Eastmain-1-A and Rupert Diversion Project
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Commission fédérale d'examen du Federal Review Panel for the Eastmain-1-A projet Eastmain-1-A et dérivation Diversion Project Rupert ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF THE EASTMAIN-1-A AND RUPERT DIVERSION PROJECT PANEL REPORT NOVEMBER 30, 2006 Note: This English translation of the panel report originally submitted in French from the Eastmain 1-A and Rupert Diversion federal review panel has not been reviewed by any of the federal review panel members. CHAIRMAN’S MESSAGE The environmental assessment of the Eastmain-1-A and Rupert Diversion Project was conducted in the specific context of harmonization within the framework of the Agreement Concerning the Environmental Assessments of the Eastmain-1-A and Rupert Diversion Project. Under the Agreement, signed by the Government of Canada, the Government of Quebec and the Cree Regional Authority, the Review Committee (COMEX), a standing provincial committee under the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement, and the Federal Environmental Assessment Review Panel had to take the necessary measures to prevent duplication and overlap and to co- ordinate and align the assessment and review processes. Owing to its complexity and the responsibility it entails, an environmental assessment of this scope could not be carried out without the participation of a large number of interested parties. I would like to extend my thanks to COMEX, which has been the Panel’s partner on this long journey, from the moment the proponent’s environmental impact assessment was received to the preparation of this report. The Panel would not be able to submit its report today were it not for the generous collaboration of COMEX members and analysts, especially with regard to their outstanding contributions to preparing a number of sections of this report. The environmental assessment process owes its legitimacy to the participation of the general public. During the public hearings, the review bodies heard from an impressive number of stakeholders in six Cree communities, Chibougamau and Montréal. The Panel is grateful to them for sharing their perspectives, opinions, suggestions and criticisms. A panel cannot carry out its mandate without there being team spirit and a deep sense of duty among its members. My colleagues on the Federal Review Panel have worked together diligently from beginning to end in the spirit of sharing and mutual support and respect. Their competence, intellectual rigour and integrity inspire confidence and give me a sense of pride. I would like to take this opportunity to express my deepest gratitude and respect to Jocelyne Beaudet, Philip Awashish, Pierre Magnan and Brian Craik. The Panel was able to count on the enthusiastic and constant support of Éric Giroux, who replaced Jean Crépault as Panel Manager early on in the review process. On behalf of the Panel, I would like to thank him for his hard work and commitment. I would also like to thank Nicolas Girard and Simon Lemay, whose support was invaluable during the public hearings. Lastly, I would like to extend my thanks to the proponent and its team for their commitment in co-operating with the review bodies and the respect they showed from the moment we became involved and throughout the process. Philippe Mora of the Société de l’énergie de la Baie-James proved to be, for myself and Clément Tremblay, my counterpart on COMEX, an attentive and courteous spokesperson when approached for assistance. We are grateful to the members of his team, especially Anne-Marie Parent for her promptness in responding to our every request. ___________________ Bernard Forestell Chairman REPORT SUMMARY 1. THE PROJECT The Eastmain-1-A and Rupert Diversion Project proposed by Hydro-Québec Production includes the partial diversion of the Rupert River, at kilometre point (KP) 314, and the creation of the Rupert diversion bays (forebay and tailbay) with a total area of 346 km2 These two diversion bays will require the construction of four control structures, 72 dikes, 10 canals and a 2.9-km tunnel linking the two diversion bays. The water level of the Rupert forebay will be controlled by a weir located at the entrance to the transfer tunnel as well as by the Rupert River control structure. The Rupert River flows from east to west over a distance of 560 km between its source, Lake Mistassini, and its mouth, on Rupert Bay. After diversion, the mean annual ecological instream flow of the Rupert River, downstream from the Rupert control structure, will be 184.7 m3/s, which corresponds to approximately 29% of the mean annual flow under natural conditions. In order to maintain uses on the Rupert River downstream from the control structure, the proponent has planned to build eight structures designed to preserve the natural character of the river in the sections that they influence, as well as navigation, fishing, spawning grounds, fish feeding habitats and aquatic grass beds. The diverted water from the Rupert River will be channelled northward to the existing Eastmain 1 reservoir in order to provide an installed capacity of 768 MW for the Eastmain-1-A powerhouse, which will be built approximately 500 m from the existing Eastmain-1 powerhouse. The diverted water will then be channelled into the Opinaca reservoir, where the Sarcelle powerhouse, with an installed capacity of 125 MW, will be built. Finally, the diverted water will be channelled further northward via the La Grande Rivière to increase the energy produced at the Robert Bourassa, La Grande-2-A and La Grande-1 generating stations. Annual output of the project is estimated at 8.5 TWh. The proposed project will also include a large number of related support structures, including construction of the permanent Muskeg-Eastmain road and a 315-kV transmission line. The proponent also plans to establish several temporary workcamps, construct a new drinking water treatment plant to serve the community of Waskaganish, and to carry out work to stabilize river banks and riverside slopes. The estimated cost of the project is around $4 billion, including financing costs. 2. THE REVIEW PANEL AND THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS At the request of the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, the federal Minister of the Environment referred the environmental assessment relating to the project to an environmental assessment review panel (Panel), pursuant to section 33 of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA). On November 1, 2004, the federal Minister of the Environment appointed the five members of the Panel, two of whom were appointed on the recommendation of the Cree Regional Authority (CRA). The Panel’s mandate was to conduct an assessment of the project’s environmental effects and submit a report to the federal Minister of the Environment and the responsible authorities pursuant to section 34 of the CEAA, in this case, Fisheries and Oceans Canada and Transport Canada. Under the provisions of the Act, the responsible authorities are required to act on this i assessment with the approval of the Governor in Council, and to render a decision on whether the project is justified. The project is also subject to the Quebec environmental and social impact assessment procedure set out in Section 22 of the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement (JBNQA). In April 2003, the governments of Quebec and Canada and the CRA signed the Agreement Concerning the Environmental Assessments of the Eastmain-1-A and Rupert Diversion Project, which provides a framework for harmonizing the two environmental assessment processes. The first step in the harmonized process involved preparing directives for the proponent in August 2003, followed by the filing of the Environmental Impact Statement by the proponent in January 2005. The review bodies then analysed the Environmental Impact Statement and submitted some additional questions to the proponent before holding 43 public hearing sessions from March 15 to June 9, 2006, in the Cree communities of Mistissini, Nemaska, Eastmain, Wemindji, Waskaganish and Chisasibi, as well as in Chibougamau and Montréal. The documents produced and received during the assessment process were filed with the Public Information Office created pursuant to the administrative agreement, as well as with the public registry of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency. 3. PUBLIC INPUT Members of the public were given the opportunity to provide their input by submitting written briefs and presenting verbal testimony during the public hearings. To summarize, the Crees described at length their experience to date and the impacts of hydroelectric projects on their culture and traditional way of life and on local wildlife. As a community, they had mixed feelings about the project. The participants at the public hearings in Chibougamau and Montréal discussed the issue of the project’s economic spinoffs, both in the region and for the province as a whole, and compared the environmental impacts of hydropower generation with other energy sources. Environmental groups expressed their opposition to the proposed project. 4. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROJECT Wind power potential The growing public interest in wind power was evident during the review, and wind power was frequently proposed as an alternative to the project. However, the proponent pointed out that electricity generated from wind power fluctuates from one period to another, depending on weather conditions, wind strength and temperature, and that the variability of wind power generation must therefore be offset by energy generation from a more controllable source, such as hydropower, in order to maintain a continuous supply of electricity. The prospects for wind power development in Quebec also appear to be limited by the ability to integrate wind power into the energy transmission system. The impacts associated with this technology, such as noise and the large land areas required for the equipment, must also be considered. Since research is continuing in this field, the potential exists for rapid advances.