Water Management Planning Guidelines for Waterpower
Contents |
Introduction
Waterpower is a major source of electricity in Ontario. Today about 27 per cent of the province’s energy needs are met by water power. Nuclear power accounts for 39 per cent, fossil fuels for 32 per cent, and other sources – for example, wind and solar – for 2 per cent. There are about 200 waterpower facilities in Ontario, two-thirds of which are located south of the French and Mattawa Rivers.
With the enactment of the Energy Competition Act in 1998, the stage was set for the deregulation and the opening of a competitive electricity market in Ontario. Prior to this Act, the Ontario government relied upon Ontario Hydro, a Crown corporation, to oversee the operation of its waterpower facilities. The potential privatization of existing hydroelectric generating facilities and the future development of new waterpower facilities by the private sector have created a need for a new policy framework and regulatory changes to ensure that operators meet clear accountability objectives.
In November 1999, a Waterpower Industry Task Force, jointly chaired by the Ministry of Natural Resources and representatives from the waterpower industry, developed a set of policy and program recommendations to support a Waterpower “New Business Relationship” for consideration by the Minister of Natural Resources. Included in their report were recommendations on water management planning, waterpower site allocation and development, waterpower lease agreements, and dam safety. In 2002, acting on the Task Force recommendations, MNR implemented a program to require waterpower producers to develop Water Management Plans (WMPs) to ensure they address environmental, social and economic concerns in a balanced way. The plans are to be produced according to a comprehensive set of Water Management Planning Guidelines (WMPGs), which are the subject of the following ECO review.
What does a WMP Include?
Issues related to water uses upstream from hydroelectric installations are generally focused on the operation of reservoirs and how water level fluctuations affect the aquatic ecosystem, shoreline erosion and recreational activities. Downstream issues generally relate to ensuring there are adequate minimum flows for sustaining the aquatic ecosystem and recreational activities. The process of developing a WMP is intended to provide all interested and affected parties with meaningful opportunities to identify the problems associated with these issues. The WMP process provides a mechanism for identifying values, objectives and constraints, along with a range of optional management strategies. An approved WMP is a document of legal effect governing water levels and flows for the entire river system and requiring dam owners to operate within the parameters set out in the approved plan.
Who is Responsible?
The Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act, amended in December 2000 and again in June 2002, gives the Minister of Natural Resources the express authority to order dam owners to prepare management plans in accordance with guidelines approved by the minister. (See Rocky Island Lake: Alleged Contravention of the Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act for more information on this Act.) Responding to comments on Registry postings, MNR has made it clear that all facilities under exclusive jurisdiction of the province — including both existing and new hydroelectric power dams — are potentially subject to this Order. A water management plan will still have to be prepared for hydroelectric projects that have been planned, or will be planned, under the Environmental Assessment Act.
Producers of waterpower are responsible for developing water management plans that take into account how various operating regimes may affect values within the river system. If more than one power producer operates within a watershed, MNR may require that plans be prepared jointly or under the jurisdiction of a Conservation Authority.
What Do the Guidelines Include?
MNR states that Water Management Plans will be developed based on the following principles:
- Maximum net benefit to society – maximize the net benefits from how water levels and flows are managed, including benefits to river users and riparian owners, as well as to power producers.
- Riverine ecosystem sustainability – arrest any ongoing degradation of the riverine ecosystem resulting from the manipulation of water levels and flows, and seek to improve the ecosystem.
- Planning based on best available information.
- Adaptive management – continually improve resource management, reduce areas of uncertainty, build on successes and make adjustments to limit failures.
- Thorough assessment of options.
- Timely implementation of study findings.
- Aboriginal and treaty rights – WMPs to be undertaken without prejudice to these rights.
- Public participation – open and transparent process.
Target timeframes for preparing WMPs depend on the complexity of the watershed involved. For simple systems involving one waterpower producer, the WMP preparation should take six months or less; for complex WMPs with two or more producers or dam operators, the timeframe is set at 18 to 24 months, with the following suggested time frames for the various sub-phases:
- Planning organization and commencement: 3-4 months
- Scoping (including data collection): 6-8 months
- Option development, evaluation and selection: 4-6 months
- Draft plan development and consultation: 3-4 months
- Final plan development and submission: 2 months
The draft WMP is reviewed by MNR and Fisheries and Oceans Canada over a two-month timeframe. Once the plan is accepted and implemented, the owners of the waterpower facilities will carry out effectiveness monitoring under a compliance self-monitoring and reporting protocol. MNR will be responsible for conducting compliance and enforcement programs. A complete plan review is required at the end of a 5-10 year period; however, if new information comes to light, a mechanism for amending the WMP is described in the guidelines.
A mechanism for dispute identification and resolution, involving the waterpower producer, the Public Advisory Committee and the MNR District office, is included in WMPs should an issue be raised by a concerned person during the preparation of a water management plan. Difficult unresolved issues could lead to Alternative Dispute Resolution and, ultimately, a decision by the Minister of Natural Resources.
Appendices
Fourteen draft Appendices accompany the main set of guidelines to provide extra guidance to plan developers, and many of the comments in response to the Registry posting for the WMPGs were directly concerned with these Appendices. MNR has said that the ministry will address these comments separately for each Appendix. However, the first of the appendices to be completed, Appendix G - Aquatic Ecosystem Guidelines, was posted on the Environmental Registry in October 2002 as an Information Notice, rather than as a regular policy proposal notice, which is subject to all the transparency and accountability features of the EBR. MNR should post these Appendices as regular notices on the Registry to allow adequate public comment on these supporting components of the WMPGs.
ECO Comment
Last summer, only months after the sale of former OPG hydroelectric dams on the Mississagi River system to a public company, flat-out operation of the facilities by an operating subsidiary led to a complete draining of Rocky Island Lake. This incident was caused in part by record electricity demands in southern Ontario during a very hot summer. The issue is the subject of both an EBR review and an investigation (for details see Rocky Island Lake: Alleged Contravention of the Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act), and it underscores the urgent need for water management plans proposed by this initiative.
However, the timeframe set for the development of WMPs is challenging, and the ECO is concerned that sufficient time may not be available for collecting appropriate hydrometric, socio-economic, aquatic ecosystem and other data. The ECO is also concerned that the guidelines appear to take the position that where hydroelectric dams exist, the aquatic ecosystem’s characteristic “baseline” is that which currently exists in the area. Opportunities to “turn back the clock” on lost ecosystem features may not be possible if plans are rigidly constrained to a status quo operating situation.
It is clear that MNR also does not intend that water management planning should threaten the economic viability of the waterpower facilities. The ministry states that “… notwithstanding circumstances in which to generate the maximum net benefits, waterpower facilities would be required to forego a portion of their revenues, it is not the intent of water management planning to render any existing waterpower facility uneconomic.” In practice, achieving this balance between the environment and profits may be challenging. While the ECO believes that requiring changes to operating plans cannot ignore profit goals, the development of water management strategies should set a high priority on conservation of natural resource values. For new hydropower projects where no pre-existing financial performance baseline has been established, it is appropriate that WMPs should be developed so as to optimize the overall value of economic, social and environmental benefits to society, rather than maximizing hydroelectric potential as a first priority.
MNR anticipates that the development of WMPs will progress rapidly, and the ministry has advised the ECO that in the next few years, between 80 and 100 Registry notices on WMPs can be expected. Although MNR proposes that information notices be placed on the Registry at various WMP stages, the EBR does not require a minister or ministry staff to consider comments on information notices, nor do they allow the public to make full use of public participation rights in the EBR. Therefore, the ECO encourages MNR to amend O. Reg. 681/94 under the Environmental Bill of Rights in order to classify water management plans as instruments. (See Instruments, pages 9-13.) Instrument proposals for each WMP could then be posted at the initiation of the planning process for each river system, keeping the public abreast of a rapidly developing process. This would also ensure that the public has the right to apply for an investigation or a review of the WMP, or the right to sue to protect a public resource. MNR has said that it will give serious consideration to this suggestion.
The ECO commends MNR for developing these detailed and comprehensive guidelines, and for the extensive consultation with stakeholders and the broader public in their synthesis. Water management planning for Ontario’s waterpower industry represents a positive step forward in water management in Ontario. This process, backed up by the changes to the Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act, should prevent extreme drawdown situations in the future, such as resulted in the fish kills at Rocky Island Lake.
As provincial emphasis shifts more toward renewable energy sources, more hydroelectric development can be expected, particularly on northern rivers. The ECO is concerned that the province continue to protect some rivers in their natural, unexploited state. While the Water Management Planning Guidelines and underlying regulations are important tools to use where hydropower is developed, the need for overall provincial stewardship of natural river resources should not be overlooked in favour of energy value for the near term.
| This is an article from the 2002/03 Annual Report to the Legislature from the Environmental Commissioner of Ontario. |
Citing This Article
Environmental Commissioner of Ontario. 2003. "Water Management Planning Guidelines for Waterpower." Thinking Beyond the Near and Now, ECO Annual Report, 2002-03. Toronto, ON : Environmental Commissioner of Ontario. 108-112.
