columbia river treaty 2014-2024 review 1 wa association of counties april 25, 2013

Columbia River Treaty 2014-2024 Review

1

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2014/2024

REVIEWWA Association of Counties

April 25, 2013


2

Presentation Topics1. Why review the Treaty now?2. Washington State Interests.3. What if we continue the

Treaty?4. What if we terminate the

Treaty?5. What if we

modernizeTreaty?6. Can the Treaty provide

water supplies for WA and OR?

7. Next Steps.8. The Sovereign Review Team

Process.


3

Why review the Treaty now? While the Treaty has no specified end date,

either nation can unilaterally terminate most provisions as early as September 2024 with 10 years’ advanced written notice.

The region is working to deliver a recommendation to the U.S. State Department by Fall 2013 so they are ready to act if necessary by September 2014.

(Some Treaty flood risk operations expire in 2024. Other flood risk elements in the Treaty continue past 2024.)


4

Washington State Interests(in no particular order)

Power generation Salmon and resident fish Flood control Water supply,

agriculture, municipal (including Columbia River Water Management Program)

Recreation Navigation Tribal cultural resources


5

What if we continue the Treaty?

NW ratepayers continue to pay $200 million to $300 million/yr for one tenth the benefit.

Flood risk affected by expiration of assured storage. Draft U.S. reservoirs deeper, more often.

Same level of certainty about flows. Can negotiate additional fish flows

with Canada from Treaty and nonTreaty storage.


6

What if we terminate the Treaty?

NW ratepayers gain $200 million to $300 million/yr

Canada loses a comparable amount.

Water flows are likely to fall in the summer and winter and

rise in the spring. Flood risk may increase and U.S. reservoirs

are drafted deeper, more often as a result. Request flood storage from Canada more often (called upon).

More uncertainty about flows across the border.


7

Modernizing: Can the Treaty improve U.S. power benefits?

Current Treaty operations come close to generating maximum power values

May reduce the size of the Canadian entitlements

Change the delivery point for the Canadian entitlement from Oliver, British Columbia.


8

Modernizing: Can the Treaty provide better benefits for fish?

Enhanced spring flows benefit juvenile migrants but raise dissolved gas and flood risk while reducing power generation.

Enhanced summer and dry year flows benefit juvenile and adult migrants with smaller negative impacts.

More stable reservoirs would help resident fish (i.e. Lake Roosevelt)


9

Modernizing: Can the Treaty provide the same level of flood risk?

Assured storage in Canada may reduce the depth and frequency of required drafts in the U.S.

A new agreement could reduce uncertainty about U.S. “effective use” and “called upon.”


10

Modernizing: Can the Treaty provide the same level of flood risk?

County State % of Expected Annual

Damages1 Pend Oreille County WA 39.31%2 Flathead County MT 25.27%3 Sanders County MT 11.97%4 Multnomah County OR 9.83%5 Cowlitz County WA 3.14%6 Bonner County ID 2.61%7 Clark County WA 1.59%8 Columbia County OR 1.36%9 Lincoln County MT 1.14%10Clatsop County OR 1.09%

Results from analysis of post 2024 given current operating conditions.


11

Modernizing: Can the Treaty provide water supplies for WA and OR?

Tested the availability of 1.5 MAF between April and October


12

Modernizing: Can the Treaty provide water supplies for WA and OR?

Conclusion: 1.5 Maf may be available in many but not all years.

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70End

of M

arch

Add

ition

al S

tora

ge R

elat

ive

to 2

A-TC

(maf

)

These estimates assume Mica stores water October-March so long as: -100kcfs or chum flow requirements are met at Bonneville Dam. -Mica and Arrow meet minimum flow requirements.

Estimates of Potential Additional Canadian Storage


13

Will the draft recommendations from the Federal Entity include: Entitlements: Equitable sharing of power

benefits Ecosystem function: Additional Treaty

purpose to include expansion of spring, summer and dry year flows for ecosystem

Flood risk: Provide the same level of flood risk

Water supply: Reasonable amount of water for spring and summer use

Climate change: An adaptable and flexible Treaty


14

Will the draft recommendations from the Federal Entity include:

More work for the United States Review flood risk policy in the Columbia

Basin U.S. process to determine use of potential

Canadian storage: spring vs. summer, in-stream vs. out-of-stream

Assess the savings from reducing entitlements

Consider modification of the U.S. Entity Regional flood plain restoration strategy


15

Next Steps Complete final analysis (Iteration 3):

Testing a modernized Treaty. Is there a regional Treaty

recommendation? Continue, terminate, or modify Elements to be included in a new or

modified treaty Deliver regional recommendation by Fall

2013 Negotiate with Canada


16

Regional Processes

Sovereign Review Team (and Technical Team): States: WA, OR, ID, MT NW Tribes: 5 representatives (USRT, CRITFC, UCUT, Cowlitz,

CSKT) Federal Agencies: NMFS, USFWS, BOR, USACE, BPA, BLM,

EPA, USFS, USGS, BIA, NPS

NW Stakeholders: Additional Outreach Regional workshops, open houses Joint Sovereign Policy Group/Stakeholder meetings Technical consultation with regional experts among stakeholders


17

End

Tom KarierWA Member of NW Power and

Conservation [email protected](509) 359-2470

mailto:[email protected]


18

Arrow - Average Outflow - All Years

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

70000

80000

Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep

cfs

CC 450 TC 450 TT 600 TC 600 TT

Key Assumption: Canadian Operations Post-2024, Treaty Terminates

Current Conditions/Treaty Continues• Outflows from Arrow are still limited by

Treaty power and flood control requirements.

• The limited number of Called Upon years had less impact than the power requirements.

Treaty Terminates• Outflows are relatively

constant across the year.

• Flows are a result of an optimal power operation for Canada, not the Treaty.

Under Treaty Continues alternatives, the bump in outflows from Arrow in the Aug/Sept/Oct period are a result of proportional draft requirements.

columbia river treaty 2014-2024 review 1 wa association of counties april 25, 2013

Documents