: Katey Savage, Daniyal Abdali, and Dave Rosenberg for his library. We also thank Al Weins and Robert W. Sandford for providing their photographs. Additionally, thanks go to: David Jessiman (AANDC), Canadian Hydrographic Service, Centre for Indigenous Environmental Resources, Government of the Northwest Territories, Erin Kelly, Dave Schindler, Environment Canada, GEOSCAN, Libraries and Archives Canada, Mackenzie River Basin Board, Freshwater Institute (Winnipeg) – Mike Rennie, Waves, and World Wildlife Fund. Research funding for this project was provided by The Gordon Foundation. Suggested Citation: Schuster-Wallce, C., Cave, K., and Metcalfe, C. 2016. Dehcho - Great River: The State of Science in the Mackenzie Basin (1960-1985). United Nations University Institute for Water, Environment and Health, Hamilton, Canada. Front Cover Photo: Western Mackenzie Delta and Richardson Mountains, 1972. Photo: Chris Metcalfe Layout Design: Praem Mehta (UNU-INWEH) Disclaimer: The designations employed and presentations of material throughout this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the ©United Nations University, 2016 part of the United Nations University (UNU) concerning legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its ISBN: 978-92-808-6070-2 frontiers or boundaries. The views expressed in this publication are those of the respective authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the UNU.
    [Show full text]
  • Site C Business Case Summary (Updated May 2014)
    SITE C CLEAN ENERGY PROJECT: BUSINESS CASE SUMMARY UPDATED MAY 2014 A HERITAGE BUILT FOR GENERATIONS Clean, abundant electricity has been key to British Some of the projects built during those years include: Columbia’s economic prosperity and quality of life • 1967: Completion of the W.A.C. Bennett Dam for generations. • 1968: Hugh Keenleyside Dam constructed From the time BC Hydro was created more than • 1969: The fourth and fifth generating units at G.M. 50 years ago, it undertook some of the most Shrum Generating Station are placed into service ambitious hydroelectric construction projects in the world. These projects were advanced under • 1970: The first 500-kilovolt transmission system the historic “Two Rivers Policy” that sought to is complete harness the hydroelectric potential of the Peace and • 1973: The Mica Dam is declared operational Columbia rivers and build the provincial economy. • 1979: The first generating unit at the Seven Mile Over time, BC Hydro’s hydroelectric capacity grew generating station is placed into service from about 500 megawatts (MW) in 1961 to several • 1980: The tenth and final generating unit at times that in the late G.M. Shrum Generating Station begins operation 1980s. Generations • 1980: The Peace Canyon Dam and Generating of residential, Station are completed commercial and industrial customers • 1984: The Cathedral Square Substation opens in in B.C. have downtown Vancouver benefited from • 1985: The Revelstoke Dam and Generation Station these historical is officially opened investments in hydroelectric B.C. became recognized as an attractive place power. to invest – in large part due to the abundance of affordable electricity.
    [Show full text]
  • The Mackenzie River Basin
    ROSENBERG INTERNATIONAL FORUM: THE MACKENZIE RIVER BASIN JUNE 2013 REPORT OF THE ROSENBERG INTERNATIONAL FORUM’S WORKSHOP ON TRANSBOUNDARY RELATIONS IN THE MACKENZIE RIVER BASIN The Rosenberg International Forum on Water Policy On Behalf of The Walter and Duncan Gordon Foundation ROSENBERG INTERNATIONAL FORUM: THE MACKENZIE RIVER BASIN June 2013 REPORT OF THE ROSENBERG INTERNATIONAL FORUM’S WORKSHOP ON TRANSBOUNDARY RELATIONS IN THE MACKENZIE RIVER BASIN 4 Rosenberg International Forum The MACKENZIE RIVER BASIN The Mackenzie River Basin 5 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE EXISTING SCIENCE & SUMMARY SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE: 06 22 WORRISOME SIGNALS AND TRENDS INTRODUCTION CANADA’s COLD 07 AMAZON: 27 THE MACKENZIE THE STRUCTURE SYSTEM AS A UNIQUE & OBJECTIVES OF GLOBAL RESOURCE 08 THE FORUM NEW KNOWLEDGE SETTING NEEDED THE STAGE: 29 10 THE MACKENZIE SYSTEM MANAGING THE MACKENZIE THE MACKENZIE 30 SYSTEM: 18 THE EFFECTS CONCLUSIONS OF COLD ON HYDRO-CLIMATIC 35 CONDITIONS 38 REFERENCES 6 Rosenberg International Forum EXECUTIVE SUMMARY he Mackenzie River is the largest north- between the freshwater flows of the Mackenzie governance structure for the Basin. flowing river in North America. It is the and Arctic Ocean circulation. These are One major recommendation is that the longest river in Canada and it drains a thought to contribute in important ways to the Mackenzie River Basin Board (MRBB), T watershed that occupies nearly 20 per stabilization of the regional and global climate. originally created by the Master Agreement, be cent of the country. The river is big and complex. In this respect, the Mackenzie River Basin must reinvigorated as an independent body charged It is also jurisdictionally intricate with tributary be viewed as part of the global commons.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Background
    Site C Clean Energy Project Environmental Impact Statement Volume 2: Assessment Methodology and Environmental Effects Assessment Section 11: Environmental Background 1 11 ENVIRONMENTAL BACKGROUND 2 This section of the EIS provides a description of the environment in the vicinity of the 3 Project. It begins with a summary of previous hydroelectric development on the Peace 4 River. Baseline conditions on land, in the water and air are described and predicted 5 changes in the following technical areas are presented: 6 • Geology, Terrain, and Soils 7 • Land Status, Tenure, and Project Requirements 8 • Surface Water Regime 9 • Water Quality 10 • Groundwater Regime 11 • Thermal and Ice Regime 12 • Fluvial Geomorphology and Sediment Transport Regime 13 • Methylmercury 14 • Microclimate 15 • Air Quality 16 • Noise and Vibration 17 • Electric and Magnetic Fields 18 The baseline information and predicted changes described in this section were used in 19 the effects assessment on VCs, as relevant. 11-1 Site C Clean Energy Project Environmental Impact Statement Volume 2: Assessment Methodology and Environmental Effects Assessment Section 11: Environmental Background Previous Developments 1 11.1 Previous Developments 2 The environmental conditions in the Peace River watershed have been influenced by a 3 range of ongoing anthropogenic developments and environmental factors, both prior to 4 and following the development of upstream hydroelectric facilities. Understanding 5 environmental changes, in particular those associated with previous hydroelectric 6 development, provides context for the environmental assessment of the Project. The 7 following sections describe the existing hydroelectric facilities in the Peace River 8 watershed, the environmental changes that are understood to be caused by these 9 hydroelectric developments, and the key follow-up programs that have been initiated to 10 manage those environmental changes due to hydroelectric development.
    [Show full text]
  • BC Hydro & Power Authority
    CAARS B.C. Hydro Site C Report - May 3, 1983 1 PART ONE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS CHAPTER I - REPORT SUMMARY l.0 INTRODUCTION In September l980, Hydro applied to the government of British Columbia for an Energy Project Certificate to allow it to build a hydroelectric generating station and related transmission facilities. The hydro station, known as Site C, would be located approximately 7 km southeast of Fort St. John on the Peace River (see Figures l and 2). The government referred Hydro's application to the B.C. Utilities Commission under Part 2 of the new B.C. Utilities Commission Act for review and recommendations. The terms of reference for this review call for an examination of the project's justification, design, impacts and other relevant matters. They specifically direct the Commission to recommend whether an Energy Project Certificate should be issued, and if so, what conditions should be attached. The Commission held formal, local community and special native hearings to hear and examine evidence on all aspects of the project. Over 70 panels of witnesses made presentations during the formal hearings and over l00 individuals made presentations during the local community and special native hearings. The Commission's conclusions, based on the evidence and submissions, are summarized in this chapter. 2 FIGURE l 3 FIGURE 2 4 2.0 PROJECT JUSTIFICATION 2.l Electrical Energy Demand Hydro's latest (September l982) "probable" forecast of electricity demand shows Hydro's load growing from 32,359 GWh in its fiscal year l98l/l982 to 5l,l50 GWh by l992/l993, an average annual growth rate of 4.3%.
    [Show full text]
  • Value of Pumped Storage in British Columbia
    VALUE OF PUMPED STORAGE SYSTEMS IN BRITISH COLUMBIA by Jonathan van Groll B.A.Sc., The University of British Columbia (Vancouver), 2016 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF APPLIED SCIENCE in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE AND POSTDOCTORAL STUDIES (Civil Engineering) THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Vancouver) June 2018 © Jonathan van Groll, 2018 The following individuals certify that they have read, and recommend to the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies for acceptance, the thesis entitled: Value of Pumped Storage Systems in British Columbia submitted by Jonathan van Groll in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Applied Science in Civil Engineering Examining Committee: Ziad Shawwash, Civil Engineering Supervisor Vladan Prodanovic, Chemical and Biological Engineering Additional Examiner ii Abstract The need to establish electricity storage in British Columbia is brought by a regional and global shift towards the development of renewable electricity generation. The integration of renewable sources of power is challenging for system operators due to their inability to be dispatched. Energy storage enables a time lag between generation, transmission, and consumption. The unique characteristics of British Columbia, namely abundance of water and mountainous terrain, are well suited for the development of Pumped Hydro Storage (PHS). The goal of this thesis is to investigate the value of the integration of a PHS plant in the BC Hydro system at a high level of planning. BC Hydro’s Generalized Optimization Model, used for medium to long term planning, was modified to include PHS plants. The benefits of the PHS plant were considered as the incremental increase of the objective function of this optimization model compared to a base case.
    [Show full text]
  • Construction Safety Management Plan
    Construction Safety Management Plan Site C Clean Energy Project Revision 2: March 22, 2017 Construction Safety Management Plan Site C Clean Energy Project TABLE OF CONTENTS REVISION HISTORY ...................................................................................................... 4 GLOSSARY .................................................................................................................... 5 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 7 1.1 BC Hydro ................................................................................................... 7 1.2 Project Overview and Description .............................................................. 7 1.3 BC Hydro Safety Expectations ................................................................... 8 1.4 Construction Safety Management Plan (CSMP) ........................................ 8 1.5 CSMP Review and Revision ...................................................................... 8 2.0 CONTRACTOR SITE SAFETY MANAGEMENT PLANS (CSSMPS) ................... 8 2.1 CSSMP Content ........................................................................................ 8 2.2 BC Hydro Review of CSSMPs ................................................................... 8 3.0 SAFETY TRAINING: ORIENTATION, TRAINING AND TAILBOARD MEETINGS9 3.1 Safety Training Overview ........................................................................... 9 3.2 Pre-Work Orientation Meetings ...............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Project Description
    PROJECT DESCRIPTION SITE C CLEAN ENERGY PROJECT May 2011 333 Dunsmuir Street Email: [email protected] Vancouver BC V6B 5R3 bchydro.com/sitec Toll-free: 1 877 217-0777 DRAFT – CONFIDENTIAL DOCUMENT – FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY Site C Clean Energy Project Description Report May 2011 PREFACE British Columbia Hydro and Power Authority (BC Hydro) proposes to develop a dam and hydroelectric generating station on the Peace River in northeast British Columbia (B.C.), referred to as the Site C Clean Energy Project (the “Project”). The Project would be the third dam and hydroelectric generating station on the Peace River in B.C., downstream of BC Hydro‟s existing generating facilities at G.M. Shrum and Peace Canyon and the respective Williston and Dinosaur reservoirs. The Project is subject to a federal environmental assessment and review process under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA). It is also subject to a provincial environmental assessment and review process under the B.C. Environmental Assessment Act (BCEAA). The Canada-British Columbia Agreement for Environmental Assessment Cooperation (2004) provides for a harmonized provincial and federal review when a project is subject to review pursuant to both BCEAA and CEAA. BC Hydro is filing this Project Description Report with both the federal Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEA Agency) and the British Columbia Environmental Assessment Office (BCEAO) to initiate the environmental assessment and review process for the Project. Key steps in the environmental assessment and review process will involve the identification and evaluation of potential effects associated with the construction and operation of the Project, the development of recommended mitigation measures that may be used to avoid or minimize negative effects and the development of measures to enhance the positive effects of the Project.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix O Fish and Fish Habitat Technical Data Report
    SITE C CLEAN ENERGY PROJECT FISH AND FISH HABITAT TECHNICAL DATA REPORT Prepared for BC Hydro Power and Authority 333 Dunsmuir Street Vancouver, BC V6B 5R3 By Mainstream Aquatics Ltd. 6956 Roper Road Edmonton, AB T6B 3H9 Tel: (780) 440-1334 Fax: (780) 440-1252 December 2012 Document No. 12002F Citation: Mainstream Aquatics Ltd. 2012. Mainstream Aquatics Ltd. 2012. Site C Clean Energy Project – Fish and Fish Habitat Technical Data Report. Prepared for BC Hydro Site C Project, Corporate Affairs Report No. 12002F: 239 p. Site C Clean Energy Project Volume 2 Appendix O Fish and Fish Habitat Technical Data Report EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of the fish and fish habitat technical data report is to synthesize and interpret fish and fish habitat baseline information collected from the technical study area in order to understand the ecology of the fish community potentially affected by the Site C Clean Energy Project (the Project). This understanding will be the foundation of the Environmental Impact Statement in regards to fish and fish habitat. The specific objectives of this report are to identify and review relevant information sources, provide a concise summary that describes fish and fish habitats, and interpret the information in order to understand the potential effect to fish and fish habitat by the Project. The technical study area used for the information synthesis includes the mainstem Peace River from Peace Canyon Dam to the Many Islands Area located 121 km downstream of the provincial boundary. Information from outside the technical study area is incorporated into the review when appropriate. This includes information from upstream (i.e., Dinosaur Reservoir) and downstream Peace River and tributaries in Alberta (i.e., Many Islands to Vermillion Chutes).
    [Show full text]
  • Commentary NO
    Institut C.D. HOWE Institute commentary NO. 528 Dammed If Yo u Do: How Sunk Costs Are Dragging Canadian Electricity Ratepayers Underwater Canada has three mega-projects underway to generate hydroelectricity. But a comparison of their costs relative to the alternatives raises the question of whether it’s time to pull the plug on them. A.J. Goulding with research support from Jarome Leslie The C.D. Howe Institute’s Commitment to Quality, Independence and Nonpartisanship About The The C.D. Howe Institute’s reputation for quality, integrity and Authors nonpartisanship is its chief asset. A.J. Goulding Its books, Commentaries and E-Briefs undergo a rigorous two-stage is President of London review by internal staff, and by outside academics and independent Economics International experts. The Institute publishes only studies that meet its standards for LLC (“LEI”). He has analytical soundness, factual accuracy and policy relevance. It subjects its advised provincially owned review and publication process to an annual audit by external experts. hydro companies, IPP associations, and consumer As a registered Canadian charity, the C.D. Howe Institute accepts groups on Canadian and donations to further its mission from individuals, private and public international electricity organizations, and charitable foundations. It accepts no donation market related issues. that stipulates a predetermined result or otherwise inhibits the independence of its staff and authors. The Institute requires that its Jarome Leslie authors disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest of which is a Senior Consultant they are aware. Institute staff members are subject to a strict conflict with LEI. of interest policy.
    [Show full text]
  • Site C Clean Energy Project: Greenhouse Gases Technical Report
    Site C Clean Energy Project: Greenhouse Gases Technical Report Prepared for: British Columbia Hydro and Power Authority 333 Dunsmuir Street Vancouver, BC V6B 5R3 Prepared by: Stantec Consulting Ltd. 845 Prospect Street Fredericton, NB E3B 2T7 Project No. 121810787 December 6, 2012 Lead Author: Michael Murphy, PhD, P.Eng. (Stantec Consulting Ltd.) Contributors: Jean-Michel DeVink, PhD (sub-consultant) Joe Harriman, PhD (Stantec Consulting Ltd.) Karen Gillam (Stantec Consulting Ltd.) Christina Flogeras, EIT (Stantec Consulting Ltd.) Orasa Webber, MScE (Stantec Consulting Ltd.) SITE C CLEAN ENERGY PROJECT: GREENHOUSE GASES TECHNICAL REPORT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY British Columbia Hydro and Power Authority (BC Hydro) commissioned Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec) to update the preliminary report on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (Jacques Whitford Axys, 2009) for the proposed Site C Clean Energy Project (Project), to be located on the Peace River, British Columbia (BC). The Project design has been updated since the preliminary assessment, for example with updated information on clearing, sediment processes, and construction material requirements, which warrant updating of the GHG emissions analysis. The GHG emissions were estimated for the area influenced by the hydroelectric dam and reservoir, both prior to and after flooding, and for construction phase activities. Construction emissions were quantified by converting estimated fuel and electricity consumption to the corresponding GHG emissions, and by quantifying life cycle emissions associated with construction materials such as steel, copper, and cement. The three primary GHGs, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O), were assessed. Operating GHG emissions, including emissions from the reservoir and land clearing activities, were quantified using three separate methods of analysis, following methods described by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2003).
    [Show full text]
  • Site C Dam Risks: Technical Backgrounder
    Site C Dam Risks: Technical Backgrounder Prepared by the Peace Valley Environment Association www.peacevalley.ca [email protected] All Dams are Not Created Equal - Unstable Geology of the Peace Valley: Landslide Concerns: There has been some acknowledgement of the unstable geology of the area by BC Hydro but much uncertainty remains when it comes to the geomorphology of the region in regard to impacts of Site C. According to an article “Initial geotechnical study on Site C completed,” in the Alaska Highway News (Feb. 26th, 2011), The Valley's steep slopes and unstable banks make it prone to landslides, like the one that blocked the river at Attache Creek in 1973. Because of this, the engineers analyzed specific slopes like those opposite of Bear Flat, the riverbank along Hudson's Hope, and at Farrell and Lynx Creeks. Engineer Andrew Watson, admitted that a lot of uncertainty surrounds how the valley will respond to a new reservoir. One concerned resident pointed out that the word, uncertainty, was used 22 times in a 2003 analysis of the valley and classified the project as posing a high risk for its geological instability. Watson admitted that the valley is unlike any others in B.C. and that a risk does exist but emphasized that the valley is still a safe place for a reservoir. “The real question is how do we manage that uncertainty?” said Watson. http://www.alaskahighwaynews.ca/article/20110226/FORTSTJOHN0101/302269998/- 1/fortstjohn/initial-geotechnical-study-on-site-c-completed Potential hazards were outlined by Andrew Watson, the lead project engineer for BC Hydro: Watson says one of the hazards that might affect the dam’s production include a risk of landslides.
    [Show full text]