Blog

Photo by Linda HeronPhoto Credit

Category Archives: Agreement Renewals

Chats Falls Generating Station, Ottawa River

Chats Falls Generating Station

PLANT GROUP: Ottawa/St. Lawrence Plant Group
DRAINAGE BASIN: Ottawa River
RIVER: Ottawa
NEAREST POPULATION CENTRE: Ottawa (56 km (35 miles) southeast)
IN SERVICE DATE:
UNITS 2-5 – October 1931
UNITS 6-9 – October 1932
BUILT BY: Hydro-Electric Power Commission of Ontario
ASSET TRANSFERRED TO ONTARIO POWER GENERATION: April 1, 1999
NUMBER OF UNITS: 8
HISTORICAL NOTE:
Early in the 20th Century the Chats Falls Power Company, later known as the Ottawa Valley Power Company, was formed and proceeded with surveys and plans for a development that would place a powerhouse at Egan Chute with a dam along the Ontario shore, upstream from Fishery Pool. This development would use only half of the flow of the river. An agreement was made in 1928 between this company and the Commission for a development of the whole site in one powerhouse. The agreement provided for the organization described later and was followed by the completion of a contract whereby the Commission purchased the Ottawa Valley Power Company’s share of the power. Surveys and engineering studies proceeded and construction started in the Fall of 1929.


Waterpower Agreements – Concerned Stakeholder/Citizen, by Rob MacGregor

June 23, 2011:

Excerpt:

a) Sitting now as a concerned stakeholder/citizen outside of government, I now see very clearly the problem governments are faced with regarding public communication and consultation. Government has a job to do, has deadlines to meet and needs to tick off the public consultation box. In the case of waterpower agreements, apparently public consultation was not really required for some reason, but you’re branch did it anyway. While I am glad you chose to consult, I am annoyed that there is a rule, policy or guideline that even suggests that public consultation is not mandatory for agreements with such far reaching and ongoing potential impacts; where does that policy appear? Now that there is a brief interlude, I have to get some things tabled; hopefully they will be helpful in future attempts to consult with the public. While I am obviously interested in these agreements and appreciate the opportunity to comment, I resent being put in the position I have been in over the last month. I, like all other members of the public, am extremely busy living life. I am also very interested and concerned over some matters that are going on with “sustainable management” of the environment within government, and I wish to have an opportunity to comment effectively. I did not, in the case of waterpower agreements, but I have the following synthesis comments: Continue reading


Chats Falls & Chenaux – Waterpower Agreements Renewal – Ross

June 13, 2011:

Excerpt:

I write this open letter as an Algonquin Elder from Pikwàkanagàn First Nation in response to your invitation for public comment to the proposed waterpower agreements with Ontario Power Generation Inc. (OPG) at Chats Falls and Chenaux. I write one letter to you both since there is a lack of continuity in MNR’s approaches to waterpower agreements in different parts of the Ottawa River Watershed and elsewhere in Ontario. There also is a lack of continuity between these proposed agreements and MNR’s responsibilities under the Lakes and Rivers Act (LRIA). I think that it is wrong for MNR to have so many different ways of treating agreements under Ontario Regulation 242/08 and also wrong to not acknowledge in every waterpower agreement the fact that MNR has responsibilities under LRIA. Continue reading


Mississippi, Chats, Chenaux Hydroelectric Generation Facilities – Agreement Renewals – Allen

June 20, 2011:

Excerpt:

Through my June 15, 2008 public input to MNR re EBR 010-3320 (To establish new regulatory provisions under the Endangered Species Act, 2007 to allow certain activities to continue), I alerted MNR to issues which it could have incorporated into the proposed agreements. For unknown reasons MNR has decided not to follow that advice. I ask that all of my three-year-old public comment to EBR 010-3320 be reviewed and incorporated into any agreement which goes forward. I also ask that my public comments re EBR 011-3334 be reviewed and incorporated into any agreement which goes forward. Continue reading


Mississippi River Hydroelectric Facilities – Agreement Renewals – Disposition of American Eel – ORA

June 20, 2011:

Excerpt:

The decline of the American Eel to near extirpation in Ontario is a matter of strong public interest and concern. Cumulatively, waterpower facilities have had major negative impacts on American Eel in Ontario by preventing adequate access to important historical habitat and by killing significant quantities of eel as they attempt to migrate back to sea to spawn. These impacts have persisted on an ongoing basis in Ontario for almost a century. Continue reading


Chenaux Hydroelectric Facility Agreement Renewal – Disposition of American Eel – ORA

June 20, 2011:

Excerpt:

This agreement must provide for permanent upstream and downstream passage to be installed at a specified time within the 30-year agreement, otherwise the ministry is committing the minister to an agreement that may not meet all tests of OReg. 242 for a 30-year period! This agreement does not even give a remote perception of assurance that the two fundamentals of recovery of eels will ever be installed, i.e. upstream and downstream passage. Continue reading


Chats Falls Generating Station Agreement Renewal – Disposition of American Eel – ORA

June 20, 2011:

Excerpt:

The ORA has noted previously that upstream and downstream passage should be pillars of all waterpower agreements involving eels. The agreement should be re-written with more careful and clear approaches that meet the tests of OReg. 242; otherwise the ministry may be unnecessarily subject to strong challenges. We have previously suggested ways of doing this in our response to the recent EBR posting on waterpower agreement. Continue reading


Gananoque Dam and Hydroelectric Facility – Agreement Renewal – Disposition of American Eel – ORA

May 23, 2011:

Excerpt:

The Waterpower Agreement process outlined in Regulation 242/08 of the ESA is one means of ensuring effective mitigation. However, the Gananoque Agreement falls far short of being an effective means of protection and recovery of the American Eel, and gives the appearance that waterpower developers have too much influence in negotiating effective agreements. A much stronger agreement should have been possible given that the ministry has had three years to negotiate it. Continue reading


Chaudiere Falls Hydro-electric Facilities, Waterpower Agreement Renewal – ORA

May 23, 2011:

Excerpt:

The agreements at Chaudier Falls are critical as these facilities are the most downstream of Ontario- owned facilities on the Ottawa River. Mitigation of the significant effects of Chats, Chenaux and Carillon dams and generating stations on eels are equally as strategic for eel recovery as they are all in the downstream middle reaches where eels still exist in the Ottawa River and continue to be impacted.   Continue reading


Sign a Petition

 

Dam Decommissioning

Modify or add your own comments in the petition below (optional)

[signature]

Share this with your friends: