wespac tilbury marine jetty project...the construction phase is expected to be initiated in 2019 and...

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATE APPLICATION

WesPac Tilbury Marine Jetty Project

SE

CT

ION

0.4

: A

PP

LIC

AT

ION

SU

MM

AR

Y


Environmental Assessment Certificate Application

Section 0.4: Application Summary

i

APPLICATION SUMMARY

PROJECT OVERVIEW

WesPac Midstream-Vancouver LLC (WesPac) is proposing the construction and operation of a marine jetty

(the Project) on Tilbury Island, City of Delta, British Columbia. The Project site is adjacent to the existing FortisBC

liquefied natural gas (LNG) facility and would allow for transfer of LNG from that facility to barges and ocean-going

vessels serving local and export markets. The Project would provide berthing and loading facilities to LNG carriers

with up to approximately 100,000 m3 of LNG capacity to serve offshore export markets and regional markets. All

LNG carriers and bunker vessels calling at the Wespac Tilbury Marine Jetty will be operated by qualified shipping

companies engaged in the business of LNG transportation. LNG carriers will transit to the Project site from the

Pacific Ocean along established shipping routes through the Strait of Juan de Fuca, the Strait of Georgia and the

South Arm of the Fraser River.

WesPac develops, constructs, owns, and operates energy infrastructure throughout North America. WesPac

Midstream LLC projects provide customers with clean, safe, and efficient modes of fuel supply, processing,

storage, and distribution. WesPac Midstream LLC has provided fuel logistics and master planning services at a

number of large commercial facilities.

The Project is comprised of the following components, each of which are briefly described below:

Marine Jetty (main trestle, berth, mooring dolphins and berthing dolphins)

LNG Transfer System including pumps, loading arms and onshore & offshore piping

Boil Off Gas management system

Process Control and Power Supply Systems

Fire Protection and Emergency Systems

Project Access (access road and parking)

Applicable Permits and Authorizations

A summary of provincial and federal authorizations anticipated to be required for the Project is provided in Table

0.4-1




ii

Table 0.4-1: Permits and Authorizations Table

Name of Authorization Statute and Authorizing

Agency Description Need for Authorization

Provincial Requirements

Environmental Assessment

Certificate

BC Environmental

Assessment Act- BCEAO

Requirement for an EA based on thresholds

prescribed in the Reviewable Projects

Regulation under Part 8 Table 4.

Facility Permit

Oil and Gas Activities Act and

Regulation - OGC

The Project is not considered a facility under

the British Columbia Oil and Gas

Commission’s (OGC) Liquefied Natural Gas

Facility Regulation. However, criteria

specified in these regulations will be included

in the EA where applicable.

Pipeline Permit Oil and Gas Activities Act and

Regulation - OGC

The Project will require a permit for the 470 m

pipeline.

Crown Licence of

Occupation

BC Land Act - OGC A new waterlot lease extending approximately

150 m along the Fraser River shoreline will be

required.

Approval (Section 11) BC Water Sustainability Act -

MOE, Water Stewardship

Branch

Required for activities in and around a stream

including dredging, clearing, foreshore

modification activities.

Heritage Inspection Permit BC Heritage Conservation Act

- FLNR, Archaeology Branch

Archaeological inspections to support the EA

on non-federal land.

Heritage Investigation

Permit

BC Heritage Conservation Act


Systematic study and data recovery from an

archaeological site.

Site Alteration Permit BC Heritage Conservation Act


Alteration of an archaeological site.

Permit BC Environmental

Management Act - OGC

Solid waste disposal.

Permit Environmental Protection and

Management Regulation-

OGC

Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat Management

Federal Requirements

Authorization Canada Marine Act – VFPA VFPA authorizes activity within its jurisdiction.




iii

Name of Authorization Statute and Authorizing

Agency Description Need for Authorization

Environmental Assessment

Decision

Canadian Environmental

Assessment Act, 2012- CEA

Agency

Requirement based on thresholds prescribed

in the Regulations Designating Physical

Activities (Section 24 (c)).

Habitat Authorization

Agreement

Fisheries Act - DFO Dredging activities, disturbing a riparian area,

and construction of jetty infrastructure may

result in serious harm to fish within the

meaning of the Fisheries Act.

Navigable Protection Act

Approval

Navigation Protection Act - TC The proposed Project site has the potential to

obstruct navigation and will likely require an

approval under the Navigation Protection Act

(NPA). NPA Approvals may also be required

for dredging activities, foreshore

enhancement, and dike/access road work (i.e.

should works occur below the High High-

Water Mark (HHWM.

Disposal at Sea Permit Canadian Environmental

Protection Act, 1999

(CEPA)and Disposal at Sea

Regulation - ECCC

Marine disposal of dredge material.

Floating Temporary Bunker Berth

A floating temporary bunker berth (FTBB) will be initially constructed prior to the permanent jetty to meet market

requirements and the BC Provincial goal of increasing the market for BC gas. The purpose of the FTBB will be to

supply bunkering vessels with LNG for delivery to customers. The FTBB will be in operation for approximately

three years during the construction of the permanent jetty after which it will be decommissioned and removed from

the Project site once the permanent berth has achieved commercial operation. The FTBB will be located upstream

(northeast) of the jetty and will be accessed from shore by the FTBB trestle extending from the existing stub dock.




iv

Permanent Marine Tandem Jetty

The Permanent marine tandem jetty will be comprised of two small loading platforms, one for LNG carriers and

the other for bunker vessels (collectively, the berth) in a tandem configuration (approximately 20 m x 22 m each),

connected to each other by a platform trestle. The platforms will be linked to the onshore LNG transfer structure

by a main trestle (up to 300 m in length and up to 4 m wide). The main trestle will connect the berth to the shoreline

and support LNG transfer systems. The LNG transfer systems will include an LNG transfer pipe, vapour return

pipe, recirculation pipe, firefighting water supply pipe and other utilities. The design of the main trestle will

accommodate a walkway will be sized for a utility vehicle. It will be designed to be above ground to pass over

foreshore habitats.

Berth LNG Transfer System

The LNG transfer system has components in both the Offshore Facilities and the Onshore Facilities. The system

will include approximately 8,000 m3/hr transfer pumps installed within the FortisBC storage tanks. In addition, the

LNG piping will comprise two stainless steel insulated pipes (one 50 to 80 cm, and one 10 to 25 cm diameter) and

one stainless steel uninsulated 35 to 65 cm diameter vapour return pipe of approximately 470 m in length that will

terminate at a boil off gas (BOG) compressor.

Boil Off Gas Management System

A boil off gas management system will be designed to manage excess gas generated during vessel loading

operations. The system will recover all gas generated during the loading operation. The objective of the final

design would be to operate this as a closed loop system with minimum venting or sending the gas to a combustion

device while meeting statutory and safety requirements.

Process Control and Power Supply Systems

The jetty operator will monitor all operating conditions and maintain communication with the FortisBC operator

during all loading operations. The FortisBC operator will control and monitor the transfer pumps (on/off and flow

rate) and the boil off gas compressors. The Project will obtain electrical power supply from BC Hydro’s existing

electric power distribution system. The connection point will be at an existing transformer located within the

FortisBC LNG facility.

Fire Protection and Emergency Systems

The Project fire protection system will include a water line installed from the berth, along the entire pipe rack

system, and fed from the water system at the adjacent FortisBC LNG facility. Dry chemical fire extinguishers will

be installed on the jetty, and an alarm system and Emergency Shut Down (ESD) system will also be installed to

stop the flow of LNG and close all PERC valves in the event of a release or fire. The Project control enclosure will

coordinate with the FortisBC LNG facility control room and have systems installed to evaluate, monitor and manage

an emergency or unusual event.




v

Project Access

Access to the Project site will be via Tilbury Road through a shared entrance with the FortisBC LNG facility. An

access road will be constructed adjacent to the Varsteel property boundary up to the river dike (to be upgraded by

FortisBC in 2018), where the road will turn eastward and run adjacent to the dike. A small parking area will be

constructed at the Project site, with enough space for approximately ten vehicles during construction.

Security

The offshore portion of the Project will have security procedures designed to maintain critical operations at and

around the jetty and for responding to threats or breaches of security including a security perimeter on the water

when a vessel is being loaded at the berths. The measures are intended to prevent unauthorized access to the

Jetty and any berthed vessel, and the transfer of illegal substances, weapons, devices and personnel.

Project Schedule

The Project will be completed in three phases:

Construction

Operation

Decommissioning

The construction phase is expected to be initiated in 2019 and continue for 36 months. Project operation for the

temporary berth will commence in 2020 and for the permanent jetty in 2022 and continue for 30 years. The final

phase, decommissioning, would occur at the end of Project operation and is expected to continue for 1 year.

Project Capital Costs and Employment Benefits

Depending on the final Project configuration, the estimated direct capital construction cost of the Project including

topsides is expected to be between approximately $107 and $198 million, with total construction costs ranging

from $154 to $260 million (WesPac Midstream—Vancouver LLC, 2018). During Operations, the Project

operational expenditures are expected to range annually from $3.6 to $6.6 million. Capital spending at

decommissioning cannot be estimated at this juncture, however, spending will be linked to labour for removal of

Project facilities including the LNG transfer systems, pipes, loading arms, control facilities, jetty infrastructure,

demolition of concrete decks, and removal of pile foundations as well as contracting for specialized services such

as dredging of spilled concrete from the river bed, and foreshore slope protection.

During preparation and construction, the Project will create approximately 276 direct person-years of temporary

employment in BC over the four-year construction period. An additional 807 direct supplier, indirect, and induced

FTEs are expected to be created due to Project spending. The numbers of personnel employed by the Project




vi

during operation will be closely linked to the anticipated number of vessels calling at the Project per year, estimated

at 7 FTEs per year, including two managers and five operators.

The Project is expected to provide benefits beyond the economic discussed above; these benefits are:

Environment – Power plants and ships converting to LNG as their primary fuel can reduce emissions up to

90% in some cases resulting in in a reduction to effects to air and water quality.

Environment - The Project will include restoration of riparian and estuarine marsh historically effected by

industrial practices. This is expected to create a net gain of these habitat types

Economic – LNG is less costly than diesel, gasoline, and other similar fuels, allowing communities adopting

the fuel to reduce fuel costs while also reducing emissions.

Social – Conversion of communities to LNG from diesel and gasoline is expected to reduce emissions and

potential negative effects to air and water quality.

Health – The introduction of LNG as a fuel has a demonstrated reduction in emissions linked to respiratory

and heart issue as well as the development and growth of infants and children.

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROCESS

Environmental Assessment (EA) in British Columbia (BC) provides an integrated process to identify and evaluate

potential adverse environmental, economic, social, heritage, and health effects that may occur during the life of a

reviewable project. The purpose of EA is to predict whether, taking into account technically and economically

feasible mitigation measures, the WesPac Tilbury Marine Jetty Project (the Project) is likely to result in significant

adverse effects. A rational and defensible assessment methodology is required to predict adverse Project-related

effects and determine whether those effects will be significant. This section describes the assessment

methodology used in this application, including scoping and Valued Component (VC)/Pathway Component (PC)

selection, identification of Project interactions, mitigation identification, residual effects characterization, and

cumulative effects assessment.

The Project is subject to regulatory review and approvals under the British Columbia Environmental Assessment

Act (BCEAA) as the design and configuration of the jetty exceeds the foreshore modification threshold of 2 ha,

specified in the Reviewable Projects Regulation. Specifically, under the Reviewable Projects Regulation, an EAC

is required for projects or activities that entail dredging, filling, or other physical disturbance of:

> 1,000 m of linear shoreline, or

> 2 hectares of foreshore or submerged land, or a combination of foreshore and submerged land, below the

natural boundary of a stream, marine coastline or estuary

BCEAA is administered by the British Columbia Environmental Assessment Office (BCEAO), an independent

provincial agency that coordinates assessment of the effects of projects under BCEAA.




vii

The project is also subject to a federal review under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act 2012 (CEAA

2012) because it is being designed to accommodate vessels larger than the 25,000 DWT threshold specified in

the Regulations Designating Physical Activities. Section 24 (c) of the Schedule of Physical Activities requires a

federal environmental assessment for the construction, operation, decommissioning and abandonment of a new:

“marine terminal designed to handle ships larger than 25 000 DWT unless the terminal is located on lands

that are routinely and have been historically used as a marine terminal or that are designated for such use

in a land-use plan that has been the subject of public consultation.”

CEAA 2012 is administered by the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEA Agency), an independent

federal body accountable to Parliament through the federal Minister of Environment. The CEA Agency is

responsible for providing support and coordination with other federal, provincial, and local government regulatory

agencies, Aboriginal groups, industry, and public stakeholders. Although the CEA Agency does not administer or

authorize any federal permits, approvals, or authorizations for proposed projects or activities, it does provide a

coordination role with other federal departments and regulatory review processes.

The Project has been approved for substitution under the Memorandum of Understanding dated July 10, 2015

between the CEA Agency and the BCEAO. The provincial review will satisfy all conditions outlined in the

Substitution Decision document for the scope of the Project and the scope of the assessment, including meeting

all information requirements outlined in CEAA 2012, specifically subsection 19(1) factors and environmental effects

as defined in section 5 of CEAA 2012.

Following completion of the review of the EAC Application, the provincial BCEAO and the federal Minister of the

Environmental will make separate determinations on whether or not the Proposed Project will result in significant

adverse environmental effects following mitigation. If the Project is approved, the BCEAO issues an EAC for a

Proposed Project and the federal Minister of the Environment issues a federal Decision Statement. Following the

decisions on the environmental assessment, individual permits, approvals and authorizations must still be obtained

from respective federal and provincial agencies.

This Environmental Assessment Certificate Application/Environmental Impact Statement (EAC Application/EIS)

for the Project has been prepared in accordance with requirements of the Application Information Requirements

(AIR) dated 29 November 2016 issued by the Executive Director of the Environmental Assessment Office. The

AIR was issued in accordance with s. 11 of the Environmental Assessment Act, SBC 2002, c.43 (BCEAA) and

pursuant to the approval given on July 10, 2015, by the Minister of Environment of Canada to substitute

assessment under BCEAA for assessment under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 (CEAA

2012).

CONSULTATION

Aboriginal Consultation Activities to Date

WesPac is undertaking a four-stage engagement and consultation process with Aboriginal groups comprising

Initial Engagement, pre-Application Consultation, Application Review Consultation, and Post-Environmental

Assessment Certificate (EAC) Consultation. WesPac has completed activities under the first two stages of

consultation.




viii

Initial Engagement Stage

WesPac initiated engagement with Aboriginal groups prior to submission of the Project Description in 2015.

WesPac determined which Aboriginal groups to contact during this stage through a query of the public version of

the province’s Consultative Areas Database. Prior to submission of the Project Description, WesPac sent

introductory letters to all Aboriginal groups identified to introduce the Project and provide details about the company

and an offer to meet and discuss the Project. Consultation activities undertaken by WesPac during the Initial

Engagement Stage focused on sharing of Project information through email and/or at in-person meetings.

Pre-Application Consultation

The pre-Application Stage of the EA process commenced on May 6, 2015 when EAO issued the Section 10 Order,

specifying that the Project is reviewable under the BCEAA. The Project also triggered a review under CEAA, and

on July 10, 2015, the federal Minister of the Environment granted BC’s request for a substituted process. On July

24, 2015, EAO issued the Section 11 Order, which identified Schedule B and C Aboriginal groups as well as

procedures for consultation requirements with those Aboriginal groups. EAO updated Schedules B and C in

subsequent Section 13 Orders dated September 25, 2015, May 11, 2016 and February 14, 2018

Consultation activities during this stage focused on a variety of methods including meetings in-person or by phone,

through email correspondence, site visits, and participation in baseline studies and Working Group meetings with

Chief and Council or with other representatives or staff with each of the Aboriginal communities.

During this stage, WesPac also provided Schedule B Aboriginal groups with the following draft EA documents for

review and comment:

Aboriginal Consultation Plan

VC Selection Document

Application Information Requirements

Aboriginal Consultation Report 1

WesPac has also provided Schedule B Aboriginal groups with the opportunity to provide input to Project design

considerations through five EAO-led Working Group meetings and meetings with individual Aboriginal groups

during the pre-Application Stage.

WesPac entered into capacity funding agreements with 10 Schedule B Aboriginal groups during the pre-

Application Stage to support their participation in the EA process up until submission of the Application. WesPac

is currently discussing additional capacity funding for the Application Review Consultation Stage with Schedule B

Aboriginal groups.




ix

Public Consultation Activities to Date

The Project’s public consultation program has been designed to reach a wide variety of stakeholders and the

public. Since 2014, WesPac has been working to identify, meet with and keep informed a broad list of stakeholders

who may be interested in or affected by the Project. Opportunities for participation by community and public

stakeholders are a key element of an environmental assessment. The main purposes of public consultation are to

share information about the Project and obtain public input about issues and concerns. This input will be

considered in the EA process and Project design. WesPac is committed to open, transparent, and meaningful

consultation with the public.

A Public Consultation Plan was prepared in 2015 and was designed to meet the pre-Application Phase and

Application Review Phase consultation requirements under Public Consultation Policy Regulation (BC Reg.

363/2002) and British Columbia Environmental Assessment Act (EAA) (EAO 2002), as well as requirements

outlined in the Section 11 Order (EAO 2015b). The Public Consultation Plan also reflects WesPac’s desire to

meaningfully consult with the public.

In May 2014 WesPac initiated engagement with stakeholders about the Project. Between May 2014 and June

2015, meetings were undertaken with, adjacent land owners, economic development and marine organizations

and users, and members of the public to introduce the Project, establish communications, and obtain an

understanding of preliminary concerns related to the proposed development of the marine jetty. Information was

exchanged on topics such as project planning and the EA process; environmental, health, and safety planning;

and studies and investigations for the Project.

In 2015, and during the pre-Application phase, WesPac completed two rounds of public consultation through open

houses: one round on December 2, 2015 in Delta and one round on December 3, 2015 in Richmond. Both open

houses were led by EAO to provide the public with opportunities to review and comment on the draft Valued

Component Selection Document and the Project.

Additional activities undertaken by WesPac with respect to public consultation during the pre-Application Phase

included announcement and publication of consultation materials and Project information, as well as continued

communication and face-to-face meetings with key stakeholders. WesPac has maintained consultation with the

general public, community groups, and stakeholders throughout the pre-Application phase to discuss the Project

and obtain feedback on the scope of environmental review. In 2018, the EAO and key stakeholders were contacted

by WesPac to provide information about the Project process.

Government Agency Consultation Activities to Date

Project related consultation with local, provincial and federal government agencies and government

representatives commenced in the pre-Application Phase and has been continued during the Project development

and EAC Application preparation process. Between 2014 and 2016, and in 2018, WesPac maintained regular

meetings, presentations and communications with the EAO, the City of Delta (Corporation of Delta at the time),

the City of Richmond and Vancouver Fraser Port Authority to identify local and federal government interests and

opportunities and to address issues through improvements and/or mitigation strategies.




x

Other consulted government agency group members include: Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Transport Canada,

Environment and Climate Change Canada and federal and provincial elected officials. WesPac undertook the

following consultation activities with government agencies during the pre-Application phase:

Engaged with the EAO Working Group to exchange information and respond to questions and comments on

the Project Description, the Valued Component Selection and Rationale Document, and the AIR;

Continued to meet with City of Delta and City of Richmond;

Identified and documented questions, issues, and interests raised;

Identified measures to address issues and concerns raised; and

Attended Working Group meetings as appropriate for matters requiring more detailed or agency-specific

discussion.

Key issues raised by government agencies have included, effects to fish and fish habitat, air quality, greenhouse

gas emissions, vessel traffic and navigation, potential effects on marine mammals, water quality and the potential

for disposal of dredged material.

Aboriginal Groups

Key issues raised by Aboriginal groups focused mainly on potential effects to fishing, hunting, gathering, other

cultural and traditional interests and Aboriginal title. Part C provides a more detailed discussion of key issues

raised by each Aboriginal group. The general key concerns raised included:

Potential effects from Project-related shipping on the Fraser River that may adversely affect the river and the

surrounding environment, as well as Aboriginal groups’ rights to fish. Aboriginal groups raised concerns that

the increase in number of large ships will increase potential safety risks to fishers on the river.

Potential Project-related effects on water quality and fish could affect Aboriginal fisheries, which could have

an adverse effect on socio-economic and cultural conditions and spiritual health and wellbeing.

Concern that importance of the Fraser River to Aboriginal groups has not been acknowledged. Several

Aboriginal groups note that the Fraser River has value as a cultural and economic landscape.

Concern that spatial boundaries considered in the assessment of several VCs were too limited to consider

Aboriginal Interests, including the effects of marine shipping in the Salish Sea.

Potential effects due to a release of LNG in the event of a collision or the sinking of a vessel and the

responsibility and procedures for managing such spills.

Some Aboriginal groups raised concerns over Project-related noise, light and visual quality effects on future

use of land over which Aboriginal title has been asserted, including the ability to realize economic benefits

associated with lands.




xi

Public

Key issues raised by the public are summarized below. Comments raised by the Public are available on the

BC EAO website. Part D: Public Consultation summarizes the key themes raised in public consultation and

provides responses from WesPac:Concern about LNG use, greenhouse gas, and the effects on climate

change.

Concern about upstream and downstream effects from hydraulic fracturing for the extraction of fossil fuels,

such as LNG.

Concern about environmental effects to wildlife from the Project, particularly with respect to killer whales

(orca), eulachon, white sturgeon, and salmon.

Effects to marine mammals from increased shipping (allisions and noise).

Safety of shipping and the potential for LNG vessels to catch fire or explode.

Effects on the environment from accidents and malfunctions.

Marine navigation safety for LNG vessels in the Fraser River and the risk of collisions and interference with

smaller vessels.

Public safety for residential areas adjacent to the shipping route.

Impacts of dredging the Fraser River and the effect on the estuary and sensitive wildlife.

Socio-economic effects pertaining to farming and residential property value.

Concern about the robustness of the environmental assessment and the role of the Canadian Environmental

Assessment Agency.

Concern about the scope of the environmental process in relation to the Fortis LNG expansion.

Requirements of the George Massey Tunnel Replacement project in relation to LNG vessel passage.

Cumulative effects from nearby Projects and adequacy of the environmental assessment to consider effects.

Site selection.

ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ASSESSMENT METHODS

The methodological steps used to undertake the assessment meet the requirements of the AIR (Figure 0.4.1) and

consist of:

1) Scoping the assessment by identifying key issues and selecting VCs, PCs, and indicators;

2) Selecting assessment boundaries (spatial, temporal, technical, and administrative, as applicable) for each

VC and PC to define the limits and scope of the assessment;

3) Defining VC- and PC-specific parameters (i.e., magnitude) and measurements of significance;




xii

4) Describing the existing conditions within the chosen assessment areas for the VCs and PCs;

5) Predicting Project-related effects:

a. identifying potential interactions between Project activities during the construction, operation, and

decommissioning phases and the selected VCs/PCs;

b. identifying mitigation measures and strategies to reduce or eliminate adverse Project interactions;

c. characterizing residual effects to the VC that are predicted to remain after the application of mitigation

measures consistent with published BCEAO guidelines;

d. describing the likelihood that predicted residual effects will occur; and

e. determining the significance of the residual effect on the VC (i.e., not significant, significant).

6) Assessing cumulative effects:

a. identifying past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects and activities within the spatial and

temporal boundaries of the VCs that may interact with a particular VC or VCs;

b. determining the interaction of the Project-related residual effects with those of other projects and

activities;

c. applying mitigation measures; and

d. assessing the significance of the cumulative residual effects using the parameters outlined for residual

effects characterization and significance.

7) Identifying monitoring and follow-up strategies, if required.




xiii

Figure 0.4-1: Summary of Environmental Assessment Methodological Steps

Source: (BCEAO, 2013)

Based on the results of the issue scoping, candidate VCs and PCs were grouped under the BCEAO’s five pillars

(Table 0.4-2).

Table 0.4-2: Identified Candidate Values Components and Pathway Components

Pillars Grouped Candidate VCs and PCs

Environment

Air Quality/Noise

Fish and Fish Habitat/Marine Mammals

Water Quality

Vegetation/Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat

River Processes

Economic Economy

Social

Socio-community

Land and Marine Resource Use

Visual Quality

Current Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes

Heritage Heritage Resources

Health Human Health

VC = Valued Component; PC = Pathway Component.




xiv

PROJECT DESIGN AND/OR ALTERNATIVE MEANS OF CARRYING OUT THE PROJECT

An assessment of alternative means of carrying out the proposed Project was conducted to evaluate technically

and economically feasible options for the Project design, transportation, dredge disposal, technologies, orientation,

and road access and laydown. Criteria considered while evaluating the various alternatives included:

technical requirement to construct and operate a marine terminal and its related infrastructure

environmental effects of the alternative as listed under Section 5 of CEAA 2012

feedback received from Aboriginal Groups, including feedback related to Aboriginal Interests as defined

under CEAA 2012

economic feasibility of alternative technologies

reducing adverse effects on environmental, economic, social, heritage, and health resources

industry safety standards and regulatory requirements

potential accidents and malfunctions and cumulative effects related to alternative means

Design of the Jetty

The design of the Jetty was assessed through an extensive optimization process. Through this process WesPac

analyzed multiple layout options prior to selecting the option provided in this EAC Application. Variations on design

options included:

Alternate locations for jetty

Alternate configurations of the berth

Alternate mooring configurations

Alternate berthing arrangements

Alternate main trestle alignments.

A management committee reviewed the options with priority given to reducing environmental, economic, social,

heritage and health effects including:

safe navigation in and out of the berth

safety of loading operations

project footprint size

sensitivity of vegetated areas (riparian and marsh).




xv

Alternative Transportation

Road and rail transportation of LNG from the FortisBC LNG facility were alternate forms of transportation

considered prior to selecting marine transportation. Neither rail or road is an option for export markets which

require transoceanic shipping. Regarding the bunker markets, ships typically load fuel on the water side of the

vessel while loading or offloading cargo or while anchored offshore. In both cases the only option is a marine

option.

Marine transportation of LNG via the Fraser River was considered the optimal choice because it provides the

safest, most environmentally sound and most logistically feasible option for transporting large quantities of LNG to

regional and international markets.

Alternative Means of Disposal of Marine Sediment from Dredging

Dredging will occur during construction of the floating temporary bunker berth (FFTB) within a 1.7-ha area, and

during construction of the permanent marine jetty for the Project within a 20.4-ha area. It is also anticipated that

there will be a maintenance dredging program, although the estimated volumes and frequency of maintenance

dredging are unconfirmed at this time and will depend on actual deposition rates.

The dredge disposal options considered in this assessment include:

beneficial onsite use and commercial use

upland disposal at an approved facility

marine disposal at a previously used site pursuant to a permit obtained under the Disposal at Sea

Regulations.

The following hierarchy of options for managing the disposition of dredge sediments has been considered:

Use as substrate for the restoration and enhancement of the existing degraded estuarian marsh and mudflat.

Re-use on-site for construction purposes.

Temporarily stockpiling on-site for subsequent re-use and/or re-sale off-site.

Disposal at an approved upland site, such as a licensed landfill.

Disposal at an existing ocean disposal site, such as Sand Heads, subject to terms and conditions of a

Disposal at Sea Permit.




xvi

Table 0.4-3: Overview of Potential Dredged Material Management Options

Management

Option Summary

Beneficial use in

construction of

estuarian marsh

and mudflat

A considerable amount of shoreline disturbance has occurred at and near the Project

area, and suitable material will be needed to construct a more natural mudflat and marsh

shoreline. Dredged materials will be preferentially re-used within the Project area for

shoreline restoration purposes to the extent practicable and dependent on the

geotechnical and chemical suitability of the material. Suitable dredge material will be

used to build and contour shoreline restoration features.

Beneficial use in

upland construction

Temporarily

stockpiling on-site

for subsequent re-

use and/or re-sale

off-site

Sediment sampling has indicated that a large proportion of the dredged material is similar

to the dredged material that is routinely removed as part of the navigational dredging

program in the section of the Fraser River near the Project site. Dredged material from

the lower Fraser River is regularly used for fill and as preload for construction purposes.

The ultimate use or disposal method for the dredged material will be influenced by the

market demand for dredged material during the time of capital and maintenance

dredging.

Efforts have been made to identify beneficial commercial uses for the dredge material

near the Project area, although no specific commitments have been made at this time.

Although there would be additional costs associated with transporting material off-site,

selling or donating the material for use off-site reduces the potential for adverse

environmental interactions as well as the complexity of obtaining environmental permits

for ocean disposal. Beneficially using dredged material for construction of habitat or on-

site construction is preferable to disposal at sea and off-site upland use due to additional

handling and potential constraints with the suitability of the material associated with these

two disposal options.

As a customer base for commercial use of the construction and maintenance dredge

material has not been secured at the time of preparing this EAC Application, WesPac will

continue to investigate the potential commercial markets for the dredge material. The

ability to use the material offsite for commercial purposes will depend on regional projects

occurring during the Project construction and operational periods.

Upland disposal at

a facility

Material that cannot be sold or otherwise used for beneficial purposes or contains

contaminants or materials not suitable for alternative disposal may be disposed of at an

upland facility. Receiving facilities have yet to be identified and could vary depending on

the volumes and chemistry of dredge materials. Receiving facilities would be licenced to

accept the volume and chemistry of material being sent.

Similar to disposing at a commercial location, dredge materials to be disposed of at an

upland facility would be stored temporarily at a location designated for this purpose along

the Fraser River. Materials potentially containing contamination would be separated and

isolated from surrounding materials.




xvii

Management

Option Summary

Disposal at sea If beneficial commercial uses for the dredge material cannot be identified, or disposal at

an upland facility is not possible, material may need to be disposed of at sea to an

applicable location as determined by the Disposal at Sea permitting process. Sand Heads

is the closest marine disposal site near the Project and has therefore been selected as

the ocean disposal location for the purposes of this EA Application. Sediment sampling

conducted during the baseline study to support the Water Quality VC (Section 4.2) was

designed to meet the ECCC requirements for Disposal at Sea permitting. These results

are presented as Appendix 4.6-2 and show that a majority of the material would be

suitable for disposal at sea.

Although the beneficial commercial uses and land disposal to a licensed landfill facility are preferred options for

dredge disposal, marine disposal of the dredge material cannot be excluded at this time. Given that the potential

land-based location(s) and markets for commercial uses of the dredge marine sediments are unknown at this time,

the assessment of dredged sediment disposal considers both marine- and land-based alternatives.

KEY CONCLUSIONS

River Processes

Potential project-related effects on river processes considered in the assessment included changes in sediment

processes, river currents, and geomorphology.

Key findings of this assessment are presented below:

Local changes in hydraulics and sedimentation are predicted to result from the dredge area and scour

protection. The Phase 1 dredge area may result in local changes in hydraulics and sedimentation over short

time scales. The Phase 2 dredge cut area and in-river scour protection are predicted to affect the cross-

sectional flow area and channel geometry, resulting in local modifications in river currents and

geomorphology. The effects of the permanent dredge area and scour protection on local river hydraulics,

sediment transport, and morphology are predicted to result in:

▪ An increase in deposition in the dredge area footprint;

▪ An increase in erosion at the downstream edge of the dredge cut;

▪ An increase in deposition behind the dredge area at the shoreline; and

▪ An increase in erosion on the upstream flat.

The magnitude of these effects is expected to be on the order of existing baseline variation in the Fraser

River.




xviii

Local changes in hydraulics and sedimentation around in-river structures are predicted to occur resulting in

a slight deflection of the river flow, and slight increase in sedimentation downstream of the jetty

Release of fine sediments is predicted to occur due to propeller wash and dredging. Dredging in the

construction phase will involve the dredging of the Phase 1 dredge area for the FTBB (50,000 m3) within a

1.7-ha area and dredging of the Phase 2 dredge area will involve approximately 460,000 m3 for the permanent

marine jetty within a 20.4 ha area. It is also anticipated that there will be a maintenance dredging program,

although the estimated volumes and frequency of maintenance dredging are unconfirmed at this time and

will depend on actual deposition rates. The estimated TSS resulting project dredging, maintenance dredging

and propeller wash is expected to contribute negligible additional fine suspended sediment during high flows.

During low flows, these activities are expected to produce suspended sediment in the order of baseline

conditions in the Project Area. Regional changes in sedimentation are not predicted to occur as a result of

the construction and operation of the project. During the construction phase, sediment will be removed from

the Fraser River during dredging associated with Stage 1 and Stage 2 construction intervals. During the

operation phase, maintenance dredging also represents an annual removal of sediment from the Fraser River

system. The project and maintenance dredge volumes are expected to be within the existing sediment budget

surplus of the Gravesend Reach of the Fraser River, however there is large uncertainty and variability in the

sediment budget.

Fish and Fish Habitat

The Project has been designed to reduce potential effects on fish and fish habitat. The Project is in an industrial

setting and makes use of an existing LNG facility and a previously disturbed site. The Project site has historically

been used as a log sort. Hauling logs from the Fraser River resulted in damage to the riparian, marsh, and mudflat

area. Limited riparian vegetation clearing is required to accommodate Project components.

Potential project-related effects related to fish and fish habitat considered in the assessment included changes to

habitat quality and function, direct loss of habitat, direct mortality and changes to fish behaviour, and riparian

habitat loss or degradation.

In 2017, the Project design was reviewed and optimized to further reduce the potential effects on fish and fish

habitat. Mitigation measures are provided in Part E Section 15.


The Project will require the direct alteration of habitat during construction of the LNG facility. It is expected

that a total area of 210,000 m2 will be temporarily disturbed through dredging, and an area of 170 m2 will be

lost due to the placement of piles.

Aquatic habitat in the LAA is considered low quality as it lacks spawning substrate for anadromous and

resident fish species (e.g., vegetation and coarse-grain sediments), and benthic communities with the LAA

are not a significant food source.

Fish use in this segment mainly includes and upstream migration of adult anadromous fish (i.e., salmonids,

steelhead, eulachon) and downstream out-migration of juveniles, along with the shoreline utilization by some

resident fish, which are resilient to stress imposed by temporary sediment disturbances.




xix

The proposed shoreline restoration and habitat offsetting is predicted to improve habitat quality and function

from existing conditions, and create more habitat than is currently present.

Project-related effects to anadromous fish, CRA fish, white sturgeon, and benthic invertebrate habitat quality

and function are anticipated to be avoided through mitigation measures that includes restoration of the

degraded nearshore habitat that currently exists at the site.

Project activities that could result in mortality to anadromous fish, CRA fish, and white sturgeon due to

dredging and pile driving, have been designed to avoid sensitive fish habitat and critical life history stages.

Given the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, the magnitude of mortality or behavioural

changes to anadromous fish, CRA fish, and white sturgeon populations is predicted to be negligible during

the construction and operation phases of the Project.

Proposed dredging during Project construction and operation will remove the biologically active layer of

sediments and lead to the entrainment and direct mortality of benthic invertebrates. This activity will cause a

temporary reduction in the abundance and distribution of benthic invertebrates within the Project area,

although the area to be dredged is anticipated to re-colonize with benthic invertebrates quickly.

Given the resilience of anadromous and resident fish species to anthropogenic changes, the potential

adverse effects of the Project are not expected to exceed the ecological thresholds, nor compromise the

resilience of the regional populations. After the implementation of mitigation measures, the Project is not

predicted to result in residual effects to Fish and Fish Habitat and has therefore not been carried forward to

the determination of significance.

Marine Mammals

The Project has been designed to reduce potential effects on Marine Mammals. The Project is in an industrial

setting and makes use of existing shipping routes, LNG facility and a previously disturbed site. The Project site

has historically been used as a log sort. Hauling logs from the Fraser River resulted in damage to the riparian,

marsh, and mudflat area. Limited riparian vegetation clearing is required to accommodate Project components.

The Project site currently supports low value Marine Mammal habitat.

Potential project-related effects related to Marine Mammals considered in the assessment included direct loss of

habitat, changes to habitat quality, and changes in the abundance and distribution of Marine Mammals in the RAA

such as behavioural disturbance and/or injury due to Project-generated underwater noise; and injury/mortality due

to vessel strikes.

In 2017, the Project design was reviewed and optimized to further reduce the potential effects on Marine Mammal

habitat. Mitigation measures are provided in Part E Section 15.


The Project will require the direct alteration of habitat during construction of the LNG facility. It is expected

that a total area of 210,000 m2 will be temporarily disturbed through dredging, and an area of 170 m2 will be

lost due to the placement of piles.




xx

Aquatic habitat in the LAA is considered low quality Marine Mammal habitat. Loss of habitat and changes to

habitat for Marine Mammals was considered negligible with no residual effects.

After the implementation of mitigation measures such as bubble curtains around the wetted piles in

combination with real-time Marine Mammal monitoring in defined safety zones and active mitigation

measures such as ramp-up/shut-down procedures and sound verification monitoring, the potential effects of

the Project are not anticipated to exceed the ecological thresholds or compromise the resilience of the

regional Marine Mammal populations considered in the assessment. As such, Project-related residual effects

remaining after the application of mitigation are considered not significant.

Air Quality

Potential Project-related effects to air quality subcomponent of the Air Quality Valued Component (VC) were

assessed based on changes in offsite ambient air concentrations of air quality measurable parameters (NO2, SO2,

CO, PM10 and PM2.5). Project related measurable parameter concentrations were combined with baseline air

quality and compared to the relevant ambient air criteria. Effects on air quality during the construction and

decommissioning phases of the Project were identified to be bounded by the effects during operation phase. Two

scenarios were assessed for the operational phase – normal operation and the dredger operation. Key findings

of the assessment are summarized below:

Existing background air quality concentrations of measurable parameters in the Air Quality LAA and RAA is

good, with ambient concentrations below relevant air quality criteria with the exception of short periods of

forest fire influence for particulate matter.

Potential Project-related effects to air quality can be reduced by the use of mitigation measures during

construction, operation, and decommissioning.

Project activities during Project operation (normal operation scenario and dredger operation scenario) have

the potential to increase ambient air quality concentrations of measurable parameters.

Residual effects during Project operation for the increase in SO2 concentration are less than 1% of the

ambient air quality objectives, and therefore the magnitudes were determined to be negligible. As such,

Project-related residual effects for SO2 are considered negligible and are therefore not carried forward to

determination of significance or cumulative effects assessment.

Residual effects during Project operation for the increase in 1-hour NO2 concentration are expected to be

high in magnitude, medium-term in duration and local in extent, and therefore are characterized as not-

significant. Exceedances of the Metro Vancouver air quality objective were predicted for a short duration

(one hour per year) at one discrete receptor on the north bank of the Fraser River, and therefore the

characterization was identified as moderately resilient because moderate human sensitivity is expected at

this location. This configuration of classification criteria concludes that the overall residual effect of increased

1- hour NO2 concentration is not significant.

Residual effects during Project operation for the increase in annual NO2 concentration are expected to be

low in magnitude, medium-term in duration and local in extent and therefore are characterized as not-

significant.




xxi

Residual effects during Project operation for the increase in CO concentration are expected to be low in

magnitude, medium-term in duration, and local in extent and therefore are characterized as not-significant.

Residual effects during Project operation for the increase in PM2.5 concentration are expected to be moderate

in magnitude, medium-term in duration and local in extent, and therefore are characterized as not-significant.

Residual effects during Project operation for the increase in PM10 concentration are expected to be moderate

in magnitude, medium-term in duration, and local in extent and therefore are characterized as not-significant.

Residual cumulative effects during Project operation are also expected to be low-to-moderate in magnitude,

medium-term in duration and local in extent, and therefore are characterized as not-significant.

Residual effects from the Dredger Operation Scenario were characterized as short-term and infrequent as

the dredging will occur for up to two weeks per year during the operation phase of the Project. The magnitude

was characterized as low or medium depending on the measurable parameter, and therefore are

characterized as not-significant.

Potential Project-related effects and cumulative effects on the greenhouse gas (GHG) management

subcomponent of the Air Quality VC were assessed by identifying Project interactions and determining the

significance of these interactions. Similar to the air quality subcomponent, effects on GHG Management during

the construction and decommissioning phases of the Project were identified to be bounded by the effects during

operation phase.

All residual Project effects were assessed to be negligible. The Project will likely result in increased GHG emissions

during all phases, compared to provincial and national levels, and have the potential to affect climate change,

despite the planned implementation of mitigation measures. Therefore, the likelihood of effects associated with

the Project GHG emissions is considered likely. The level of confidence associated with the effects assessment is

considered high due to the reasonably conservative estimates of the maximum GHG emissions used.

Noise

Potential Project-related effects to noise considered in the assessment included changes in daytime and nighttime

noise levels and the change in the percentage of highly annoyed people (%HA) due to Project construction,

operation, and decommissioning activities.

Key findings of the assessment are presented below:

Baseline noise levels in the Noise LAA and RAA are influenced by shipping, airplane, and truck traffic and

construction and operations of neighbouring facilities.

Potential Project-related effects to noise can be reduced by the use of mitigation measures during

construction, operation, and decommissioning.

Project-related effects during dredging activities and operations are predicted to be negligible and were not

carried forward to significance determination.




xxii

Project activities during construction of the FTBB and permanent jetty have the potential to increase noise

levels.

Residual effects during construction are expected to be moderate in magnitude, short-term in duration and

local in extent, and therefore are characterized as not-significant.

Residual cumulative effects during construction are also expected to be moderate in magnitude, short-term

in duration and local in extent, and therefore are characterized as not-significant.

Project-related effects to noise during decommissioning are expected to be similar to, or less than those

associated with construction.

Water Quality

The Project has the potential to affect Water Quality from Project activities during construction, including dredging,

soil densification, pile driving, and infrastructure installation that may result in sediment disturbance with the

potential for increased turbidity levels. Project activities during operation, such as maintenance dredging and

vessel operations, also have the potential to affect water quality through direct or indirect effects. Dredging

activities associated with the Project are anticipated to be of primary concern in this assessment, but consideration

has also been given to other Project-related activities that could potentially result in adverse effects. The effects

assessment considered existing conditions and proposed mitigation measures that included timing of the

construction activities and the temporary, localized nature of potential impacts.

The Water Quality VC is linked to the River Process pathway component and to the Fish and Fish Habitat, Marine

Mammals and Human Health valued components.


Although dredging may increase suspended sediments in the LAA, the magnitude of the effect is expected

to be low and any changes in surface water quality are not expected to be distinguishable from existing

conditions, accounting for inherent variability due to tidal cycles and river discharge. The Fraser River

naturally carries a high sediment load, and aquatic biota in the river have adapted to this condition. Thus, the

river is considered to have high resilience to increases in suspended sediment.

Changes in water quality or sediment quality due to potential contaminant releases from removal of creosote-

treated piles or release of alkaline materials from concrete works are not expected to be detectable; therefore,

the magnitude of the residual effect is negligible. Effects are expected to be localized to the immediate area

of riverbed disturbance.

After application of the proposed mitigation measures, residual effects on the Water Quality VC and its

subcomponents associated with the Project (i.e., surface water quality, sediment quality, and aquatic health)

are predicted to be none or negligible. Thus, the significance of those effects is also none or negligible and

so no further evaluation is required.

Confidence that residual effects will not be greater than predicted is high given the predicted effectiveness of

the proposed mitigation measures, understanding of suspended sediment dynamics in this river, and

elements of conservatism in the assessment approach.




xxiii

Vegetation

The Project has been designed to minimize the extent of the Project Disturbance Footprint in the LAA, and the

extent of clearing and ground stabilization is limited to the Project Disturbance Footprint. Ecosystems in the LAA

have been disturbed by historical and ongoing industrial activities and by the presence of invasive plant species.

Although these ecosystems have been highly modified, direct loss of wetland and riparian ecosystems has been

considered for mitigation. Mitigation measures are provided in Part E Section 15.


The Project will require the direct loss of habitat during construction of the LNG facility. It is expected that a

total area of approximately 0.23 ha of wetland and riparian ecosystems will be disturbed through construction,

while mitigation during construction is expected to create approximately 1.2 ha of estuarine marsh and

riparian mudflat habitat at year 2. The Project design has integrated features that will minimize loss of these

ecosystem types, and offsetting through wetland enhancement and creation is expected to result in an overall

gain of 0.92 ha of wetland ecosystems in the LAA.

A Wetland Mitigation Plan will be produced for the Project prescribing restoration and monitoring

specifications and details, including a description of management needs, cost estimates, and the funding

mechanism that will be used to meet those needs. The primary goal of compensatory wetland mitigation is

to replace or enhance wetland functions and services to achieve no net loss due to the Project.

An Invasive Plant Species Management Plan will be developed and incorporated into the CEMP to reduce

the potential for introduction and proliferation of invasive plant species in the LAA.

No plant species at risk were encountered in the LAA. A pre-construction survey of the Project Disturbance

Footprint will be conducted to identify and salvage or otherwise protect any plant species at risk and traditional

use species where possible. Planned wetland and riparian enhancement and restoration is expected to

expand the available habitat for these species.

Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat

The Project has potential to affect wildlife and wildlife habitat through habitat loss, mortality, and creation of barriers

to movement. Wildlife habitat in the LAA has been altered by historical and ongoing industrial use and invasive

plants. Wildlife populations occurring in the LAA persist in an industrial setting and are expected to be adapted to

industrial and urban environments. Mitigation measures are provided in Part E Section 15. Key findings are:

The Project has generally been designed to reduce effects on wildlife and wildlife habitat by reducing the

length and width of the trestle, locate staging areas on previously disturbed areas (i.e. paved), and reducing

light trespass by planning lighting layout.

The Project may result in a loss of 0.31 ha of potential wildlife habitat; however, proposed wetland and riparian

restoration will result in an overall gain of 0.92 ha of wetland ecosystem.

Indirect effects from the Project such as those resulting from noise and light may reduce the suitability for

wildlife beyond direct habitat loss.




xxiv

The Project could result in wildlife mortality during construction and operation due to collisions with equipment

or vessels.

The Project is not expected to create barriers to wildlife movement.

After application of the proposed mitigation measures, residual effects on the Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat VC

and its subcomponents associated with the Project are predicted to be negligible and are thus not carried

forward into a significance determination.

Economy

The Economy VC addresses potential Project effects to the local labour market, regional economic development,

and local government finance. Potential Project-related economic effects were assessed through considering

changes to employment and income due to Project associated hiring, changes in labour market balance due to

Project labour demands, procurement of goods and services, and payment of local, provincial, and personal

income taxes.


Project construction is expected to create 276 full time equivalent (FTEs) equating to approximately 218 jobs.

These jobs are expected to be sourced from the local labour force in Metro Vancouver. Based on information

provided by WesPac, the average household labour income per FTE for the Project’s direct construction

workers is expected to be $99,786 per year.

Project construction would generate an additional 407 FTEs or 366 jobs through supplier businesses.

Approximately 88% of these jobs are expected to be filled by the local, Metro Vancouver labour force. Direct

supplier industries are expected to see an annual average household income of $81,575 due to the Project.

Project construction would also generate incremental indirect and induced employment due to direct suppliers

buying BC-produced goods and services. Indirect employment of 271 FTEs (271 jobs) are attributed to the

Project while another 129 FTEs (142 jobs) are expected through induced spending. Annual compensation

for indirect and induced workers would be in the typical range for these types of positions in the businesses

that support industrial construction in the LAA and the province, including an estimated average annual

household income of $68,120 per indirect employee and $50,196 in annual average household income per

induced employee.

No change in labour market balance is anticipated as there is capacity within the local labour force to meet

Project labour demand while maintaining a balanced rate of unemployment.

The goods and services revenues (output) for direct supplier industries in BC due to Project spending for

constructing the Project is anticipated to be approximately $132.8 million over the construction phase

including taxes and wages. Of the total $132.8 million, $106.7 million would go to goods and services

revenues for BC businesses due to expenditures on production inputs to make or provide the direct goods

and services.




xxv

Total spending on capital items, materials, goods, and labour is estimated to range from $86,277,000 to

$160,136,000 over the 20-year operation phase1, approximately $3,549,000 to $6,591,000 annually.

Project-associated induced output (revenue) in BC earned over the construction phase is expected to be an

estimated $24.2 million.2 The location of consumer spending of wages and salaries connected to the Project

would mainly vary according to the permanent residence of direct and indirect employees. LAA businesses,

including Aboriginal businesses in the LAA, would garner a major share of this household spending because

a large majority of the construction phase workers from BC would reside there.

The Project will pay property taxes to City of Delta as well as payment for applicable regional district services

to Metro Vancouver. Property tax and fee payments during the construction phase are estimated at

approximately $1.3 million to $1.7 million over the four-year construction phase.

At the BC government level, incremental tax revenues are estimated through personal income taxation of

Project associated employment income and through taxes on products (especially PST) used in construction

of the Project. The total tax revenues of the BC government over the construction stage would be an

estimated $9.8 million, or an annual average of $2.5 million.

While the Project will require seven FTEs throughout operation, these positions will be filled by existing

employees at the Tilbury LNG Plant. As a result, the Project will not create new employment opportunities

and therefore not result in change in income or income tax revenue.

To support accrual of benefits to the local and Aboriginal labour force, WesPac will require its EPCM

contractor to have formal local and Aboriginal hiring and procurement policies in place throughout Project

construction. These polices will include general approaches and strategies to maximize local and Aboriginal

hiring consistent with industry best practice.

As these identified Project effects are considered beneficial, no adverse residual effects are identified for the

Economy VC.

Socio-Community

The Socio-community VC assesses Project effects on community infrastructure and services by considering

Project-related changes in the demand for, or provision of emergency and health services and municipal

infrastructure as well as changes to community health and well-being through changes in noise and nighttime light

and social determinants of health. Mitigation measures are provided in Part E Section 15.

1 Operations phase expenditures were calculated for a 20-year period. It is expected that the economic benefits associated with operations of the project would continue over the full 30-year period.

2 Project associated induced output was calculated with WesPac supplied estimates of the Project’s planned expenditures on direct goods and services and labour compensation for its direct workforce.




xxvi


No change in demand for community infrastructure is anticipated during construction as solid and liquid waste

will be collected on site and disposed of by contractors at facilities licenced to accept such material. Potable

water will be brought onto the site. No potable water will be sourced from municipal lines. During operations,

workers will use amenities such as breakrooms and washrooms at an existing office located at the FortisBC

Tilbury LNG Plant adjacent to the Project site. No new sources of domestic water, solid or liquid waste will

be created by the Project.

The Project is not expected to increase road traffic during construction and operations. During construction

and operation, most of the goods and materials required to construct the Project are expected to be delivered

to site via barges using established shipping routes in the Fraser River. Delivery by road is expected to

minimal during construction and rare during operation. During construction, the commuting workforce could

increase the number of vehicles travelling on River Road by up to 100 vehicles during peak construction.

This increase would represent less than a 1% increase in weekday traffic volume.

The Project will provide emergency response services on site during all project phases, including fire safety,

first aid, and security services designed to meet or exceed Canadian standards with an Emergency

Management Plan in place throughout the life of the Project. As part of this plan, emergency responders will

be on site during working hours to respond to emergency situations, including marine-based emergencies

such as collisions or spills. Heath and emergency first responders would only be called if an emergency

exceeds the capacity of the on-site crews, such as a health emergency experience by a worker requiring

medical assistance. As the potential number of incidents on site is expected to be low and mitigation

measures will be in place, no changes to demand for emergency services, including marine based emergency

services, due to direct Project usage are anticipated during construction, operation, and decommissioning.

Increase in nighttime light can cause nuisance to those undertaking nighttime viewing or disrupt the sleep of

individuals living near the Project. The closest residence to the Project is located 440 m south of the Project

boundary. Temporary task lighting will be used for nighttime construction activities to create a safe work

environment. With the mitigation measures including a lighting plan and actions to minimize obtrusive

construction lighting in place, construction lighting is not expected to change the lighting conditions of the

overall environment, and therefore is not expected to create nuisance for those either sleeping or undertaking

nighttime viewing at the identified receptor sites.

During construction, predicted noise levels are expected to exceed the Health Canada percent Highly

Annoyed 6.5% threshold at the receptor representing the First Nation village of Tl’uqtinus, located 300 m

north of the Project Site Boundary. While future plans for the site may include residential development, at the

time of writing, it is understood there is no current use of the site, including no permanent residences or

residences planned for construction within the timeframe of the construction period. A noise management

plan will be in place throughout the construction period to reduce noise wherever possible. WesPac will use

the protocols outlined in the Aboriginal Communications Plan to identify times during construction when noise

levels may be higher than usual. Given that current use of the Tl’uqtinus site is limited, the future plans for

development fall outside of the construction period, and the proposed mitigation, the potential residual

nuisance effect due to changes in noise is expected to be negligible.




xxvii

During construction and operations, Project related vessels could limit access to areas used by Aboriginal

groups for traditional purposes, specifically food, social, and ceremonial (FSC) fishing by the Musqueam

Indian Band and the Tsawwassen First Nation, which could in turn, decrease community well-being.

To address potential effects due to the disruption of FSC fishing activity by project related vessels during the

already short FSC fishing windows, a Marine Access and Transportation Management Plan (MATMP) will be

developed and implemented in accordance with TERMPOL recommendations. A Marine Communications

Plan (MCP) will also be developed (as a subplan of the MATMP) and implemented throughout construction

and operation to further avoid and minimize adverse effects on Aboriginal marine users during construction

and early stage of operations. These Plans will be further supplemented with the Aboriginal Group

Communications Plan to facilitate dissemination of information relevant to FSC fishing. In addition, to address

potential effects directly to the Musqueam and Tsawwassen First Nations, a Marine Use and Fisheries

Advisory Group will be formed to further minimize potential adverse effects on to Musqueam, and

Tsawwassen and potentially other Schedule B Aboriginal groups who report marine use and fishing for

traditional purposes on the Fraser River in proximity to the Project area. As these measures are expected to

be effective, adverse effects to instream access for FSC and Domestic Purposes are expected to be

negligible (Section 6.3.4.9) and therefore effects to community well-being due to reduced access to areas

used by Aboriginal groups for traditional purposes are also expected to be negligible.

Land and Marine Use

The Project is located at Tilbury Island, within the Tilbury Industrial Park area, along the South Arm of the Lower

Fraser River in Metro Vancouver. Within the past 20 years, growth and development along the Lower Fraser has

focused on industrial use, urban and rural residential development, and transportation infrastructure development.

The Fraser River is an important commercial marine transportation route with numerous barges, container ships,

and bulk carriers regularly transiting the South Arm to access marine terminals and foreshore industrial areas. It

is also an important area for commercial fisheries and provides marine recreational use opportunities for the

population of Metro Vancouver and visitors.

Potential Project-related effects on land and marine resource uses were assessed through considering changes

to navigation, commercial and non-commercial marine resource use, and commercial and non-commercial land

resource use. Key findings of this assessment are presented below:

Based on the assessment of potential Project effects in relation to land and marine resource use indicators,

no effect was identified for the following interactions:

▪ Navigation from change in river processes,

▪ Marine tourism from changes in productivity, abundance, and presence of marine mammals and coastal

birds

▪ Consistency with land use designations, plans, objectives, policies, and zoning requirements

▪ Commercial industrial and non-commercial land access and area use




xxviii

Based on the assessment of potential Project effects in relation to land and marine resource use indicators,

negligible effects were identified for the following interactions:

▪ Commercial, recreational, and guided sport fishing from changes in productivity and sustainability of

harvested fish species

▪ Recreational fishing, guided sport fishing, marine tourism, and recreational boating environmental setting

from changes in air quality, atmospheric noise, and visual quality

▪ Land-based recreation from changes in air quality, atmospheric noise, and visual quality

Marine transportation of materials and equipment during construction and decommissioning, marine shipping

during operations, dredging of dredge area and maintenance dredging, and operations of the marine security

zone during construction and operation could result in temporary interference to navigation, both within the

navigational channels and in the immediate Project area.

Marine transportation of materials and equipment during construction, marine shipping activity during

operation, marine construction and operational activities at site including dredging, and operations of the

marine security zone construction and operation could affect commercial and non-commercial marine area

use and access.

The application of mitigation measures will address effects on commercial and non-commercial marine area

access and use and limit disruption of marine user’s activities. These include compliance with maritime

regulations and legislation, management plans for marine access and transportation, and communication,

and the implementation of TERMPOL recommendations which are anticipated to fully address Project effects

on navigation during construction and operations. However, residual Project effects on commercial and non-

commercial marine access and area use are expected to remain.

Residual Project effects on commercial and non-commercial marine access, including commercial marine

transportation, commercial and recreational fishing, marine tourism, and recreational boating, are predicted

from marine transportation of materials and equipment during construction, marine shipping and the operation

of the marine security zone during operations. The change to marine resource use is predicted to result in a

low degree of the residual effects and would occur in a highly industrialized area, whereby marine users are

accustomed to temporary in-river interferences and industrial activities. Residual Project effects on

commercial and non-commercial marine use and access are predicted to be not significant.

Certain and reasonably foreseeable projects and activities within the region have marine shipping

requirements that could cumulatively interact with marine shipping associated with the Project. This shipping

activity could affect commercial and non-commercial marine access and area use. However, cumulative

effects are anticipated to be low relative to the overall marine vessel traffic on the lower portion of the South

Arm of the Fraser River and cumulative effect would be within historical norms and not compromise the ability

for commercial and non-commercial marine activity to continue in the region. The residual cumulative effects

on land and marine resource use were determined to be not significant.




xxix

Current Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes

The Current Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes is a factor identified under subsection 5(1)(c)(iii)

of CEAA 2012. Project components and activities have the potential to adversely affect the current and future use

of locations and resources that support traditional diets, economies, social and spiritual life, governance, and

cultural transmission (e.g., transfer of traditional language, laws, stories, and beliefs associated with places and

sites on the landscape, sites of historical significance harvesting of resources, and formation and maintenance of

cultural identity). The effects assessment considered TEK and TU information, where provided by Aboriginal

groups listed in the Section 11 and Section 13 Orders in Schedules B and C, during ongoing consultation between

the WesPac and Aboriginal Groups, or otherwise available through public sources.

Potential Project-related effects on the current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes were assessed

through considering Project changes that may affect Aboriginal groups’ ongoing use of these resources and their

culturally relevant practices. Effects across indicators were considered for each Aboriginal group potentially

affected.

Potential Project-related effects on the current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes were assessed

through considering changes to access resources, abundance and distribution of resources, perceived quality of

resources, and the quality of the current use experience.


Based on the assessment of potential Project effects in relation to the current use of lands and resources for

traditional purposes indicators, no effects were identified for the following interactions:.

▪ Access from changes in river processes

▪ Changes in productivity, abundance, and presence of preferred resources including marine mammals,

fish, and birds

▪ Quality of preferred resources

Negligible effects were identified for the following interaction:

▪ Quality of experience when accessing areas of current use for harvesting and cultural practices in air

quality, atmospheric noise, and visual quality

Marine transportation of materials and equipment during construction and decommissioning, marine shipping

during operations, construction and maintenance dredging, and operations of the marine security zone during

construction and operation could result in temporary interference to FSC fish harvesting for some Aboriginal

groups. This effect was carried forward for residual effects analysis.

Marine transportation of materials and equipment during construction, marine shipping activity during

operation, marine construction and operational activities at site including dredging, and operations of the

marine security zone construction and operation could affect access to locations for FSC or domestic

harvesting. This effect was carried forward for residual effects analysis.

Effects were found for the Musqueam Indian Band and the Tsawwassen First Nation related to their ability to

continue to harvest fish for FSC and domestic purposes at some locations. With the application of mitigation




xxx

measures including the Marine Transportation Management Plan, the Marine Communications Plan, an

Aboriginal Communications Plan, and a Musqueam/Tsawwassen First Nation Marine use and Fisheries

Advisory Group, project-related residual effects are considered negligible and were not carried through for

cumulative effects.

Visual Quality

The Project is located at Tilbury Island within a developed corridor of the South Arm of the Fraser River in Metro

Vancouver. The existing visual landscape is characterized by urban / suburban and industrial land use settings

within Richmond and Delta, and a pattern of natural riparian areas interspersed with industrial marine infrastructure

and activity along the foreshore of the Fraser River. The Fraser River is also an important marine transportation

route with numerous commercial vessels regularly transiting the South Arm. There are a range of direct light

sources visible during nighttime related to nearby industrial facilities, transportation infrastructure, and residential

areas as well as ambient light from the regional context of Metro Vancouver.

Potential Project-related effects related to visual quality considered in the assessment included changes from

current daytime and nighttime viewing conditions based on the visibility and visual contrast of Project components

and Project-related lighting with the existing visual character and the resulting visual impact to viewers from key

viewpoints. Key findings of this assessment are presented below:

While construction activities are anticipated to create temporary changes in visual quality from current

daytime and nighttime viewing conditions (e.g., construction activities and equipment, progressive assembly

of permanent jetty structure, lighting for worker safety and security), the largest anticipated effect to visual

quality, both spatially and temporally, will occur during the Operation phase when Onshore Facilities and

Offshore Facilities are fully built and operational. In addition to construction activities, the FTBB structures

and bunker vessels will be visible during the construction phase. The temporary components of the FTBB

will be decommissioned once the permanent Offshore Facilities are fully operational.

Visibility analysis indicated that where viewpoints are within a foreground viewing distance (i.e., < 1 km) of

the Project, visible components will be perceived as prominent elements of the landscape setting which may

attract the attention of viewers. From more distant viewpoints, the Project components will generally be less

evident in the landscape and will be seen within the larger urban and industrial setting, where they will blend

in with existing conditions.

Analysis of the visual contrast created by Project components and their effect on the existing visual quality

indicates that at most key viewpoints, the Project is predicated to result in a generally “low” (i.e., visual

disturbance is evident, but the contrast does not attract the attention of the viewer) level of visual impact

related to the visual character of Offshore Facilities and LNG carriers / barges that are characteristic of the

existing visual landscape character during the daytime.

Project-related operational lighting (i.e., navigational and floodlighting of the marine jetty and the navigational

lighting of marine vessels) will introduce perceivable light sources that may appear prominent within the

existing lighting conditions. However, it is anticipated that they will have no effect on the existing level of

brightness locally and regionally.




xxxi

The residual effects resulting from changes to visual quality as a result of visible Project components and

Project lighting is expected to be low after the application of mitigation measures due to the generally small

level of visual change to existing conditions that is characteristic with the existing visual character of daytime

and nighttime viewing. The residual effects of the Project on visual quality were determined to be not

significant

Certain and reasonably foreseeable projects and activities within the region were predicted to have

cumulative visual effects with the Project that will change the existing visual quality during daytime and

nighttime viewing. The expected residual cumulative effects will result in a noticeable and distinct change to

the existing visual quality during daytime viewing due to the visibility of new industrial infrastructure projects,

as well as a small change to existing lighting conditions due to an increase in perceived lighting sources and

a potential increase in the light level from existing conditions. The residual cumulative effects on visual quality

were determined to be not significant.

Heritage Resources

Heritage Resources is one of the BCEAO’s five pillars, and consists of three sub-components, each of which is

considered under CEAA 2012 Subsections 5(1) and 5(2); is of conservation/scientific importance; and is important

to Aboriginal groups and stakeholders. The subcomponents are as follow:

Paleontological resources – consisting of paleontological sites, features, and objects;

Archaeological resources – consisting of archaeological sites, features, and objects, and provided with

automatic protection under the Heritage Conservation Act (HCA); and

Historical resources – consisting of historical sites, and possibly protected under the HCA.

Indicators of project effects are detectable, project-induced disturbance of paleontological, archaeological, or

historical sites, features, and objects; or changes in the level of accessibility to paleontological, archaeological, or

historical sites, features, and objects. A desktop heritage resources overview assessment listed known, or

previously recorded, heritage resources in both the Regional Assessment Area (RAA) and Local Assessment Area

(LAA), as well as assessing for the potential for unrecorded heritage resources in areas subject to project effects

from a broad range of sources, including reports on traditional use of the regional environment by Aboriginal

groups. It was determined that resources subject to project effects would be limited to the LAA.

Desktop review indicates there are no known heritage resources located within the LAA. The review suggests that

there is some potential for unrecorded heritage resources to exist in the LAA, depending on the subcomponent

and location within the LAA as follows:

Owing to depth of bedrock and lack of bedrock, shale or gravels it is unlikely that paleontological resources

are present within the depth of possible project effects.

There is potential for buried archaeological resources to exist within 100 m of the river edge in both the marine

and terrestrial parts of the Project, and within the depths of possible project effects (i.e., densification).




xxxii

Although their presence is unlikely, historical resources (i.e., heritage wrecks) could potentially exist within

the offshore portion of the Project.

WesPac commits to a follow-up program of archaeological inventory conducted prior to, or concurrent with,

proposed future ground disturbance activities in areas with heritage resource potential that have not been subject

to field inspection. These areas that have heritage resource potential (and therefore provide a potential Project

interaction) and are also testable include terrestrial portions of the LAA that will be subject to land-based ground

stabilization and pile works during construction, and which may be subject to accidents and malfunctions

(i.e., spills) during operation. Additionally, if suitable remote sensing data (i.e., bathymetry, magnetometry) are

available, the review of these data would address the unlikely possibility that heritage wrecks are present and have

not been removed by historical dredging in the subtidal portions of the Dredge Area. Depending on availability of

data and results of further assessment archaeological monitoring of construction activities may be recommended.

Should heritage resources be encountered as a result of inventory, construction, or chance find during or after

construction, mitigation measures will be implemented to eliminate the potential for residual project effects on

Heritage Resources as follows:

Realign or Redesign Project Components to Avoid Heritage Resources (the preferred mitigation option, when

feasible).

Alternative Measures to Reduce Project Effects to Archaeological and Historical Sites (e.g., protective

covering, stabilization, and physical barriers that aim to minimize or reduce Project effects).

Heritage Offsetting (i.e., if effects to archaeological and historical sites cannot be avoided or minimized, the

permanent loss may be offset by a gain in knowledge commensurate with severity of the adverse effect, as

determined by the Archaeology Branch).

A Heritage Resources Chance Find Management Procedure will be prepared for implementation by WesPac.

Human Health

The Human Health VC addressed the physical determinants of health (from exposure to chemicals) and was

assessed using a human health risk assessment (HHRA) approach. The risk assessment approach provides a

structured framework for evaluating potential adverse effects on receptors (e.g., people) from environmental

stressors (e.g., metals in soil).

The purpose of the Human Health assessment was to assess the potential health risk to people that could result

from the Project. The Human Health assessment provides an evaluation of risks at receptor locations where people

are known to be present including communities, Aboriginal harvesting areas and recreational areas that are in the

proximity of the Project. This was done by identifying the chemicals or chemical groups present in the emissions

from the Project, predicting resultant Project-related changes to environmental media to which people could be

exposed, and estimating and assessing the risk that the predicted changes represent to human health.




xxxiii

There were three components to the Human Health assessment:

1) A human health multimedia risk assessment, which evaluated risk associated with exposure to constituents

that might be present in soil, sediment, water, country food and air;

2) A human health inhalation risk assessment, which evaluated the acute and chronic effects associated with

airborne and gaseous substances that are present only in air; and

3) A human health particulate matter risk assessment, which evaluated risks of estimated exposures to airborne

particulate matter.

The results of the Human Health assessment are as follows:

Based on the problem formulation, no constituents of potential concern were identified for the human health

multimedia risk assessment; therefore, this component was not carried forward for residual effects analysis.

Based on the problem formulation, constituents of potential concern were identified for the human health

inhalation risk assessment:

▪ Acute 1-Hour: nitrogen dioxide (Dredger and Normal Operation scenarios), diesel particulate matter

(DPM), benzo(a)pyrene, cyclopenta(c,d)pyrene, 2,5-dimethylbenzaldehyde and crotonaldehyde.

▪ Chronic: nitrogen dioxide, cadmium and chromium.

Based on the problem formulation, DPM was identified as a constituent of potential concern for the human

health particulate matter risk assessment. A qualitative discussion was used to evaluate potential health

effects of DPM.

Relative to other sections, the Human Health assessment used a slightly different approach to classify

residual effects and evaluation of significance because several of the criteria (e.g., geographical extent,

duration, frequency and reversibility) were already incorporated into the risk estimates and, therefore, are not

independent variables. The Human Health assessment considered magnitude (comparison of maximum,

95th percentile and/or 75th percentile concentrations to thresholds, frequency and probability of exceedances),

context (comparison of Application Case and Project Only Case risk estimates to Baseline Case risk

estimates) and prediction confidence and uncertainty (conservatisms and uncertainties in the air predictions,

conservatisms in the thresholds, exposure assumptions and reference concentrations). The results of the

residual effects analysis are as follows:

▪ Residual effects were considered negligible for acute 1-hour exposure to nitrogen dioxide (Dredger

scenario) and crotonaldehyde.

▪ Residual effects were considered low for acute 1-hour exposure to nitrogen dioxide (Normal Operation

scenario), DPM, benzo(a)pyrene, cyclopenta(c,d)pyrene and 2,5-dimethylbenzaldehyde. These

constituents were carried forward for significance determination.

▪ Residual effects were considered negligible for chronic exposure to nitrogen dioxide, cadmium and

chromium.




xxxiv

The determination of significance of potential residual effects for the Human Health assessment was based

on the residual effects rating assigned (negligible, low, moderate and high), a review of background

information, consultation with government agencies and other experts, and professional judgement. The

results of the significance determination are as follows:

▪ Acute 1-hour exposure to nitrogen dioxide (Normal Operation scenario), DPM, benzo(a)pyrene,

cyclopenta(c,d)pyrene and 2,5-dimethylbenzaldehyde during the Operations phase were not considered

to be significant.

The likelihood of each residual effect is unlikely, based on the low probabilities of residual effects occurring

(less than 3.1%), and the prediction confidence of each residual effect is moderate. Overall, there were

several model inputs and assumptions that were considered to result in overprediction of exposure and risks.

Therefore, the assessment is considered conservative and there is high confidence that risks have not been

underestimated. However, due to some uncertainties around the air thresholds and the air quality predictions,

the prediction confidence is considered moderate.

It was not possible to conduct a quantitative cumulative effects assessment for Human Health because there

is insufficient information available to conduct air quality modelling of other certain and reasonably

foreseeable projects and activities. Cumulative effects are discussed qualitatively as follows:

▪ Section 4.4 (Air Quality) provides a qualitative discussion of cumulative effects assessment for the

atmospheric environment. The results of the qualitative evaluation indicated that residual cumulative

effects for nitrogen dioxide were not considered significant.

▪ With respect to benzo(a)pyrene, cyclopenta(c,d)pyrene and 2,5-dimethylbenzaldehyde, emissions to air

result from diesel combustion in marine vessels. Benzo(a)pyrene emissions to air also occur from the

adjacent Fortis facility (in the Application Case), although the emissions are much lower than the Project

Only emissions. Potential interactions could occur with the VAFFC Fuel Delivery project and the proposed

expansion of the Tilbury Seaspan ferries jetty, as operation of these projects are likely to contribute

emissions of benzo(a)pyrene, cyclopenta(c,d)pyrene and 2,5-dimethylbenzaldehyde at a level that may

generate residual effects. However, interaction would occur through combustion of diesel in marine

vessels, and hence interaction would likely be intermittent. For the VAFFC Fuel Delivery Project, where

one marine vessel is expected every two weeks, the interaction is infrequent. Therefore, the residual

cumulative effects for benzo(a)pyrene, cyclopenta(c,d)pyrene and 2,5-dimethylbenzaldehyde were not

considered significant.

Accidents and Malfunctions

The assessment methodology for Accidents and Malfunctions follows a risk assessment methodology consistent

with Canada’s National Standard CAN/CSA-IEC/ISO 31010 for risk assessment (Canadian Standards Association

[CSA] 2010; International Organization for Standardization [ISO] 2009) and the BC Risk Management Guideline

for the BC Public Sector (BC Risk Management Branch and Government Security Office, 2012). The approach

includes hazard identification, risk measurement, and risk evaluation.

Hazard scenarios were organized into the following categories of accidents and malfunctions.




xxxv

1. Hazardous material spills: The Project will be designed, operated, and managed to reduce the potential for

hazardous material spills. A hazardous material spill is more likely to occur during the construction and

decommissioning phases, when a larger number of heavy equipment and construction materials will be used.

During operations, sources of hazardous material spills at the Onshore Facilities are limited primarily to

maintenance and support activities and materials. The residual consequence severity for an onshore spill that

is contained on land can range from negligible to low with potential local short-term reversible effects on

vegetation and wildlife. The residual consequence severity for a hazardous material spill affecting the

estuarine environment is also estimated to be low with potential local short-term reversible effects on

vegetation, wildlife, marine mammals, water quality, and fish.

2. Loss of liquefied natural gas (LNG) containment: A leak or rupture on the onshore portion of the LNG

transfer system could occur due to equipment failure or natural hazards. During the construction phase with

Floating Temporary Bunker Berth (FTBB) operations, an offshore release could occur due to a leak or rupture

of the flexible cryogenic line or a coupling failure. During the operations phase with the permanent jetty, an

offshore release could occur due to a leak or rupture of the offshore portion of the stainless-steel pipeline or

the loading arms. The residual consequence severity of an onshore LNG release is estimated to be low, with

potential local, short-term reversible effects on air quality as well as vegetation and wildlife if present in the

affected area. The gas detectors and the emergency shut down system limit the release volume and thereby

prevent further escalation of the effects. The residual consequence severity of an offshore LNG release

affecting the estuarine environment is also estimated to be low, with potential local, short-term reversible

effects on the Air Quality, Vegetation, Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat, Fish and Fish Habitat, and Marine Mammals

VCs. The emergency shut down system prevents further escalation of the effects.

3. Fire or explosion: In over 45 years of LNG storage and terminal operations worldwide, there have been no

significant off-site public injuries or property damage. LNG has limited flammability, is not explosive in an

unconfined environment, and is non-toxic; these physical and chemical properties contribute to its safety.

Furthermore, the broad set of standards, codes, and regulations that now apply to the LNG industry also assist

in maintaining a high safety record. For a fire that could result from the ignition of an LNG spill at the Project

facilities, the residual consequence severity for the environmental VCs is estimated as low with potential local

short-term reversible effects on air quality, vegetation, wildlife, fish, marine mammals, and socio-community.

The potential fire could also result in public injury or fatality; thus the potential public safety consequence is

considered high. Preliminary results of the quantitative risk assessment undertaken for the Project indicates

that the risk for an individual fatality in the immediate vicinity of the Offshore Facilities is once in 10,000 to

100,000 years, with lower likelihood in and around the Onshore Facilities.

4. Unplanned shutdown: An unplanned shutdown of the Project’s LNG loading system could occur due to an

upset condition at the Tilbury LNG Plant, equipment failure, control system failure, or a power failure. The

emergency shut down valves would be activated, either automatically or manually, in the event of a failure. As

the LNG transfer system is heavily insulated, LNG can remain in the system even during a prolonged

shutdown. Boil-off gas from the LNG transfer system can be directed to the FortisBC LNG storage tank or

flushed using an inert gas to the LNG vessel cargo system. The boil-off gas flushed to the LNG vessel cargo

system would most likely be used as a fuel to power the ship’s propulsion, eliminating the need for venting.

5. Unplanned disturbance of ecologically sensitive areas by equipment operations: To prevent an

unplanned disturbance of an ecologically sensitive area by equipment operations, environmental training will




xxxvi

be mandatory for all contractors and equipment operators and will address the location of the ecologically

sensitive areas. Boundaries of the ecologically sensitive area will be identified by high-visibility means such

as snow fencing and flagging tape. If an unplanned disturbance occurs, the Project will revegetate and restore

the riparian habitat in consultation with the applicable regulatory agencies. The residual risk consequence to

the environment of an unplanned disturbance of an ecologically sensitive area by equipment operations is

considered to be low with potential for local and short-term reversible effects.

6. Failure of sediment containment: A stormwater drainage system for the onshore portion of the Project site

will be designed according applicable standards to limit erosion and release of sediments into the riparian

zone and estuarine environment. Failure of the drainage system could occur due to inadequate design,

inadequate construction, or an extreme weather event exceeding design specifications, and could result in

increased sedimentation affecting the riparian habitat. The drainage system will be designed by qualified

professionals in compliance with the principles of the Fisheries and Ocean Canada (DFO) Land Development

Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Habitat (DFO, 1992), the ENV Develop with Care 2014 (MOE, 2014),

and other ENV best management practices and standards for erosion and sediment control. Construction

quality control will be performed to confirm the system is constructed according to design specifications. The

residual risk consequence to the environment of a failure of the stormwater drainage system is estimated to

be low with local and short-term reversible effects.

7. Marine vessel allision, grounding, or collision: Potential accidents and malfunctions involving Project-

related marine vessels include allision (i.e., a vessel striking against a stationary structure) between a Project-

related vessel and the Project’s docking or berthing facilities, collision between a Project-related vessel and

another vessel, and grounding of a Project-related vessel. These accidents and malfunctions could result in

potential adverse effects to one or more EA VCs or public safety. Marine transport of LNG has a long record

of safe operation. Review of LNG shipping history shows that, since the first commercial LNG cargo shipped

over 50 years ago in 1964, there have been no collisions, fires, explosions, or hull failures resulting in a loss

of containment for LNG ships. The safety record is attributable to the inherently safe and robust design and

construction of the LNG vessels and their specialized cargo containment systems, comprehensive operational

procedures, crew training, equipment maintenance planning, continuous technological improvements,

effective industry standards, and regulatory oversight by government.

Effects of the Environment on the Project

The Project could be subject to the following environmental factors:

Potential effects of climate change on temperature, precipitation, and sea level rise;

Extreme weather and weather-related events including wind, heavy rain, extreme temperatures, lightning,

drought, and fog;

Flood risk from extreme tides and peak river flows;

Seismic events;

Volcanic events; and




xxxvii

Tsunami, river slope stability, and mass wasting events.

Historical and future projections on environmental factors, considering the effects of global and regional climate

change, has been considered in the design of the Project. While the region may be affected by environmental

factors such as extreme weather, flooding, and seismic events, the risks will be mitigated by Project design based

on engineering criteria and regulatory standards. The design values will be confirmed during detailed design to

ensure they meet long-term climate change trends and changes. Additional management processes will also be

developed to manage the potential risks associated with the environmental factors.

Climate Change

Since 1900, the average annual temperature in the southern coastal regions of British Columbia (BC) has

increased at a rate of 0.8°C per 100 years, like the global average warming rate. The temperature increase since

1900 is expected to accelerate in the future (Metro Vancouver 2016). Climate change has also led to changes in

precipitation in southern coastal BC. Historically, spring precipitation (March to June) has increased by 23% over

the past 100 years in southern coastal BC, with no statistically significant historical increase in precipitation for the

rest of the year (MOE, 2016). The warming trends and changes in precipitation due to climate change would

influence the occurrence of extreme weather events that could affect the Project. Along with sea level rise, they

would also influence the occurrence of coastal flooding.

Extreme Weather Events

During the construction phase of the Project, extreme temperatures could result in construction delays and safety

concerns for the construction workers (e.g., heat exhaustion and fatigue). These issues will be managed according

to the construction management plan. During operation, extreme temperatures would cause similar safety

concerns for Project personnel. The warming trend may increase the risk for heat exhaustion or fatigue; however,

the higher temperatures are not atypical to similar operations in warmer climate and will be managed accordingly

and addressed in the Project’s operational health and safety plan. While extreme temperatures could affect the

Project, the effects of extreme temperatures on the Project do not impose a risk to the VCs or public safety.

Extreme precipitation may temporarily suspend some construction activities, and in poor visibility may hinder

navigation or berthing operations. Extreme precipitation is unlikely to affect the LNG transfer system and unloading

activities, although ice, if present on loading arm and other key equipment, may need to be removed before

unloading operations. The Project will be designed to withstand 1:50-year rain and snow load in accordance to the

National Building Code of Canada. The extreme precipitation and snow load design criteria will be reviewed during

detailed design to ensure they meet long-term trends and changes.

Extreme wind conditions could also produce extreme waves. Wave calculations performed for the Project

(Ausenco, 2015) showed a sustained wind speed of 50 knots from the southwest (i.e., in the up-river direction)

would result in a wave height of approximately 1.0 m with associated peak wave periods of 4 seconds. Mitigation

measures to minimize potential risk to the construction and operation of the project for extreme wind and waves

include:




xxxviii

LNG export carriers will follow the Port of Vancouver TCZ-4 guidelines including the restriction from transiting,

berthing, and disembarking on the Fraser River in winds exceeding 25 knots.

The Project’s LNG transfer system and marine structures will be designed for repairable damage under the

1:50-year wind and wave loads, in accordance with the National Building Code of Canada.

Considering that absence of vegetation in much of the Project vicinity, a fire caused by a lightning strike in the

area (e.g., a brush fire) is unlikely to escalate to the Project site. Furthermore, the Project’s key structures, including

the pipes, pipe racks, and terminal structures, will be constructed with fire-resistant materials. Therefore, lightning

is not a material risk to the Project.

The effect of drought conditions on the Project is minimal. The Project has low water demand, and therefore, would

be relatively unaffected by the shortage in regional water supply. Lower stream flows would also have little effect

on the Project, as the Fraser River would remain navigable with tidal assist at its lower flow range.

Flooding

Due to its setting in the lower Fraser River delta, the Project site is vulnerable to flooding from spring freshet in the

Fraser River and from storm surge and high tide events. A major storm surge, which typically occurs in late fall to

early winter, could add 1.0 m to the high water level in the Fraser River delta (Thomson et al., 2008). An extreme

storm surge, which could be caused by a culmination of a major storm event coinciding with a highest high water

tide during a major El Niño event, could foreseeably result in water levels of up to 5.3 m CD (with no sea level

rise), or 5.6 m CD assuming up to 30 cm sea level rise by the end of the 25-year Project operations.

The Project will be designed to withstand flood conditions, as described below:

The Project’s Onshore Facility will be protected by the Fraser River dike. The top of the interim dike has an

elevation of 5.8 m CD, which would accommodate the 1:200-year design flood with 1.1 m freeboard.

The onshore stainless-steel pipeline will be placed on elevated pipe racks.

The Floating Temporary Bunker Berth (FTBB), with flexible cryogenic line, is a floating structure that would

move vertically with tide and flood levels.

The permanent jetty will have an elevation of 10.0 m CD, which is higher than the foreseeable extreme storm

surge flood levels.

Seismic Events

The Project is located within a region of high potential for ground movement associated with earthquakes. To

mitigate the risk of damage due to seismic events, the Project will be designed to meet all applicable seismic

design standards, including Canadian Standards Association (CSA) Z276 and the recommended practices in the

American National Fire Protection Association’s NFP-59A standards for LNG facilities.




xxxix

The Project site is underlain by soft compressible deltaic sediments that have a limited load bearing capacity and

a relatively high potential for liquefaction under seismic loading. To enhance the load carrying capacity and reduce

the likelihood of liquefaction under seismic loading, onshore and offshore densification will be required. The

densification would involve an array of vertical stone columns, each drilled into the weak soils, filled with stone and

compacted, resulting in a densified ground matrix that considerably increases the strength of the soils.

Volcanic Events

The nearest active volcanoes to the Project are Mount Baker (approximately 100 km east-southeast) and Mount

St. Helens (approximately 320 km south-southeast), both in Washington State. Other volcanoes near the Project

area are those in the volcanic belts of Garibaldi (approximately 80 km north), Wells Gray (approximately 400 km

northeast), and the Chilcotin Plateau (approximately 450 km north-northwest). These volcanoes are considered

dormant, with the most recent eruption in these belts occurring at Mount Meager in the Garibaldi belt approximately

2,350 years ago.

An eruption of an active or currently dormant volcano could generate ash that could lower visibility for navigation

of Project-related vessels.

Tsunami and Mass Wasting Events

The Metro Vancouver area is exposed to a greater risk by a potential local landslide-generated tsunami, which

could be caused by a massive submarine landslide at the foreslope of the Fraser River delta into the deep waters

of the Strait of Georgia. The foreslope of the Fraser River delta consists of unconsolidated sediments and is known

to be unstable (Rabinovich et al., 2003; Leonard et al., 2012). The effects of a tsunami on the Fraser River delta

is predicted to be low, with waves not exceeding 2 m in Tsawwassen, which suggests more limited effects farther

up-river at the Project site along Tilbury Island. Small slides of the unconsolidated materials in the Fraser River

delta are relatively common. These slides are shallow-seated, move down gradually over a period of hours, and

therefore would not result in tsunami waves.

At the Project site, densification would also be carried out in the foreshore area and the river dike will be stabilized

as part of the planned improvement. Consequently, these design mitigation measures would increase slope

stability of the dike and the Project’s foreshore area.

Summary of Monitoring and Follow-up Programs

The EAC Application recommends that monitoring and follow-up programs be implemented prior to and during

Project construction, operation, and decommissioning. Monitoring and follow-up programs for each of the affected

VCs include:

River Process: Annual Sounding surveys and Analysis of Reach-wide Bathymetry Data

Fish and Fish Habitat: Monitoring and Habitat Plan

Marine Mammals: Monitoring Plan




xl

Water Quality Monitoring

Air Quality Monitoring

Vegetation: Invasive Plant Species Monitoring and Wetland Mitigation Plan

Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat: Wildlife Management Plan

Land and Marine Resource Use: Monitoring

Visual Quality: Monitoring

Heritage Resources: Archaeological Impact Assessment




xli

Summary of Statutory Requirements under CEAA 2012

Table 0.4-4 provides a summary of Project-related environmental effects as defined in subsections 5(1), 5(2), and 19(1) of CEAA 2012.

Table 0.4-4: Summary of Environmental Effects

Subject Potential Changes

5(1)(a) a change that may be caused to the following components of the environment that are within the legislative authority of Parliament

(i) fish and fish habitat as defined in subsection 2(1) of the Fisheries Act,

Reduction in fish and marine mammal habitat

Reduction in fish and marine mammal abundance

Disturbance to fish and marine mammals

Mortality to fish and marine mammals

Reduction in benthic communities as food sources

(ii) aquatic species as defined in subsection 2(1) of the Species at Risk Act,

Reduction in fish and marine mammal abundance

Disturbance to fish and marine mammals

Loss of marine plants

(iii) migratory birds as defined in subsection 2(1) of the Migratory Birds Convention Act, 1994, and

Reduction in habitat suitability due to noise and light

Increases in migratory bird mortality from collisions

5(1)(b) a change that may be caused to the environment that would occur

▪ (i) on federal lands,

▪ (ii) in a province other than the one in which the act or thing is done or where the physical activity, the designated project or the project is being carried out, or

▪ (iii) outside Canada

The Project is entirely located within the province of British Columbia and does not occur on federal lands; therefore, with the application of applicable mitigation measures, no residual adverse effects to federal lands are expected as outlined in Section 4.1 River Processes, Section 4.5 Noise, Section 4.6 Water Quality, Section 4.7 Vegetation, and Section 4.8 Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat.

Where residual effects are determined to be greater than negligible, the construction and operation of the Project may change the environment within federal lands, by having an effect on the following VCs:

▪ Section 4.3 Marine Mammals ▪ Section 4.4.1 Air Quality




xlii


5(1)(c) with respect to Aboriginal peoples, an effect occurring in Canada of any change that may be caused to the environment on

(i) health and socio-economic conditions, Health effects resulting from changing Air Quality related to SO2 concentrations, NO2 concentrations, PM2.5 concentrations, PM10 concentrations, DPM emissions.

Health effects related to exposure to NO2, benzo(a)pyrene, cyclopenta(c,d)pyrene and 2,5-dimethylbenzaldehyde

Health effects related to changes in noise levels

Health effects related to changes in nighttime light levels

Health effects related to changes in water quality

Economy increases from employment

Increased demand on community infrastructure

Increased road traffic during construction and operations

(ii) physical and cultural heritage, Potential effects to archaeological sites

Potential effects to historical sites

Potential effects to sites and places with connection to cultural practices and traditions

(iii) the current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes, or

Access and navigation from changes in river processes and project related vessels

Changes in productivity, abundance, and presence of preferred resources including marine mammals, fish, and birds

Quality of preferred resources

(iv) any structure, site or thing that is of historical, archaeological, paleontological or architectural significance.

Paleontological resources

Archaeological resources

Historical resources

5(2)(a) a change, other than those referred to in paragraphs (1)(a) and (b), that may be caused to the environment and that is directly linked or necessarily incidental to a federal authority’s exercise of a power or performance of a duty or function that would permit the carrying out, in whole or in part, of the physical activity, the designated project or the project

Fisheries Act Environmental changes to fish and fish habitat

Navigation Protection Act Project changes that restrict navigation

Canadian Environmental Protection Act Potential environmental effects associated with disposal of dredge marine sediments at sea




xliii


5(2)(b) an effect, other than those referred to in paragraph (1)(c), of any change referred to in paragraph (a) on

(i) health and socio-economic conditions, Health effects resulting from changing Air Quality related to SO2 concentrations, NO2 concentrations, PM2.5 concentrations, PM10 concentrations, DPM emissions

Health effects related to exposure to NO2, benzo(a)pyrene, cyclopenta(c,d)pyrene and 2,5-dimethylbenzaldehyde

Health effects related to changes in noise levels

Health effects related to changes in nighttime light levels

Health effects related to changes in water quality

Economy increases from employment

Increased demands on community infrastructure

Increased road traffic during construction and operations

(ii) physical and cultural heritage, or Archaeological sites

Historical sites

Sites and places with connection to cultural practices and traditions

Access and navigation from changes in river processes and project related vessels

(iii) any structure, site or thing that is of historical, archaeological, paleontological or architectural significance.

Paleontological resources

Archaeological resources

Historical resources

Project-related residual adverse effects on VCs under federal jurisdiction were assessed to be not significant with the implementation of identified mitigation

measures.




xliv

Aboriginal Interests

During Initial Engagement and pre-Application Consultation, WesPac requested information from each Aboriginal

group on the nature and scope of their Aboriginal Interests, which is defined as asserted or determined Aboriginal

rights, including Aboriginal title, and Treaty rights, and how the Project may affect these Aboriginal Interests.

Mitigation measures identified for VCs presented in Part B of the Application were reviewed in Part C for their

effectiveness at also addressing potential Project-related effects on the exercise of Aboriginal Interests. These

mitigation measures are expected to be effective at avoiding, reducing, or otherwise managing potential adverse

Project-related effects on the exercise of Aboriginal Interests.

Ongoing consultation between WesPac and Schedule B Aboriginal groups is proposed during Application Review

and following issuance of an EAC, should the Project be approved. Although Project-related effects are unlikely

to result in a significant adverse effect on Aboriginal groups’ other traditional and cultural interests or on Aboriginal

title, WesPac has committed to ongoing consultations with the Schedule B and C Aboriginal groups.

Prior to construction, WesPac will prepare a CEMP to provide guidance on actions and activities that will be carried

out during construction of the Project, and to identify measures to reduce the risk of occurrence of incidents that

could affect the environment and reduce effects that are unavoidable. The CEMP and its component plans will

include measures designed to be effective at avoiding, reducing, or otherwise managing potential adverse effects

of the Project on the exercise of Aboriginal Interests during Project construction.

Prior to commencement of operation of the Project, WesPac will prepare an OEMP that will describe the

environmental management measures and best management practices that will be in place throughout Project

operation, and will address operation and maintenance activities that may adversely affect environmental, social,

economic, heritage, or health components. Similar to the CEMP, the OEMP will include component plans to

address activity-specific mitigation measures. The OEMP and its component plans will be designed to be effective

at avoiding, reducing, or otherwise managing potential adverse effects of the Project on the exercise of Aboriginal

Interests during Project operation.

To facilitate the inclusion of Aboriginal Interests’ considerations of Schedule B Aboriginal groups into the effective

management of potential Project construction and operation effects, WesPac will consult with affected Schedule

B Aboriginal groups when developing plans to be included within the CEMP and OEMP. WesPac will also consult

affected Schedule B Aboriginal groups on the development of monitoring and follow-up programs to facilitate

consideration and inclusion of their Aboriginal Interests.

After consideration of the measures linked or interrelated with the VC and PC assessments, including the CEMP,

OEMP, and Environmental Monitoring Plan relevant to those assessments, and including consultation with

Schedule B Aboriginal groups during their development and implementation, no additional mitigation measures

are required to avoid a significant adverse effect on Aboriginal Interests.




xlv

Conclusion

The proposed Project will allow for transfer of LNG from Fortis’ existing LNG facility to barges and ocean-going

vessels serving local and export markets. The environmental assessment undertaken for the Project identified

environmental and socio-community resources that may potentially be affected by the Project. Where applicable,

the engineering design concept for the Project has been adapted and refined to mitigate potential adverse effects

to valuable components. Additional mitigation measures during detailed Project design, construction, and

operation are proposed to further avoid and/or minimize potential adverse effects. Project-related residual adverse

effects on VCs were assessed to be not significant with the implementation of mitigation measures.

\\golder.gds\gal\burnaby\Final\2013\1422\13-1422-0049\1314220049-184-R-Rev3\1314220049-184-R-Rev3-Tilbury Application

Summary_19MAR_19.docx

wespac tilbury marine jetty project...the construction phase is expected to be initiated in 2019 and...

Documents