Appealing the Director’s Decision

Summary
If you submitted an elevation request, you should have received notice that this was denied.

1. There is an appeal process and you must send your e-mail before April 18, 2011, details below.
2. If you are a member of the Muskoka Lakes Association, send them an e-mail (Info@mla.on.ca) to let them know you are concerned.
3. Please contact your home MPP (details here), letting them know your concerns.
4. Put up a Stop the Hydro Plant lawn sign on your property (signs for a $3 or $5 donation, available at Gidley Real Estate, and in Toronto, e-mail us at info@SaveTheBalaFalls.com to arrange).
5. Follow us on Twitter, @SaveBalaFalls

Detail
In response to the proponent’s environmental screening report for their proposed project to build a hydro-electric generating station at the Bala Falls, over a year ago most of you submitted requests to have this elevated to require an individual environmental assessment, as this is the only way the province’s process could stop this proposal.

As you may have read, the Director of the Environmental Assessment and Approvals Branch of the Ministry of the Environment has denied all the requests.

We continue to spend a huge amount of time on this, and we need everyone to participate in the appeal procedure, in which those who requested an elevation ask the Minister of the Environment to review the Director’s decision.

If you feel the Director’s response (more here) did not address your concerns:

1. Address your concerns in writing (e-mail is best) to the Minister of the Environment, with a copy to the proponent (contact information below, you could also copy the Ministers of Energy, Tourism, Natural Resources, and your local MPP).
2. Your letter should follow this format:
   1. The background and reason for this request (such as significant issues have still not been addressed).
   2. Detail of the specific environmental concerns (concentrate on the scientific, economic, and public safety aspects).
   3. Describe how the Director’s decision fails to address your concern.
   4. Provide any additional information that would be helpful in reviewing the Director’s decision.
   5. Other points you may wish to note.
3. Your letter must be received by the Minister by April 18, 2011.
4. This process is described in Section B.4.1.2 of the Guide to Environmental Assessment Requirements for Electricity Projects.
5. If you have any questions, please e-mail us at Info@SaveTheBalaFalls.com

Contact Information
Send your completed appeal e-mail letters to all of the following:

• The Honourable John Wilkinson, Minister of the Environment, JWilkinson.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org
• Karen McGhee, Project Manager, Swift River Energy Limited, KMcGhee@m-k-e.ca
• Anthony Zwig, President, Swift River Energy Limited, AZwig@horizonlegacy.com
• Please send us a copy too, at info@SaveTheBalaFalls.com

Background
The proponent still has not addressed any of our concerns, for example:

• Their economic impact study did not consider any of the negative effects on local businesses, tourism, and the local economy.
• We still don’t know anything about the appearance or noise.
• Over 97% of the water would be diverted through the proposed plant, leaving only a trickle for the falls, year-round.
• They still have not provided any assurance they would never, during the 40 years of the proposed project, apply to change (who knows, the proponent could try to build condominiums) Diver’s Point or Margaret Burgess Park (north of the north falls), as they would be given control of both.
• Hundreds of feet of the only publically-accessible shoreline in the area would become too dangerous for access.
• They refuse to provide a completion bond to ensure the project would be completed properly, which is a concern, given the proponent has no assets, no employees, and no operations.
• How a hydro-electric power station could possibly be safe in the middle of an established recreational area, especially given the OPP/OPG “Stay Clear, Stay Safe” campaign which specifically notes the dangers of such remotely-controlled facilities.
• Would there ever be barbed-wire fencing required, which is a concern given that the three power stations (which are operated by the same proposed company) at and north of Bracebridge have barbed-wire fencing.
• Would there ever be strobe lights and sirens, as is required to be used at other remotely-operated power stations every time the flow is changed.
• Given that Transport Canada only has an interest in marine navigation, there has not been a consideration of the in-water recreational safety issues which would be created.

And now there are new concerns:

• The proponent has not done a risk assessment of the north dam, such as possible effects of their blasting and excavation nearby (which is a concern, given that the water level of Lake Muskoka is 20’ above the Moon River and the dam is more than 50 years old, so dam failure needs to be considered).
• We recently learned that the proponent plans to cycle the plant off and on, even though the resulting and greatly increased public safety and wildlife habitat concerns are not addressed in the proponent’s environmental screening report as they have always claimed it would be a run-of-river operation.

Note that it is important to detail how the Director’s response did not respond to your specific concerns.

——————————————————————————————
SaveTheBalaFalls.com