Construction Environmental Management Plan€¦ · report for Anthem Duncan Developments LP solely...

Construction Environmental Management Plan Sediment Remediation and Dike Construction

02 August 2018

307071-01144 – 00-EN-PLN-0002

Advisian Suite 500, 4321 Still Creek Drive Burnaby, BC V5C 6S7 CANADA Phone: +1 604 298 1616 Facsimile: +1 604 298 1625 www.advisian.com

© Copyright 2018 WorleyParsons Canada Services Ltd.

Anthem Duncan Developments LP Construction Environmental Management Plan Sediment Remediation and Dike Construction

307071-01144-00-EN-PLN-0002_R2.docx Advisian ii

Disclaimer

The information presented in this document was compiled and interpreted exclusively for the purposes stated in Section 1 of the document. WorleyParsons Canada Services Ltd., operating as Advisian (Advisian) provided this report for Anthem Duncan Developments LP solely for the purpose noted above.

Advisian has exercised reasonable skill, care, and diligence to assess the information acquired during the preparation of this report, but makes no guarantees or warranties as to the accuracy or completeness of this information. The information contained in this report is based upon, and limited by, the circumstances and conditions acknowledged herein, and upon information available at the time of its preparation. The information provided by others is believed to be accurate but cannot be guaranteed.

Advisian does not accept any responsibility for the use of this report for any purpose other than that stated in Section 1 and does not accept responsibility to any third party for the use in whole or in part of the contents of this report. Any alternative use, including that by a third party, or any reliance on, or decisions based on this document, is the responsibility of the alternative user or third party.

No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior permission of Advisian.

Any questions concerning the information or its interpretation should be directed to V. Burdett-Coutts, Author or T.Hildahl.


307071-01144-00-EN-PLN-0002_R2.docx Advisian iii

Contents Acronyms and Abbreviations ................................................................................................................................................................. vii

1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Project Location ........................................................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Project Scope ................................................................................................................................................................ 1

1.3 Purpose ........................................................................................................................................................................... 1

1.4 Objectives ....................................................................................................................................................................... 2

2. Environmental Setting ............................................................................................................................................................... 4

2.1 Habitat Assessment .................................................................................................................................................... 4

2.2 Wildlife ............................................................................................................................................................................ 6

2.3 Riparian Habitat ........................................................................................................................................................... 6

2.4 Guidelines and Best Management Practices .................................................................................................. 10

3. Description of the Proposed Works ................................................................................................................................... 11

3.1 The Project ................................................................................................................................................................... 11

3.2 Project Schedule ........................................................................................................................................................ 21

3.3 Site Access, Mobilization, and Laydown Areas .............................................................................................. 21

4. Project Organization ................................................................................................................................................................. 22

4.1 Roles and Responsibilities ..................................................................................................................................... 22

4.1.1 Proponent – Anthem Properties ...................................................................................................................... 22

4.1.2 Contractor ................................................................................................................................................................. 23

4.2 Communication and Reporting ........................................................................................................................... 23

4.3 Key Project Personnel .............................................................................................................................................. 23

5. Legislation, Regulations, and Guidelines .......................................................................................................................... 26

5.1 Legislation and Regulations .................................................................................................................................. 26

5.2 Permitting Requirements ....................................................................................................................................... 27


307071-01144-00-EN-PLN-0002_R2.docx Advisian iv

6. Potential Environmental Effects ........................................................................................................................................... 29

6.1 Fish and Fish Habitat ............................................................................................................................................... 29

6.2 Marine Mammals ...................................................................................................................................................... 29

6.3 Vegetation and Wildlife .......................................................................................................................................... 30

6.4 Water and Sediment Quality ................................................................................................................................ 30

6.5 Erosion and Sediment Control ............................................................................................................................. 31

6.6 Air Quality and Dust ................................................................................................................................................. 31

6.7 Waste Management, Fuel Storage, Spills, and Emergency Response.................................................. 31

6.8 Traffic Management ................................................................................................................................................. 32

6.8.1 Marine-Based ........................................................................................................................................................... 32

6.8.2 Land-Based ............................................................................................................................................................... 32

6.9 Noise and Vibration ................................................................................................................................................. 32

7. Mitigation Measures ................................................................................................................................................................. 33

8. Environmental Monitoring ..................................................................................................................................................... 39

8.1 General Monitoring .................................................................................................................................................. 39

8.2 Turbidity Monitoring ............................................................................................................................................... 39

9. Reporting ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 40

9.1 General .......................................................................................................................................................................... 40

9.2 Non-Compliance ....................................................................................................................................................... 40

9.3 Reportable Incidents ................................................................................................................................................ 41

9.4 Reporting Frequency ............................................................................................................................................... 41

10. Adaptive Management ............................................................................................................................................................ 42

11. References .................................................................................................................................................................................... 43


307071-01144-00-EN-PLN-0002_R2.docx Advisian v

Tables within Text

Table 2-1 General Nesting Period for the Lower Mainland (A1 Zone) ...................................................................... 6

Table 2-2 Habitat Categorizations Fronting the Project Site ......................................................................................... 7

Table 3-1 Construction Activities Proposed to Occur in Foreshore Regions within VFPA Jurisdiction ................................................................................................................................................................... 15

Table 3-2 Areas and Volumes of Sediment to be excavated within the Risk Management Areas and VFPA Jurisdiction .............................................................................................................................................. 17

Table 4-1 Key Project Personnel .............................................................................................................................................. 24

Table 5-1 List of Federal, Provincial, Regional District, and Municipal Legislation and Legal Requirements for the Project ............................................................................................................................... 28

Table 7-1 Mitigation Measures for the Proposed Project ............................................................................................. 33

Figures within Text

Figure 1-1 Site Location .................................................................................................................................................................. 3

Figure 3-1 Habitat Classifications, Risk Management Areas, and Dike Footprint ................................................. 12

Figure 3-2 Miscellaneous Debris Fronting Project Site .................................................................................................... 13

Figure 3-3 Condition Rating Scale - On-Site Trees............................................................................................................ 14

Photographs within Text

Photo 2-1 Habitat Fronting the Site: a) West Foreshore; b) Mid Foreshore; c) East Foreshore ........................ 8

Photo 2-2 Riparian Area Fronting the Site: a) West Foreshore Looking West; b) Mid Foreshore Looking West; c) East Foreshore (immediately E of RMA #3) Looking West ...................................... 9

Photo 3-1 View Depicting the Concrete Retaining Wall to be Removed ................................................................ 18

Photo 3-2 Riparian Area Fronting the Site: a) West Foreshore Looking West; b) Mid Foreshore Looking West; c) East Foreshore (immediately E of RMA #3) Looking West .................................... 19

Photo 3-3 Tree(s) on a) Western Boundary (N001-N007) and b) Eastern Foreshore (Tree 943) of the Site .......................................................................................................................................................................... 20


307071-01144-00-EN-PLN-0002_R2.docx Advisian vi

Appendices

Appendix 1 Sediment Remediation Report

Appendix 2 Engineering Drawings for Dike Construction

Appendix 3 Nesting Bird Behaviour Information


307071-01144-00-EN-PLN-0002_R2.docx Advisian vii

Acronyms and Abbreviations

Term Definition

Anthem Anthem Duncan Developments LP

Approved Facility provincially approved disposal facility

BC British Columbia

CDC Conservation Data Centre

CEMP This Construction Environmental Management Plan

CEPA Canadian Environmental Protection Act

CEPP Contractor Environmental Protection Plan

CM Construction Manager

COSEWIC Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada

CRA Commercial, Recreational, or Aboriginal

CSR Contaminated Site Regulations

Demolition Works Demolition of existing structures that were not embedded in sediment and the removal of piles

DFO Fisheries and Oceans Canada

ECCC Environment and Climate Change Canada

EM Environmental Monitor

FREMP Fraser River Estuary Management Program

HSE Health, Safety, and Environment

HWL High Water Line

IBA Important Bird Area

LFR Lower Fraser River

MoE Ministry of Environment

PER Project and Environmental Review

QEP Qualified Environmental Professional

RAR Riparian Area Regulations

RMA Risk Management Area

SARA Species at Risk Act

SDS Safety Data Sheets


307071-01144-00-EN-PLN-0002_R2.docx Advisian viii

Term Definition

SERP Spill and Emergency Response Plan

SME Subject Matter Experts

SoG Strait of Georgia

SoW Scope of Work

the Project works and activities covered in the CEMP

the Site 41 and 175 Duncan Street in New Westminster, British Columbia

VFPA Vancouver Fraser Port Authority

WHMIS Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System

WQG Water Quality Guidelines


307071-01144-00-EN-PLN-0002_R2.docx Advisian 1

1. Introduction

1.1 Project Location

Anthem Duncan Developments LP (Anthem) is planning to construct a townhouse development at 41 and 175 Duncan Street in New Westminster, British Columbia (BC), which was previously an industrial facility (the Site). The Project is located in the Queensborough neighbourhood of New Westminster, BC, on northeast Lulu Island, facing the south side of Poplar Island (49˚11.475’N, 122˚55.829’W, Figure 1-1). Lulu Island and Annacis Island (south of Lulu) are between the north and south arms of the Fraser River.

1.2 Project Scope

This Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) has been developed to cover the works and activities (the Project) that are required to occur within the Vancouver Fraser Port Authority’s (VFPA) jurisdiction. These are summarized below:

1. Removal of Foreshore Structures: Demolition of remaining marine structures and debris removal.

2. Sediment Remediation: soil remediation works within retained areas on the foreshore.

3. Construction of the foreshore dike including a ramp on the western edge (dike footprint is outside of VFPA jurisdiction).

4. Removal of trees and vegetation for both the townhouse development and dike construction

The VFPA has indicated that these activities will require a Category C Permit.

The demolition of existing structures that were not embedded in sediment and the removal of piles were permitted by the VFPA (Demolition Works) (VFPA, 2017, Permit No. 16-154), and was completed in Fall 2017. These works will not be discussed further in this report.

Anthem plans to undertake the Project under a single construction contract.

1.3 Purpose

This CEMP sets out the structure and framework for the management of potential environmental effects related to the Project and includes the following:

Roles and responsibilities.

Communication and reporting procedures.

Implementation of mitigation measures.

Conducting compliance (monitoring) checks and implementing improvements where required.



The mitigation measures outlined in this CEMP are based on site-specific documents which provided information on the existing conditions at the Site. These documents include:

Shoreline Habitat Assessment (Advisian, 2017).

Recommended Sediment Management Areas (Keystone, 2017).

Arborists Report (Arbortech, 2017)

1.4 Objectives

The objectives of the CEMP are to limit or prevent adverse environmental effects to the Fraser River during construction activities including:

Apply control measures to maintain water quality within the Fraser River.

Minimize air pollution from equipment operation and associated activities.

Minimize effects on the environment caused by the disturbance of any contaminated sediments.

Minimize waste and manage hazardous materials safely.

Minimize the potential for serious harm to Commercial, Recreational, or Aboriginal (CRA) fisheries or fish that sustain such fisheries, as specified by Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO).

Prepare for potential incidents or environmental emergencies.

Monitor and adaptively manage work procedures as necessary to limit environmental effects.

Poplar Island

Fraser River

122°55'0"W122°56'0"W

49°12'0"N

5050005450000

307071-01144 1-1 0

KR

24/07/2018

KR

VB

PLOT DATE & TIME: 24/07/2018 12:28:37 PM

SAVE DATE & TIME: 24/07/2018 12:28:37 PM

USER NAME: kenneth.w.ritchie

ISSUING OFFICE: BURNABY GIS

FILE LOCATION: U:\YVR\307071\01144_AP_DuncanDike\10_Eng\16_Geomatics\01_Mxd\CEMP\Sediment_Remediation_and_Dike_Construction\Contractor_CEMP\2018-07-24_Figure1-1_Location.mxd

SCALE: SHOWN

"This drawing is prepared for the use of our customer as specified in the accompanying report. WorleyParsons Canada Ltd.assumes no liability to any other party for any representations

contained in this drawing."

CUSTOMER:A SHEET

WORLEYPARSONS PROJECT No: FIG No: REV

DATE:

DRAWN:

EDITED:

APPROVED:

Site Location

Service Layer Credits: Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), swisstopo, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community

Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community

Legend

Limit of VFPA Jurisdiction

Site Location

0 100 200 30050

Metres ±

ANTHEM PROPERTIES

SITE LOCATION



2. Environmental Setting The Site is located within the Lower Fraser River (LFR), which extends from the mouth of the Fraser River to the beginning of the Fraser Canyon at Hope (Richmond Chamber of Commerce, 2014). Lulu Island and Annacis Island to its south, divide the LFR into the North Arm and South Arm, with the South Arm considered the main channel. Within Queensborough, the most productive sections of the LFR are the southwest shoreline, along Annacis Channel (City of New Westminster, 2015). Within the LFR, the Site is located on the northeast shore of Lulu Island, and is the first reach of the North Arm of the Fraser River, with the uninhabited Poplar Island to the north. The Fraser River estuary and tidal mudflats in the LFR reaches provide important rearing habitat and migration corridor for a variety of CRA and designated fish species.

The Site is located approximately 23 km upstream from the Strait of Georgia (SoG), and is influenced by oceanic tides. New Westminster (No. 7654) is the closest tidal station to the Project, where 2016 observed water levels with a maximum tidal range of 3.2 m (DFO, 2015b).

2.1 Habitat Assessment

Advisian (2017) conducted a habitat assessment to determine the habitat characteristics of the Fraser River fronting the Site (to low water) and determined habitat suitability for anadromous or freshwater fish species. A follow up visit was conducted in January 2018, following the Demolition Works, to understand the current conditions ahead of the Project.

Advisian biologists reviewed the habitat classifications previously assigned by the Fraser River Estuary Management Program (FREMP). FREMP had considered the western, mid, and eastern foreshore of the Site to be high, low, and moderate productivity areas respectively. Advisian (2017) concluded the western side to be moderate productivity, and the mid and eastern foreshore to be low productivity. The justification for the moderate value was that the sedge grass along the intertidal of the western foreshore are similar to nearby habitats and are unlikely to support habitat for CRA or designated species. The 2018 field survey confirmed the habitat classifications described in Advisian (2017) (Figure 3-1).

The East Foreshore was considered to be an impacted area similar to the Mid Foreshore, and was deemed to be low productivity habitat. While there is a very narrow section of riparian and intertidal habitat, which was not disjointed from the water line, it is a very small fragmented patch, and given the extent of surrounding anthropogenic debris, is unlikely to provide habitat functions to fish or wildlife (Photo 2-1).

CRA fishery species or designated species (Species at Risk Act [SARA], Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada [COSEWIC]) which have potential to be using the areas of moderate to high productivity, or to be migrating through the north arm of the Fraser River are provided herein. Additional details on habitat requirements are provided for designated species.

CRA Fishery Species

Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha)

Sockeye salmon (O. nerka)



Pink salmon (O. gorbuscha)

Chum salmon (O. keta)

Coho salmon (O. kisutch)

Coastal cutthroat trout (O. clarkii)

Steelhead (O. mykiss)

Bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus)

Dolly Varden (S. malma)

Designated Species

Eulachon (Thaleichthys pacificus¸ COSEWIC, Endangered; SARA, No Status)

White Sturgeon (Lower Fraser River Population [Acipenser tranmontanus], COSEWIC, Endangered; SARA, No Status)

Eulachon

Eulachon are an anadromous fish species, which spend the majority of their lives in the marine environment, returning to their natal rivers to spawn. The Fraser River Eulachon are known to spawn in the lower reaches of the north and south arms of the Fraser River (DFO, 2015a), in late April to early June (DFO, 2016). Preferred spawning habitat consists of sand and pea-sized gravel (Moody, 2000). Historically, the north arm of the Fraser River in proximity to the Site has been an area for migrating/spawning Eulachon (Lower Fraser Fisheries Alliance, 2015). Spawning locations may vary annually as they are strongly dependent on flow rates (Stables et al., 2005). While there is the potential for Eulachon spawning near the Site, historically the major spawning area is the stretch between Mission and Chilliwack (Scott and Crossman, 1973), which is approximately 45 km east of the Site. The historical run for this species is from the end of March to the beginning of May (DFO, 2015a). It is not expected that Eulachon would be impacted by the Project as all works are occurring within DFO’s recommended least-risk work windows (June 16 to February 28) (DFO, 2014) (Area 28 Vancouver: Fraser River Estuary [Oak Street Bridge/George Massey Tunnel to Mission Bridge]).

White Sturgeon

The LFR White Sturgeon is unlikely to be residing near the Site, but may be migrating through the north arm of the LFR. Spawning habitat preferences are variable between locations, although typically include cobble and gravel mixed with sand, with spawning occurring from July to August (Perrin, 2000). There is no spawning habitat at the Site. However, Nelson et al. (2015) conducted a tagging study in collaboration with the LFR White Sturgeon Monitoring and Assessment Program, which showed White Sturgeon are present in the vicinity of the Site. Prior to this survey, BC Ministry of Environment (BC MoE, 2017) identified the majority of the stock upstream of the Site near Mission, BC. The Site is within the BC Conservation Data Centre (CDC) White Sturgeon (LFR population) database (BC CDC, 2014b).



2.2 Wildlife Advisian (2017) assessed the potential for wildlife species at risk to occur. This assessment was a desktop review and no targeted wildlife field surveys were conducted. Since Advisian (2017), the upland buildings which may have provided habitat for wildlife have been removed.

Within the foreshore areas, foraging, roosting habitat exists for double-crested cormorant (Phalacrocorax auritus) (COSEWIC Status, Not at Risk; BC Status, Blue), great blue heron (Andrea herodias fannini) (COSEWIC Status, Special Concern; BC Status, Blue), green heron (Butorides virescens) (COSEWIC Status, None, BC Status, Blue), and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus anatum) (COSEWIC Status, Special Concern; BC Status, Red) (BC MoE, 2013b). These types of habitats do not appear to be limiting in the area and given historical disturbance and contamination, the value is considered low. Great blue heron and double-crested cormorant nest in colonies. Although a nest search was not specifically conducted, no evidence of stick nest colonies was observed. Similarly, the lack of protected trees and shrubs (to conceal a nest) along the foreshore reduce the breeding potential for green heron. There were no at risk great blue heron nests documented on provincial databases (e.g. BC CDC).

The Site is located within the Boundary Bay –Roberts Bank – Sturgeon Bank (Fraser River Estuary) Important Bird Area (IBA) (IBA Canada, 2018). However, there is no unique habitat for birds within the Site. The foreshore area is relatively small in relation to other areas in the LFR, it is in close proximity to other industrial operations, and in an urbanized environment. While the Site may not provide high quality habitat for birds, nearby areas likely do. Thus, consideration must be given to life history processes such as nesting. For the lower mainland, the nesting season generally occurs between mid-March and mid-August (Table 2-1) (ECCC, 2017). Overall breeding activity is highest between mid-April and late-July.

Table 2-1 General Nesting Period for the Lower Mainland (A1 Zone)

Source: ECCC (2017).

2.3 Riparian Habitat As presented in Advisian (2017) and in the 2018 follow up Site visit, riparian vegetation was observed along the majority of the West Foreshore, along a limited extent of the Mid Foreshore, and along a short section of the East Foreshore (Photo 2-2). When present riparian vegetation consisted primarily of western red cedar (Thuja plicata), black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa), hardhack (Spiraea douglasii), thimbleberry (Rubus parviflorus), snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus), Nootka rose (Rosa nutkana), salmonberry (R. spectabilis), thimbleberry, other native shrub species and the invasive Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor).

According to the BC CDC, point rush (Juncus oxymeris) is located on Annacis Island and within the Site (BC CDC, 2014a). Point rush is blue listed (BC CDC, 2018), but does not have a federal listing under COSEWIC or SARA (SARA, 2017). Point rush was not observed during Advisian (2017) or during the 2018 Site visit. However, a summer Site visit has not been conducted.



Table 2-2 Habitat Categorizations Fronting the Project Site

Location Habitat Shoreline Length (m)

West Foreshore Moderate Productivity: habitat features that are of moderate value in structure or diversity due to existing conditions (e.g. surrounding land uses or productivity) to support fish and wildlife functions.

92

Mid Foreshore Low Productivity: areas where habitat features and functions are limited due to existing conditions (e.g. developed for port or other urbanized uses).

226

East Foreshore Low Productivity: see above 124

Source for habitat categorizations: (FREMP, 2013)



Photo 2-1 Habitat Fronting the Site: a) West Foreshore; b) Mid Foreshore; c) East Foreshore



Photo 2-2 Riparian Area Fronting the Site: a) West Foreshore Looking West; b) Mid Foreshore Looking West; c) East Foreshore (immediately E of RMA #3) Looking West



2.4 Guidelines and Best Management Practices

Guidelines and Best Management Practices (BMPs) that were used in developing this CEMP include:

DFO: Measures to Avoid Harm (DFO, 2013)

DFO: Projects Near Water: British Columbia Marine/Estuarine Timing Windows for the Protection of Fish and Fish Habitat (DFO, 2014)

Port of Vancouver: Guidelines (Port of Vancouver, 2018a)

VFPA- Project and Environmental Review Application Guide – CEMP – April 2018 (Port of Vancouver, 2018b)

Port of Vancouver: Project and Environmental Review Application Guide – November 2017 (Port of Vancouver, 2017)

Best Management Practices for Pile Removal and Related Operations (BC Marine and Pile Driving Contractors Association, 2003)

A User’s Guide to Working in or Around Water (BC MoE, 2005)

Guidelines to Protect Fish and Fish Habitat from Treated Wood Used in Aquatic Environments in the Pacific Region (Hutton and Samis, 2000)

Develop with Care 2014: Environmental Guidelines for Urban and Rural Land Development in British Columbia (BC MoE, 2014)

Guidelines for Raptor Conservation during Urban and Rural Land Development in British Columbia (BC MoE, 2013a)

Avoiding Harm to Migratory Birds (ECCC, 2018)



3. Description of the Proposed Works

3.1 The Project

The proposed construction activities are described in the following sections and summarized in Table 3-1.

The proposed foreshore dike is above the HWL, and the majority of the footprint is not within the VFPA jurisdiction.

Engineering drawings showing dike construction are provided in Appendix 2.

307071-01144-00-CI-DGA-1010 – General Notes and Design Criteria

307071-01144-00-CI-DGA-1011 – Plan and Profile

307071-01144-00-CI-DGA-1012 – Lockblock Wall Elevation View

307071-01144-00-CI-DGA-1013 – Sections and Details (Sheet 1)

307071-01144-00-CI-DGA-1014 – Sections and Details (Sheet 12)

The proposed construction activities are described in the following sections and summarized in Table 3-1 with the area depicted in Figure 3-1.

kj

kjkj

Approximate location of Retaining Wall(to be removed)

1 2 3

West Foreshore Mid Foreshore East Foreshore

#A

#B

#C

#D

#E

# F

#G

See Inset for detail

943

N007 HEDGEROW

N006

122°55'38"W122°55'39"W122°55'40"W122°55'41"W122°55'42"W122°55'43"W122°55'44"W122°55'45"W122°55'46"W122°55'47"W122°55'48"W122°55'49"W122°55'50"W122°55'51"W122°55'52"W122°55'53"W

49°11'49"N

49°11'48"N

49°11'47"N

49°11'46"N

49°11'45"N

49°11'44"N

505000 505100 505200 505300

5449200

5449300

PLOT DATE & TIME: 24/07/2018 12:14:39 PM

SAVE DATE & TIME: 24/07/2018 12:14:39 PM

USER NAME: kenneth.w.ritchie

ISSUING OFFICE: BURNABY GIS

FILE LOCATION: U:\YVR\307071\01144_AP_DuncanDike\10_Eng\16_Geomatics\01_Mxd\Project_Description\2018-07-24_Figure3-1_Risk_Management_Areas_Dike_Footprint.mxd

SCALE: SHOWN CUSTOMER:B SHEET

DATE:

DRAWN:

EDITED:

APPROVED:

K.R.

Y.M.

V.B.

307071-01144

24/07/2018

"This drawing is prepared for the use of our customer as specified in the accompanying report. WorleyParsons Canada Ltd.assumes no liability to any other party for any representations

contained in this drawing."


Service Layer Credits: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community

Lot information from City of New Westminster.VFPA Jurisdiction supplied by Port of Vancouver.

Legend

kj Tree

High High Water Level

Low Low Water Level

RAR 30m Buffer

Dike Layout

Limit of VFPA Jurisdiction

Lot Boundary (Approx.)

Risk Management

Ground Truth ClassificationBased On Survey

Low Productivity

Moderate Productivity

0 10 205

Metres ±ANTHEM PROPERTIES

HABITAT CLASSIFICATIONS,RISK MANAGEMENT AREAS AND DIKE FOOTPRINT

3-1 0

kjkj

kjkj

kjkj

kjN007 HEDGEROW

N006

N005

N004

N003

N002

N001

West Foreshore Mid Foreshore East Foreshore

4

36

2

5

PLO

T D

ATE &

TIM

E: 01/0

8/2

018 6

:56:1

2 A

MSAV

E D

ATE &

TIM

E: 01/0

8/2

018 6

:56:1

2 A

M

USE

R N

AM

E: kenneth

.w.ritchie

ISS

UIN

G O

FFIC

E: B

UR

NA

BY G

IS

FIL

E L

OC

ATIO

N: U

:\Y

VR

\307071\0

1144_A

P_D

uncanD

ike\1

0_Eng\1

6_G

eom

atics\0

1_M

xd\C

EM

P\S

edim

ent_

Rem

edia

tion_and_D

ike_C

onstruction\C

ontracto

r_C

EM

P\2

018-0

2-1

3_Fig

ure

3-2

_Photo

s1.m

xd

SCALE: SHOWN CUSTOMER:B SHEET

DATE:

DRAWN:

EDITED:

APPROVED:

K.R.

307071-01144 0

01/08/2018

"This drawing is prepared for the use of our customer as specified in the accompanying report. WorleyParsons Canada Ltd.

assumes no liability to any other party for any representations contained in this drawing."


Service Layer Credits: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community

ANTHEM PROPERTIES

MISCELLANEOUS DEBRIS

FRONTING PROJECT SITE

PHOTO 3-2

1

2

3 4 5

6

K.R.

V.B.



Figure 3-3 Condition Rating Scale - On-Site Trees

Source: Arbortech (2017)



Table 3-1 Construction Activities Proposed to Occur in Foreshore Regions within VFPA Jurisdiction

Project Activity

Task No.

Description Photo, Figure reference

Foreshore Location

Engineering Drawing Section

Construction Approach

Removal of Foreshore Structures

3.1A

Miscellaneous anthropogenic debris is scattered along the Site foreshore.

Other miscellaneous debris that could not be removed during the previous demolition phase will be removed, as required.

Excavators may be used where debris is embedded. Excavation is described in Item 3.2A below.

Figure 3-2 All Areas NA

Debris will be removed primarily using land-based equipment in ‘out-of-water’ tidal conditions.

If any debris is embedded, excavation around the debris will only occur in ‘out-of-water’ tidal conditions.

3.1B The primary component of the remaining demolition is the removal of the retaining wall and associated soil contained behind it that extends beyond the HWL.

Photo 3-1

Figure 3-1

Mid Foreshore Area and RMA No. 2

East of D

The soil that is landward of the retaining wall will be removed first with a land based excavator so that it will not be eroded into the marine environment. The soil will be placed in an appropriately sized truck for daily removal from Site. Soil will be disposed of at a provincially approved disposal facility (Approved Facility). The concrete retaining wall will also be removed with a land based excavator and removed by truck to an Approved Facility. The area falls within the Risk Management Area (RMA) and therefore the remaining sediments will be remediated, as per Item 3.2B, ahead of dike construction.

3.1C Removal of existing concrete surface. None Mid Foreshore Area and RMA No. 2

C Removal of the concrete surface will be done in ‘out-of-water’ tidal conditions using land based equipment.

3.1D Disposal of construction debris, structures, and soil/sediment will be managed to prevent any materials from entering the marine environment.

NA NA NA

The soil will be placed into an appropriately sized truck for daily removal from Site. Soil will be disposed of at an Approved Facility.

The concrete retaining wall will be removed with a land-based excavator and trucked from Site to an Approved Facility.

Sediment Remediation

3.2A Excavation of sediment out-of-water to 0.5 m depth.

RMA No. 1 (West Foreshore)

RMA No. 2 (Mid Foreshore)

RMA No. 3 (East Foreshore)

NA

A pad will be constructed above the HWL to facilitate access for the crane/excavator and disposal trucks.

Material will be loaded directly into sealed truck or bins for transportation to an Approved Facility.

3.2B

Keystone has conducted several sediment survey programs to identify areas below the HWL that require remediation for the dike construction. Keystone (2017) refined previously established RMAs for metals, hydrocarbons and organo-metals to provide Anthem with remediation recommendations.

Excavation or dredging will be to 0.5 m below existing grade, as per the remediation plan (Keystone 2017). Clean native material will be used to fill the excavated areas.

Figure 3-1 details the RMAs, the VFPA jurisdiction limits, and the dike footprint.

The surface area and volumes of the RMAs are provided in Table 3-2

RMA No. 1 (West Foreshore)

RMA No. 2 (Mid Foreshore)

RMA No. 3 (East Foreshore)

NA

Sediments within the RMAs will be excavated with land or marine-based equipment depending on the location and the reach of equipment. The location of equipment staging (land/marine-based) will primarily be determined by equipment reach

Marine-based excavation will occur using a spudded barge with a crane derrick and clamshell bucket.

Activity will be planned to occur at high tide when feasible. Dredged material will be placed in a sealed barge and transported to Approved Facility.



Project Activity

Task No.

Description Photo, Figure reference

Foreshore Location

Engineering Drawing Section

Construction Approach

Land-based excavation will occur for soil remediation with access via existing roads at the Site.

3.2C Transportation and disposal of sediment. NA NA

It will be necessary to dewater and/or solidify the sediment for transportation. Dewatering would occur within the barge with water pumped into storage tanks for transport to the Approved Facility. It may be necessary to use an additive to solidify the sediment within the barge or truck. Cement is typically used for this purpose. If so, the additive will be stored and applied so that it cannot enter the Fraser River. There will be no release or discharge of water from the barge or the truck.

Foreshore Dike

3.3.1 A small volume of sediment will be excavated from within the VFPA jurisdiction to allow for the construction of the dike. The total volume is approximately 3 cubic metres (m3) of material.

Drawing No. 1013, Section D, Appendix 2.

East Foreshore, Mid Foreshore

A, B, C, D

The sediment will be excavated using land-based equipment during out-of-water tidal conditions.

Sediment will be transported by sealed barge or truck depending on method of removal (marine-based or land-based) and delivered to an Approved Facility.

Clean native material will be used to fill the excavated areas. The total volume is approximately 3 cubic metres (m3) of material.

3.3.2

Construction of dike ramp.

The ramp will be approximately 7 m long and have a 5% grade. The ramp will be used for access during construction, and will remain in place subsequent to construction.

see Drawing No 1011, west end of profile drawing

West Foreshore, East Foreshore

307070-01144-00-CI-DGA-1010

See construction Specification 5.0 of drawing 307070-01144-00-CI-DGA-1010.

Vegetation and Tree Removal

3.4A

There are trees that will be required to be cleared for both the Project and the Development, which are both within and adjacent to VFPA jurisdictional boundary of the VFPA. The existing vegetation is sparse and provides very little value as riparian habitat for the Fraser River.

An arborists report was completed in January 2017, where all trees assessed were categorized as ‘unsuitable’ (Figure 3-3 for ratings).

Tree 943 within VFPA jurisdiction N001 – N007 – outside of VFPA and along the western boundary of the Site.

Photo 3-2 (vegetation),

Photo 3-3 (trees)

East Foreshore, RMA 3

NA Vegetation and trees will be removed using land based equipment



Table 3-2 Areas and Volumes of Sediment to be excavated within the Risk Management Areas and VFPA Jurisdiction

Risk Management Area

Constituent of Concern Surface Area (m2)

Volume (m3)

1 Organo-metal: Tributyltin 180 90

2

Metals: arsenic, copper, lead, mercury, zinc

PAHs: acenaphthene, anthracene, benzo(a)anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene, chrysene, fluoranthene, fluorene, phenanthrene, pyrene

Organo-metal: Tributyltin

1,604 802

3

Metals: arsenic, copper, lead, mercury, zinc

PAHs: acenaphthene, anthracene, benzo(a)anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene, chrysene, fluorene, phenanthrene, pyrene

719 360

Total 2,503 1,252

Source: Keystone (2017)



Photo 3-1 View Depicting the Concrete Retaining Wall to be Removed



Photo 3-2 Riparian Area Fronting the Site: a) West Foreshore Looking West; b) Mid Foreshore Looking West; c) East Foreshore (immediately E of RMA #3) Looking West



Photo 3-3 Tree(s) on a) Western Boundary (N001-N007) and b) Eastern Foreshore (Tree 943) of the Site



3.2 Project Schedule

The Project is planned to commence in the 2019-2020 least risk season window (beginning June 2019), and is expected to be completed within four to six months. All works are planned to be completed within DFO’s recommended least-risk work windows (June 16 to February 28) (DFO 2014: Area 28 Vancouver: Fraser River Estuary [Oak Street Bridge/George Massey Tunnel to Mission Bridge]) (DFO, 2014).

The sediment remediation is expected to only require a total of three to four days of effort, based on the small volume of material to be excavated and/or dredged. Similarly, the removal of the soil and retaining wall that extends into the VFPA jurisdiction is expected to be a total of three to four days and will be scheduled to coincide with the construction of the related section of dike. These activities may not be continuous, i.e. may be spread over a longer period, depending on coordination with other components of construction and accessibility, such as tidal restrictions.

Construction activity is anticipated to be scheduled between 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. on weekdays and 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on a.m. Saturdays, conforming to the New Westminster Construction Noise Bylaw No. 6063, 1992 (City of New Westminster, 1992) and to the Port Authority’s standard work hours (Port of Vancouver, 2018c). The Contractor will apply for a Request for Construction Noise Bylaw Exemption in the event it is required for works dictated by tidal cycles.

3.3 Site Access, Mobilization, and Laydown Areas

Activities will take place with either marine-based or land-based equipment. Marine-based will occur using a spudded barge, and land-based will occur using existing access roads at the Site. Marine-based and land-based construction equipment may be operating simultaneously when logistically feasible. The location of equipment staging (land/marine-based) will primarily be determined by equipment reach.



4. Project Organization The responsibility and authority pertaining to environmental management roles of key VFPA personnel, Health, Safety, and Environment (HSE) personnel, environmental specialists, Environmental Monitor (EM), Contractors, and Construction Manager (CM) is described in this section.

4.1 Roles and Responsibilities

4.1.1 Proponent – Anthem Properties

The Proponent has the obligation to confirm commitments within this CEMP and any other permits or regulations to protecting the environment are met, and that these obligations are made known to the Contractor. The Proponent plans to have a CM and EM for the Project. The EM role may fall to the Contractor. Anthem representatives will liaise with the CM and EM, and Contractor to review all aspects of construction and confirm the commitments outlined in this CEMP are met. Regulatory authority will also fall under the jurisdiction of VFPA for this Project.

The roles will include:

4.1.1.1 Construction Manager

The CM is responsible for confirming that all environmental obligations are met during the design and decommissioning phase of the Project. This process will include frequent dialogue between the EM, Contractor, and Proponent Representative.

4.1.1.2 Environmental Monitor

The EM will provide independent verification of the implementation of the Proponent’s commitments and obligations and to monitor general environmental compliance. The EM should be a Qualified Environmental Professional (QEP).

The EM is on site to observe, record, and report on environmental performance and is responsible for observing the methods of construction and for preparing reports on the compliance of the project activities as per this CEMP.

The EM can direct the CM or any worker, as applicable, to stop a construction activity if the activity is deemed to pose a risk to the environment.

The EM will be present on site at detailed in Section 8. Monitoring duties will include visual inspection and collection of data, as required. The EM will also verify that mitigation measures are implemented and that all site personnel are aware of the requirements of this CEMP and any other permits or regulations. The EM may bring in Subject Matter Experts (SME) to support monitoring if required for a specific construction activity or environment, although this is not expected to be necessary in this case.



4.1.2 Contractor

The Contractor will be required to comply fully with the requirements of the CEMP. The Contractor will be in constant communication with the CM and EM, as part of the CEMP implementation and monitoring process.

The Contractor will be responsible for producing a Contractor Environmental Protection Plan (CEPP) (or similar titled document) that details how construction activities will conform to requirements outlined in this CEMP as well as any other regulations or permit conditions.

It is the responsibility of the Contractor to understand and adhere to this CEMP and undertake the following:

Induction/training for personnel regarding potential environmental effects, the requirements of this CEMP, and Emergency Response Procedures.

Conduct regular inspections of work procedures and equipment operation to confirm compliance with standard procedures and prevent possible future effects.

Check regular inspections of spill response measures and secondary containment to confirm compliance and containment goals are met.

The Contractor will be responsible for providing a detailed Construction Plan prior to initiation of the Project. It will at a minimum contain the following:

Provide details on construction methods.

Detailed work schedule, including coordination with tidal cycle during construction period.

Details on disposal routes planned from the Site to a provincially Approved Facility for both marine-based and land-based construction activities.

The Contractor will prepare a Spill and Emergency Response Plan (SERP).

4.2 Communication and Reporting

The Contractor will be responsible for the reporting of incidents to the VFPA and/or any other regulatory body, in collaboration with the CM and EM.

The EM will produce monitoring reports detailing field inspections and including any sampling data and photographic documentation.

4.3 Key Project Personnel

Key Project personnel contact information is provided in Table 4-1.



Table 4-1 Key Project Personnel

Name Role Organization Phone Number Email

Kevin Beck Director, Construction (Proponent)

Anthem Office: 1-604-488-3628

Mobile: 1-604-834-2984

[email protected]

Ryan Wickham Project Manager

Anthem Office: 1- 604 689 3040

Mobile: 1-604 347 9732

[email protected]

Tom Hildahl Project Manager

Advisian Office: 1-778-945-8545

[email protected]

Victoria Burdett-Coutts

Professional Biologist

Advisian Office: 1-778-945-5501

[email protected]

Raminder Grewel

Sediment Remediation Specialist

Keystone Office: 1-604-430-0671

[email protected]

Kevin Wong Office: 1-604-430-0671

[email protected]

Alice Story Archaeologist Archer Office: 1-604-336-6016

[email protected]

Spencer Chaisson

Environmental Specialist - Project Review and Development

VFPA Office: 1-604-665-9389

[email protected]

Catalin Debrescu

Utilities Engineer

City of New Westminster

1-604-527-4595 [email protected]

DFO Observe, Record and Report Hotline

DFO 1-800-465-4336 ---

Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC)

Environmental Emergency Reporting (Pollution Incident)

ECCC 1-800-663-3456 ---

mailto:[email protected]













Name Role Organization Phone Number Email

Canadian Wildlife Service

[email protected]

1-800-668-6767

Canadian Coast Guard (CCG)

Reporting a Marine Pollution Incident (Marine-Based)

CCG 1-800-889-8852 ---

BC MoE 24 Hour Emergency Reporting

--- BC MoE 1-800-663-3456 ---

Emergency Management BC (EMBC)/ Provincial Emergency Program (PEP)

--- EMBC/PEP 1-604-660-2421

1-800-663-3456

---

Notice to Shipping

--- CCG 1-250-413-2842 [email protected]

Emergency Medical Services

--- Police, Fire, Ambulance

911 ---






5. Legislation, Regulations, and Guidelines

5.1 Legislation and Regulations

Legislation, regulations, and guidelines applicable to the Project are described in this section. The latest revisions of all Acts and Guidelines will be applied to the CEMP where necessary; however, the CEMP is an iterative document and may be amended as deemed appropriate. Copies of all permits and approvals received for this Project will be kept onsite to be presented on request.

Legislation relevant to the Project includes:

Fisheries Act (Section 36), pollution prevention provisions dealing with the deposit of deleterious substances into waters frequented by fish (administered under Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC)).

Fisheries Act (Section 35), prevention of serious harm to fish or effect to a commercial, aboriginal, or recreational fishery.

Navigation Protection Act, governs protection of navigable water.

Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 2012 (CEPA), management of toxic substances.

Canada Marine Act. Administered through the VFPA for shipping and port related land and marine use in the Metro Vancouver Region.

Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012. Administered through the VFPA for shipping and port related land and marine use in the Metro Vancouver Region.

Canada Shipping Act, 2001, promotes safety in marine transportation.

Contaminated Site Regulations (CSR), enabled by the British Columbia Environmental Management Act, regulates waste discharge, hazardous waste, and spill reporting.

Migratory Birds Convention Act, protection of shoreline birds and foreshore/intertidal habitat.

British Columbia Wildlife Act.

SARA (Species at Risk Act), protection or endangered or threatened species.

British Columbia Water Sustainably Act, for works in or about a stream.

Spill reporting Regulations (BC Environmental Management Act).

British Columbia Riparian Area Regulations (RAR) (Riparian Area Regulation) (Riparian Area Regulation) (Riparian Area Regulation) (Riparian Area Regulation) (Riparian Area Regulation) (Riparian Area Regulation) (Riparian Area Regulation) (Riparian Area Regulation) (Riparian Area Regulation) (Riparian Area Regulation) (Riparian Area Regulation) (Riparian Area Regulation) (Riparian Area Regulation).

New Westminster Riparian Areas Protection Bylaw, 2005; this fulfils the City of New Westminster’s legal requirement to adopt the provincial RAR.



5.2 Permitting Requirements

Permitting requirements that are anticipated for Project, which will be obtained by the Proponent or Contractor prior to the implementation of the Project, are summarized in Table 5-1. In addition, applications for development and building permits have been submitted to the City of New Westminster for the construction of the townhouse complex. However, these permits are not required for the construction activities within the Project.



Table 5-1 List of Federal, Provincial, Regional District, and Municipal Legislation and Legal Requirements for the Project

Legislation Regulatory Authority

Construction Activity Required Authorization/ Permit/Approval

Permit/Approval Required Additional Details Legislation Source

Federal

Canada Marine Act

VFPA Any works that occur within the VFPA jurisdiction.

Project and Environmental Review Permit (Category C)

Yes Permit will be obtained from VFPA https://www.portvancouver.com/development-and-permits/project-and-environmental-reviews/

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-6.7/

Application to work outside of construction hours stipulated by VFPA guidance document

Works outside of the ports standard work hours

Yes Permit will be obtained from VFPA https://www.portvancouver.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/2018-2-15-FINAL-Construction-Outside-of-Regular-Work-Hours-Guideline_CheckboxForm.pdf

Fisheries Act DFO In-water works that have the ability to result in serious harm to fish or fish habitat, as defined under the Fisheries Act.

Section 35(2) Fisheries Act Authorization

No A professional biologist will develop a self-assessment for the Project

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/F-14.pdf

Navigation Protection Act

TC In-water works that have the potential to interfere with navigation.

Notice of Works and/or Application for Approval

No The Project will fall under the minor works and waters order (https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/programs-675.html)

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/N-22.pdf

Provincial

No provincial permits.

Municipal

Bylaw No. 6063, 1992

City of New Westminster

Application to work outside of construction hours stipulated in the bylaw.

Bylaw amendment Yes Contractor will apply for a bylaw amendment if they plan to work outside of the stipulated construction hours

https://www.newwestcity.ca/database/files/library/6063cons.pdf

https://www.portvancouver.com/development-and-permits/project-and-environmental-reviews/

https://www.portvancouver.com/development-and-permits/project-and-environmental-reviews/

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-6.7/


https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/programs-675.html

https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/programs-675.html





6. Potential Environmental Effects Project related construction activities that were described in Section 3.1 (Table 3-1) have the potential to interact with the environment. Potential environmental effects are described herein. Effects are considered mitigatable with the measures described in Section 7.

6.1 Fish and Fish Habitat

Construction activities which have the potential to result in environmental effects on fish habitat include:

Excavation for the dike construction and sediment remediation.

Excavation of soil during the removal of the retaining wall.

Construction vessel traffic and marine equipment.

Fuel storage and refuelling, including spills.

Removal of riparian vegetation from the rip rap slope on the western portion of the site.

The construction activities listed above have the potential to result in the following environmental effects:

Destruction of fish habitat through sediment excavation and spudding of barge during construction.

Modification of fish habitat due to changes in water quality and sedimentation.

Disruption of fish spawning or alteration of natural behaviour around Project site, including migration patterns.

Direct mortality or injury to aquatic life.

The Project has been assessed by a QEP where it was determined, serious harm to fish or fish habitat (or fish that sustain such fisheries), under the Fisheries Act is unlikely.

The majority of the habitat fronting the Site is considered low productivity. While moderate productivity habitat is present fronting the west foreshore area, effects to this area are mitigatable and the sedge bed can be avoided (Advisian, 2018). This assessment is described in the Shoreline Habitat Assessment (Advisian, 2017).

Riparian vegetation is sparse and provides little value to the neighbouring fish habitat.

As works will occur during DFO’s recommended least-risk windows, effects to fish (e.g. salmonids, eulachon) using these habitats will be largely avoided by timing.

6.2 Marine Mammals

It is assumed that marine mammals are not a concern in the vicinity of the Site during construction activities due to its location in the Fraser River. There is the possibility that sea lions may migrate this far upstream. Where all construction activity is occurring within DFO’s recommended least-risk windows, when anadromous



species are less likely to be present, the presence of sea lions is considered unlikely as they are prey motivated.

6.3 Vegetation and Wildlife

Construction activities that have the potential to have environmental effects on vegetation and wildlife include:

Operation of land based equipment.

Removal of riparian vegetation and foreshore tree (s).


Disturbance through noise and land-based equipment traffic.

The Site has an extensive history of industrial activity, the vegetation and tree cover is not extensive, and are unlikely to provide significant habitat for terrestrial or aquatic species. In addition, construction is occurring outside of the primary nesting windows (Table 2-1).

6.4 Water and Sediment Quality

Construction activities which have the potential to result in environmental effects on water and sediment quality include:

Excavation for the sediment remediation.


Storage and transportation of contaminated sediment and soil.

Removal of remaining anthropogenic debris from intertidal area.


Fuel storage and refuelling, including spill.


Decreased water quality in the Fraser River due to mobilization (disturbance and re-suspension) of sediment from construction activities.

Decreased water quality in the Fraser River due to the deposition of deleterious substances (e.g. accidental release of hydrocarbons).

The construction activity has the potential to mobilize sediments from the benthos of the Fraser River. Mitigation measures will be in place to minimize sediment mobilization during marine-based (dredging) and land-based (excavation).



6.5 Erosion and Sediment Control

Construction activities which have the potential to result in environmental effects on water and sediment quality include:


Use of roads by construction vehicles.

Removal of riparian vegetation and trees.


Decreased water quality in the Fraser River due to sediment from upland construction activities.

Decreased water quality in the Fraser River due to the deposition of deleterious substances (e.g. accidental release of hydrocarbons).

Reduced light penetration and growth of vegetation (primary production).

Infilling interstitial spaces in hard substrate environments which serve as habitat for fish.

Effects to fish health due to increased sediment in the water, e.g. to gills.

Toxic effects to fish, if upland sediment is contaminated.

These effects are considered mitigatable as mitigation measures will be in place to minimize the effect. The Contractor will also follow the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (ESC) which has been submitted to the City for the preloading work.

6.6 Air Quality and Dust

Construction activities which have the potential to have environmental effects on noise and vibration include:



Decreased air quality due to fuel emissions from marine and land-based equipment.

Decreased air quality due to generation of dust.

This effect is considered mitigatable as mitigation measures will be in place to minimize the effect.

6.7 Waste Management, Fuel Storage, Spills, and Emergency Response

A spill, as defined by the Spill Reporting Regulation is considered a discharge of a pollutant into the environment, not authorized under the Environmental Management Act, or a substance in an amount equal to



or greater than the amount listed in Column 2 of the Schedule opposite the substance in Column 1’. For unforeseen events or site emergencies, it is necessary to develop emergency procedures that can be followed and implemented to confirm timely and effective decision making during the critical period following an emergency.

The only hazardous material required for the Project is fuel. Fuel will be required for land-based and marine equipment.

The only specific wastes generated by the Project are the sediments and marine debris that will be removed. Any other wastes will be non-hazardous and managed within the site as per the site’s Waste Management Plan.

6.8 Traffic Management

6.8.1 Marine-Based

For marine-based construction, a marine derrick equipped with a crane and barges to transfer sediment will be required. Given the width of the Fraser River, this is unlikely to hinder navigation. Due to the relatively small volume of material only, one or two barge loads are expected.

The Project is expected to be classified as a Minor Works according to Transport Canada’s Navigation Protection Act. Construction equipment will be marked and lit to maintain safe navigation of the channel at all times, as required under the Canada Shipping Act, 2001. Any marine vessels will be securely moored near shore when not in use to minimize interference with vessel traffic. All operators of marine vessels will be licenced and trained in accordance with the Canada Shipping Act, 2001. The Contractor will also be required to submit a Notice to Shipping prior to the implementation of works.

6.8.2 Land-Based

Land-based equipment will access the Site via existing roads at Site. The primary increase in traffic will be related to the transportation of sediments for disposal. Assuming that 50% of the material can be excavated using land-based equipment, approximately 80 truckloads of material will be transported from the Site over the duration of excavation or a maximum of 20 trucks per day. Given that it is an active construction site, there are already frequent truck trips from the Site and no additional traffic management measures are required for these activities.

6.9 Noise and Vibration

Construction activity will be conducted during the hours required by the New Westminster bylaw as well as from the VFPA, or the Contractor will apply for an amendment.

There are no in-water construction activities that are expected to create underwater sound that could cause issues for fish. In addition, all in-water works will be conducted within DFO’s recommended least-risk windows. Marine mammals are not expected to be observed near the Site as summarized in Section 6.2.



7. Mitigation Measures In addition to the BMPs presented in Section 2.4, the specific mitigation measures defined in Table 7-1 will be implemented.

Table 7-1 Mitigation Measures for the Proposed Project

ID Mitigation

Fish and Fish Habitat

F1 Marine-based equipment (e.g. barge) will not ground out and land-based equipment will not enter the intertidal area.

F2 Land-based equipment will not enter and marine-based equipment will not spud within the sedge grass habitat in the West Foreshore.

F3 All construction structures, debris, sediment, and soil will be transported off site to an Approved Facility.

F4 In-water work will take place during the least-risk window to ensure that activities are unlikely to cause serious harm to fish.

F5 Excavation by land-based equipment will occur ‘out-of-water’ to minimize potential for sediment mobilization.

F6 All aquatic works will cease in the event of fish kill/injury or stress to aquatic wildlife is observed near the Site until the EM can provide guidance for the continuation of works.

F7 All aquatic works will cease in the event that spawning behaviour activity or evidence of spawning (egg masses) is observed near or attached to the structures until a QEP can provide guidance for the continuation of works. Assuming the work is in the least-risk window, this mitigation will not be required.

F8 Pump intakes for any water requirements from Fraser River will be screened as per federal fisheries specifications.

F9 A sediment curtain will be used to restrict the dispersal of sediments during marine in-water dredging. The sediment curtain will be installed where there is sufficient water depth to be successfully installed and removed without causing disturbance of the seabed.

F10 The EM will frequently check the efficacy of the sediment curtain. Turbidity monitoring outside of the work area (to be defined in the CEPP) and the sediment curtain will be undertaken and results compared to Water Quality Guidelines (WQG) as described in Section 8.



ID Mitigation

F11 All barges, trucks and bins used for the transportation of sediments will be sealed. Any water removed from the sediment will be stored in tanks for transportation to the Approved Facility. There will be no discharge of water into the Fraser River.

F12 An environmental bucket will be used for marine excavation to reduce the loss of turbid water to the Fraser River when the bucket is raised from the seabed. The bucket will also be selected to minimize overdredging and therefore the total volume of waste material for disposal.

F13 Mechanical dredging is the preferred approach, as it results in lower turbidity levels and underwater noise.

F14 The contractor will submit a plan which details construction activities that will occur by land- or marine-based equipment.

F15 The EM will be present during all in-water construction activities and as otherwise detailed in Section 8.1.

Vegetation and Wildlife

WL1 Buffers or exclusion zones shall be implemented, in the event a sensitive species or feature (e.g. nest) is identified, to ensure wildlife are not disturbed. The EM will survey for such features ahead of construction.

WL2 If construction is to begin before August 1, a nest sweep (in a non-intrusive manner) will be conducted by a QEP. Construction will begin no later than seven days following the survey, if conducted later the area will require an additional survey to confirm new birds have not arrived and initiated nesting.

WL3 If a nest is found, buffer zones (measured as a radius from the nest) dependant on the species, activity, and tolerance of the individual must be determined by a QEP using government or biologist recommended setback distances. Any nest that is disturbed will result in immediate notification to ECCC (see Table 4-1).

WL4 Any bird behaviour that indicates a nest is present or has been disturbed, should be immediately reported to the CM and work should stop immediately and workers leave the area until guidance has been received from a professional wildlife biologist. A pamphlet with information regarding behaviours that may indicate the presence of a nest or that a nest is being disturbed is provided in Appendix 3.

WL5 The contractor will identify any invasive species prior to vegetation clearing. Mitigation will be implemented to remove and avoid the spread of any invasive species found.

WL6 All trees set for removal will be marked.



ID Mitigation

Water and Sediment Quality

WS1 Monitoring measures as outlined in Section 8.2.

Sediment and Erosion Control

SE1 Pad(s) will be constructed above HWL to provide a solid platform and defined work area for the land-based excavation.

SE2 ESC measures, such as sediment traps and silt fences, will be implemented during land-based construction.

SE3 ESC measures will be inspected daily when land-based construction activities occur to confirm they are functioning as intended.

SE4 Water quality into the Fraser River will be monitored for sediment run-off. If visual monitoring identifies sediment run-off, turbidity will be monitored as detailed in Section 8.2.

SE5 Subsequent to high precipitation events, ESC measures will be inspected to confirm they are appropriate for all weather conditions.

SE6 The EM will be on-site prior to the commencement of land-based construction to check the installation and efficacy of the control measures and during high precipitation events. Visual monitoring of turbidity will be undertaken. If there is any indication of increased turbidity, monitoring will be initiated as described in Section 8.2.

SE7 If required, works will be halted during high precipitation events to modify sediment traps and silt fences as required.

SE8 If the Contractor is required to operate land-based machinery on a surface other than the existing access roads, then a gravel road base will be used to minimize sediment erosion.

SE9 During land-based excavation, sediments will be deposited directly into a sealed truck or bin to avoid sediment erosion and run-off.

SE10 If a contractor laydown area is required for stockpiling rip rap boulder or other construction materials, at no time will materials enter the Fraser River.

SE11 The Contractor will follow any additional measures specified in the ESC Plan submitted to the City for the preloading work.

Air Quality

A1 Idling of construction equipment and vehicles will be minimized.

A2 Machinery and equipment will be maintained in good working order to minimize emissions.



ID Mitigation

A3 During marine-based dredging activities, all sediment will be placed in a sealed barge and transported to an Approved Facility.

Hazardous Material Handling, Storage, and Disposal

H1 Storage and handling procedures designed to prevent harm to personnel and the environment from hazardous materials, as per the Safety Data Sheets (SDS), will be implemented. SDS will be kept on-site.

H2 All hazardous waste and materials shall be classified and labelled – containers must be clearly labelled to identify their contents according to requirements of the Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System (WHMIS) and the relevant Transport Authority.

H3 A suitable container, based on the properties of the waste or materials to be stored, shall be selected: hazardous materials shall be stored in their original containers, where possible, or in containers specially manufactured for the purpose of storing a specific hazardous waste or materials.

H4 All hazardous waste and materials shall be stored on a firm working surface that is impervious to leaks.

H5 Records are to be maintained indicating the type and quantity of waste being stored along with the date, type and quantity of hazardous waste brought into or removed from the Site.

Waste Management

W1 All waste will be taken off site for disposal at an Approved Facility by a barge or by truck. The acceptance criteria of the Approved Facility will be confirmed by the Contractor.

W2 All sediment removed from an RMA will be placed directly into a sealed container (barge, truck or bin) for both marine-based and land-based excavation.

W3 The Contractor will prepare a Waste Management Plan for the Project.

W4 Outline storage and handling procedures designed to prevent harm to personnel and the environment from hazardous materials, as per the SDS.

W5 All construction activities will be conducted in a manner that prevents waste material from entering the Fraser River.

W6 All food, food waste, and other attractants will be handled, stored and disposed of safely to avoid attracting and habituating animals.

Spill Prevention

S1 Procedures and methods will be in place to prevent spillage of deleterious substances or



ID Mitigation

construction debris falling into the aquatic environment.

S2 Any fuelling or equipment maintenance of such equipment should occur on the upland and greater than 30 metres away from the foreshore (for land land-based equipment) or in a contained fuelling station.

S3 Fuel storage and refuelling facilities will be equipped with drip trays, or other secondary containment of 110% of the fuel stored.

S4 Fuel transfer lines will be equipped with check valves to prevent spillage in case of equipment failure.

S5 All equipment will have vegetable-based hydraulic fluid.

S6 All fuel-carrying equipment will be accompanied with spill prevention, containment, and clean-up materials that are suitable for the volume of fuels carried.

S7 Hydraulic, fuel, and lubrication systems of equipment used in or near the Fraser River will be inspected periodically to ensure that the systems are in good condition and free of leaks.

S8 All equipment will be maintained and in good working order to prevent leaking or spilling of deleterious substances into the marine environment (e.g. hydraulic fluid, diesel, gasoline). The Contractor will document a maintenance program to confirm construction equipment is in good working order.

S9 All workers shall be trained in the spill prevention and response requirements during site induction and subsequent toolbox talk sessions.

S10 A boom will be available on site in the event of a spill, and all equipment should have a spill kit readily available. The contractor personnel are to be trained in the deployment of this emergency spill equipment.

S11 The Contractor will also be required to prepare a SERP. The Contractor must have spill response procedures in place, which must include specific instructions regarding applicable contacts and appropriate response actions in the event of a spill. The purpose of these plans is to establish policies, procedures, and an organizational hierarchy for response to emergencies that could occur during the Project. The plan will encompass any environmental emergency or incident encountered during the Project and will layout the following:

Identify and assess potential hazards.

Identify and locate emergency resources and equipment.

Educate all construction and management personnel of their roles during an emergency.

Establish emergency lines of communication and notification procedures.

Develop, monitor, and adaptively manage systems for preventing accidents.

Minimize adverse environmental effects resulting from accidents, malfunctions, and



ID Mitigation

accidents.

Provide a clear method of communication and administration.

List possible areas where emergencies (fire, explosions, spills, etc.) might occur.

Identify the possible outcome (injury, environmental damage, fatality).

Determine required response and control measures (spill control, firefighting, etc.).

Determine resources and quantities that will be required to respond to the emergency.

Determine training required to effectively respond to the emergency.

All personnel will be provided with a copy of the plan and it will also be kept on all construction vessels and equipment.

S12 All reportable incidents will be documented and investigated by the Proponent to determine the cause. The incident reports will be prepared by the EM. Additional mitigation or updates to the CEMP will be implemented to prevent the recurrence of any similar event. Emergency contacts are provided in Table 4-1.

Emergency Response

E1 In the event an environmental emergency has occurred, the following protocols will be implemented:

Conduct a scene assessment to identify any hazard to yourself or others prior to attempting any remediation or mitigation.

Isolate the area and notify nearby workers.

Inform area supervisor of problem, the exact location, and the magnitude of emergency.

Determine the extent of the incident, e.g. human safety concerns, components of equipment involved, or nearby risks to the environment.

Consult SERP details for necessary steps to neutralize the area and implement mitigation and remediation works procedures.

Determine if external support, such as fire brigade, Hazmat, or BC MoE should be called to assist.

Communicate with the Contractor, CM, and EM to discuss further mitigation measures if contamination of land and/or water is imminent or has taken place.

Conduct an investigation into the procedures followed during the response to determine if amendments can be made to further improve the procedures detailed in this plan.

Any soil, groundwater, or water quality testing implemented after a significant event to determine extent of contamination should be undertaken by a QEP. The EM will supervise this role. No immediate remediation or mitigation measures will be implemented if human safety is compromised.

E2 All reportable incidents will be documented and investigated by the Proponent to determine the cause. The incident reports will be prepared by the EM. Additional mitigation or updates to the CEMP will be implemented to prevent the recurrence of any similar event. Emergency contacts are provided in Table 4-1.



8. Environmental Monitoring The Proponent will be represented by an EM for environmental performance of work crews on site. The EM(s) will work under the supervision of the CM and will be responsible for ensuring adherence to this CEMP. The EM will be onsite for the first day of the Project, at all times during in-water construction activity, and intermittently throughout the Project.

8.1 General Monitoring

Primary responsibilities of the EM, with support from the CM, will be to:

Conduct regular (at a minimum weekly) monitoring with additional presence based on sensitivity of construction activities or when extreme adverse conditions are anticipated onsite.

− Communicate with the onsite Contractor and provide information to support decisions and to avoid or respond to potential environmental effects or incidents.

Undertake monitoring during all in-water construction and any other higher risk activities, such as equipment encroachment near aquatic environments, or those associated with emergency events.

Routinely check to verify that all equipment in use at Site is in good working condition.

Routinely check to determine that the required emergency response materials, including the spill kits, are onsite during Project construction.

Confirm all site personnel are aware of, and trained in emergency procedures outlined in the SERP.

Confirm that the CEMP is being adhered to.

Report any non-compliance or unplanned events immediately to the CM and Proponent.

8.2 Turbidity Monitoring

Monitoring of all of the construction activities will be conducted by visual monitoring. During in-water construction activity and in the event there are concerns/considerations for effects to water quality based on visual monitoring, turbidity monitoring will be conducted based on the BC MoE approved WQG Guidelines (BC MoE, 2006). These are as follows:

Turbidity (NTU) Allowance Over Background (“Induced” Turbidity): maximum increase of 8 NTU at any one time for a duration of 24 hours in all waters during clear flows (<8 NTU); 5 NTU in 24 hours when background is between 8 NTU to 50 NTU during high flows or in turbid waters; or 10% when background is 50 NTU during high flows or in turbid waters.

If there are exceedances of the guidelines adaptive management measures will be implemented as discussed in Section 10.



9. Reporting

9.1 General

Monitoring reports will be prepared for each of the EMs visits to the site. If there are multiple visits during a week these may be amalgamated into a single report. The reports will, at a minimum, contain:

Project site area and task description.

Name(s) of EM on-site.

Date of the work report period covered and date the report was submitted.

Weather conditions.

Equipment used and its state of repair.

Contractor’s personnel working on-site during the period.

Report on construction activities by area and include a description, photos and status.

Environmental meeting notes (including tailgate) and key issues discussed.

Design updates and construction activities for that period.

Mitigation measures implemented during that period as well as any future proposed activities.

Outstanding environmental issues and/or non-compliances, including corrective actions.

Environmental incident reports.

Photo record of construction activities, particularly those identified as potentially harmful to the environment.

Water sampling data and/or exceedances, as deemed relevant.

9.2 Non-Compliance

In the event of non-compliance or potential non-compliance with the CEMP and applicable environmental permits, the EMs have the authority to suspend construction activities until the appropriate mitigation measure can be implemented.



9.3 Reportable Incidents

In the event of an emergency that is reportable under the CEPA. The Contractor will notify the CM and EM of the incident during or immediately following its occurrence. The CM and/or EM will be responsible for notification to the Proponent and regulatory agencies. For the purpose of this CEMP, a reportable incident is defined as an incident resulting in:

A potential/actual contravention of legislation. According to Section 64 of CEPA, substances are considered harmful if they are entering or could enter the environment in quantities or concentrations or under conditions that:

− Have or may have an immediate or long-term harmful effect on the environment or its biological diversity.

− Constitute or may constitute a danger to the environment on which life depends.

− Constitute or may constitute a danger to human life or health in Canada.

A potential/actual contravention of a permit/approval condition.

A significant non-compliance with the CEMP resulting in environmental effect.

Reportable incidents and exceedances of turbidity thresholds will be reported to the VFPA within 24 hours. Adaptive management measures implemented and results of additional monitoring triggered by the exceedance will be submitted to VFPA.

9.4 Reporting Frequency

Monitoring reports will be submitted to the VFPA weekly, when construction activities are taking place within the VFPA jurisdiction. A summary monitoring report will be provided following completion of the Project.



10. Adaptive Management During the Project it may be necessary to modify methodology and address site conditions not foreseen in the initial CEMP. Should adaptation to field conditions need to be addressed, the EM on site, in conjunction with the CM, Contractor and the Proponent, will develop the update to the methodology, The EM will then evaluate any additional potential environmental effects or regulatory requirements. Mitigation measures will be updated, if required, and documented within the CEMP. Turbidity monitoring is proposed to manage the risk of sediment mobilization effecting water quality. Should there be exceedances of WQG outside of the immediate work area or outside of the sediment curtain the following steps will be taken:

Stop work will be initiated by the EM.

Notification to VFPA within 24 hours (see Table 4-1).

Discussion with Contractor for potential changes to construction activity and mitigation.

If feasible, implement additional mitigation to allow turbidity to remain below the WQG and in-water construction activity to continue.

Water samples will be taken for chemical and toxicity analysis. Mitigation and ongoing monitoring requirements will be updated by the CM in consultation with the EM to allow in-water construction activity to continue. Results will be shared with VFPA.



11. References

Advisian. (2017). Anthem Properties 41 and 175 Duncan Street. Shoreline Habitat Assessment Report. Advisian. WorleyParsons Group, April 2017 Revision 2 (Document Number 307071-01144-00-EN-REP-0001), 43p.

Advisian. (2018). Re: DFO Self-Screening Assessment – Sediment Remediation and Dike Construction 15 March 2018 12 pages.

Arbortech. (2017). Tree Management Report for Development Application Purpose. January 18, 2017. 19p.

BC CDC. (2014a). Conservation Data Centre. Occurrence Report Summary, Shape ID: 3514, pointed rush. B.C. Ministry of Environment. Available at: http://delivery.maps.gov.bc.ca/ess/sv/cdc Accessed: February 2018.

BC CDC. (2018). Conservation Data Centre. Species Summary: Juncus oxymeris. B.C. Minist. of Environment. Available at: http://a100.gov.bc.ca/pub/eswp/ Accessed: February 2018.

BC CDC. ( 2014b). B.C. Conservation Data Centre. 2014. Occurrence Report Summary, Shape ID: 8546, White Sturgeon (Lower Fraser River population). B.C. Ministry of Environment. Available: http://delivery.maps.gov.bc.ca/ess/sv/cdc, (accessed Feb 14, 2018).

BC Marine and Pile Driving Contractors Association. (2003). Best Management Practices for Pile Driving and Related Operations. March 2003. Available at: https://a100.gov.bc.ca/appsdata/epic/documents/p351/d32211/1273516310337_a8f9af96262d9ff325e4452109b72a5c6e2c4828796e47dd8ed0c732bc322dfb.pdf Accessed: 16 May 2016.

BC MoE. (2005). A User’s Guide to Working in or Around Water. Available at: http://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/farming-natural-resources-and-industry/natural-resource-use/land-water-use/crown-land/working_around_water.pdf . Accessed: April 2016.

BC MoE. (2006). Approved Water Quality Guidelines. Available at http://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/environment/air-land-water/water/water-quality/water-quality-guidelines/approved-water-quality-guidelines. Ministry of Environment.

BC MoE. (2013a). Guidelines for Raptor Conservation During Urban and Rural Land Development in British Columbia. Available at: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/environment/natural-resource-stewardship/standards-guidelines/best-management-practices/raptor_conservation_guidelines_2013.pdf Accessed: February 2018.

BC MoE. (2013b). BC Ministry of Environment. BC Species and Ecosystems Explorer. Available at: http://a100.gov.bc.ca/pub/eswp/. Accessed: February 2018.

BC MoE. (2014). Develop with Care 2014. Environmental Guidelines for Urban and Rural Land Development in British Columbia. Available at: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/environment/natural-resource-stewardship/standards-guidelines/best-management-practices/develop-with-care/dwc-cover.pdf Accessed: February 2018.

http://delivery.maps.gov.bc.ca/ess/sv/cdc

http://a100.gov.bc.ca/pub/eswp/

http://delivery.maps.gov.bc.ca/ess/sv/cdc

https://a100.gov.bc.ca/appsdata/epic/documents/p351/d32211/1273516310337_a8f9af96262d9ff325e4452109b72a5c6e2c4828796e47dd8ed0c732bc322dfb.pdf

https://a100.gov.bc.ca/appsdata/epic/documents/p351/d32211/1273516310337_a8f9af96262d9ff325e4452109b72a5c6e2c4828796e47dd8ed0c732bc322dfb.pdf

http://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/farming-natural-resources-and-industry/natural-resource-use/land-water-use/crown-land/working_around_water.pdf

http://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/farming-natural-resources-and-industry/natural-resource-use/land-water-use/crown-land/working_around_water.pdf

http://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/environment/air-land-water/water/water-quality/water-quality-guidelines/approved-water-quality-guidelines

http://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/environment/air-land-water/water/water-quality/water-quality-guidelines/approved-water-quality-guidelines

https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/environment/natural-resource-stewardship/standards-guidelines/best-management-practices/raptor_conservation_guidelines_2013.pdf



http://a100.gov.bc.ca/pub/eswp/

https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/environment/natural-resource-stewardship/standards-guidelines/best-management-practices/develop-with-care/dwc-cover.pdf

https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/environment/natural-resource-stewardship/standards-guidelines/best-management-practices/develop-with-care/dwc-cover.pdf



BC MoE. (2017). Fish & Habitats – Stock Groupings Identified for the Fraser and Nechako Rivers. Available at: http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wld/fishhabitats/sturgeon/fraser_fig1.html. Accessed: March 2017.

BC Water Sustainability Act. [SBC 2014] Chapter 15 http://www.bclaws.ca/civix/document/id/lc/statreg/14015 Assented to May 29, 2014.

British Columbia Water Sustainably Act. SBC 2014 Chapter 15 http://www.bclaws.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/14015.

British Columbia Wildlife Act. RSBC 1996 Chapter 488 http://www.bclaws.ca/civix/document/id/consol24/consol24/00_96488_01.

Canada Maritime Act. S.C. 1998, c. 10 http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/C-6.7.pdf Last Ammended January 1 2017.

Canada Shipping Act 2001. SC 2001, c26 http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/C-10.15.pdf Last Ammended February 26, 2015.

Canadian Environmental Assessment Act 2012. S.C. 2012, c. 19, s. 52 http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/C-15.21.pdf Last Ammended December 31 2014.

Canadian Environmental Protection Act 1999. S.C. 1999, c. 33 http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/C-15.31.pdf Last Ammended December 21 2016.

City of New Westminster. (1992). Corporation of the City of New Westminster. Bylaw No. 6063, 1992. Available at: https://www.newwestcity.ca/database/files/library/6063cons.pdf Accessed: January 2018

City of New Westminster. (2015). Ecology Inventory for New Westminster, June 23, 2015. Produced by Diamond Head Consulting Ltd. and Raincoast Applied Ecology.

Contaminated Site Regulations. BC Reg 184/2016 http://www.bclaws.ca/EPLibraries/bclaws_new/document/ID/freeside/375_96_00 Last Ammended July 19 2016. Enabling Act: Environmental Management Act.

Corporation of the City of New Westminster. (2005). Riparian Areas Protection Bylaw. Bylaw No 7033, 2005. Available at: https://www.newwestcity.ca/database/files/library/7033_Riparian.pdf.

DFO. (2013). Fisheries and Oceans Canada. Measures to Avoid Causing Harm to Fish and Fish Habitat Including Aquatic Species at Risk. Available at: http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/pnw-ppe/measures-mesures/measures-mesures-eng.html Accessed: April 2017.

DFO. (2014). Projects Near Water: British Columbia Marine/Estuarine Timing Windows for the Protection of Fish and Fish Habtat – South Coast and Lower Fraser Areas. Available at: http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/pnw-ppe/timing-periodes/bc-s-eng.html#area-28. Accessed: March 2017.

DFO. (2015a). Recovery Potential Assessment For Eulachon – Fraser River Designatable Unit. DFO Can. Sci. Advis. Sec. Sci. Advis. Rep., 2015/002, 11p.

http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wld/fishhabitats/sturgeon/fraser_fig1.html

http://www.bclaws.ca/civix/document/id/lc/statreg/14015

http://www.bclaws.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/14015

http://www.bclaws.ca/civix/document/id/consol24/consol24/00_96488_01

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/C-6.7.pdf






http://www.bclaws.ca/EPLibraries/bclaws_new/document/ID/freeside/375_96_00

https://www.newwestcity.ca/database/files/library/7033_Riparian.pdf

http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/pnw-ppe/measures-mesures/measures-mesures-eng.html

http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/pnw-ppe/measures-mesures/measures-mesures-eng.html

http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/pnw-ppe/timing-periodes/bc-s-eng.html#area-28

http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/pnw-ppe/timing-periodes/bc-s-eng.html#area-28



DFO. (2015b). Fisheries and Oceans Canada. Station Data: Station 7654. Available at: http://www.meds-sdmm.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/isdm-gdsi/twl-mne/inventory-inventaire/data-donnees-eng.asp?user=isdm-gdsi&region=PAC&tst=1&no=7654 Accessed: March 2017.

DFO. (2016). Fisheries and Oceans Canada. Fraser River Eulachon egg/larval Abundance Survey. Available at: http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/science/species-especes/pelagic-pelagique/herring-hareng/herspawn/pages/river1-eng.html. Accessed: March 2017.

ECCC. (2017). Environment and Climate Change Canada. General Nesting Periods of Migratory Birds in Canada. Available at: https://www.ec.gc.ca/paom-itmb/default.asp?lang=En&n=4F39A78F-1. Accessed: February 2018.

ECCC. (2018). Government of Canada. Environment and Climate Change Canada. Avoiding Harm to Migratory Birds. Available at: https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/avoiding-harm-migratory-birds/overview.html Accessed: February 2018.

Environmenal Management Act. [SBC 2003] Chapter 53 http://www.bclaws.ca/civix/document/id/lc/statreg/03053_04.

Fisheries Act. RSC 1985, c F-14 http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/F-14.pdf Last Ammended April 5 2016.

FREMP. (2013). Burrard Inlet Environmental Action Program & Fraser River Estuary Management Program. Available at: http://cmnmaps.ca/FREMP/map.php?agree=0. Accessed May 2018.

Hutton, K. E., & Samis, S. C. (2000). Guidelines to protect fish and fish habitat from treated wood used in aquatic environments in the Pacific Region. Can. Tech. Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci., 2314, vi + 34 p. .

IBA Canada. (2018). IBA Canada. Important Bird Areas. Available at : https://www.ibacanada.ca/mapviewer.jsp?lang=en Accessed: February 2018.

Keystone. (2017). Re. Draft No 1 (December 21 2017). Recommended Sediment Management Areas. VFPA Water Lot - 177 Duncan Street, New Westminster, BC. Project No. 13008. 41p.

Lower Fraser Fisheries Alliance. (2015). What do we know about Fraser River Eulachon? A Snapshot of Frist Nation’s Knowledge and the State of Science on this Stock. Edited by the LFFA for the Habitat Stewardship Program (HSP), 112p.

Migratory Birds Convention Act 1994. SC 1994, c22 http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/M-7.01.pdf Last ammended December 10, 2010.

Moody, M. F. (2000). Eulachon Past and Present. Master’s Thesis March 2008. The University of British Columbia. 307p.

Navigation Protection Act. RSC 1985, c N-22 http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/N-22.pdf Last Ammended October 7 2016.

Nelson, T. C., Robichaud, D., Mochizuki, T., Rissling, J., English, K. K., & Gazey, W. J. (2015). Manuscript Report: Status of White Sturgeon in the Lower Fraser River. Report on the Findings of the Lower Fraser River

http://www.meds-sdmm.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/isdm-gdsi/twl-mne/inventory-inventaire/data-donnees-eng.asp?user=isdm-gdsi&region=PAC&tst=1&no=7654



http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/science/species-especes/pelagic-pelagique/herring-hareng/herspawn/pages/river1-eng.html

http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/science/species-especes/pelagic-pelagique/herring-hareng/herspawn/pages/river1-eng.html

https://www.ec.gc.ca/paom-itmb/default.asp?lang=En&n=4F39A78F-1

https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/avoiding-harm-migratory-birds/overview.html

https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/avoiding-harm-migratory-birds/overview.html

http://www.bclaws.ca/civix/document/id/lc/statreg/03053_04


http://cmnmaps.ca/FREMP/map.php?agree=0

https://www.ibacanada.ca/mapviewer.jsp?lang=en

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/M-7.01.pdf




White Sturgeon Monitoring and Assessment Program 2015. Fraser River Sturgeon Conservation Society, Vancouver BC, May 2016, 45.

Perrin, C. J. (2000). White Sturgeon (Acipenser transmontanus) Spawning Habitat in the Lower Fraser River, 1999. Final Report. November 20, 2000. Produced by Limnotek Research and Development Inc. and A. heaton and MA Laynes Cascade Fishing Charters Ltd. 81p.

Port of Vancouver. (2017). Project and Environmental Review Application Guide. November 2017 Available at: https://www.portvancouver.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/VFPA_PER_ApplicationGuide.pdf Accessed: March 2018.

Port of Vancouver. (2018a). Guidelines. Available at: https://www.portvancouver.com/development-and-permits/project-and-environmental-reviews/technical-guidelines/ Accessed: May 2018.

Port of Vancouver. (2018b). Project and Environmental Review Application Guide. Port Metro Vancouver. April 2018. Available at: https://www.portvancouver.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/PER-Construction-Environmental-Management-Plan-CEMP-Guideline-UPDATE.pdf.

Port of Vancouver. (2018c). Projects and Environmental Review – Guidelines – Request to Conduct Construction Outside Regular Work Hours. February 2018. Available at: https://www.portvancouver.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/2018-2-15-FINAL-Construction-Outside-of-Regular-Work-Hours-Guideline_CheckboxForm.pdf Accessed: April 2018.

Richmond Chamber of Commerce. (2014). The Economic Importance of the Lower Fraser River. 74p.

Riparian Area Regulation. BC Reg 376/2004 http://www.bclaws.ca/civix/document/id/loo96/loo96/376_2004 Last Ammended January 14 2010. Enabling Act: Fish Protection Act.

Riparian Area Regulation. B.C. Reg. 376/2004, O.C. 837/2004 http://www.bclaws.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/376_2004 Last Ammended February 29 2016. Enabling Act: Riparian Areas Protection Act.

SARA. (2017). Species At Risk Public Registry. Ringed Seal Species Search. http://www.registrelep-sararegistry.gc.ca/species/speciesDetails_e.cfm?sid=347#docs. . Accessed January 2017.

Scott, W. B., & Crossman, E. J. (1973). Freshwater Fishes of Canada. Fisheries Research Board of Canada, 84, xiii + 955p.

Species at Risk Act. SC 2002, c 29 http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/S-15.3.pdf Last ammended February 3, 2017.

Spill Reporting Regulation. BC Reg 376/2008 http://www.bclaws.ca/Recon/document/ID/freeside/46_263_90 Last Ammended December 9 2008. Enabling Act: Environmental Management Act.

Stables, T. B., Perrin, C. J., & Rosenau, M. L. (2005). Acoustic and Trawl Surveys to Locate Eulachon Aggregations in the Lower Fraser River, British Columbia. North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 25, 675-688.

https://www.portvancouver.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/VFPA_PER_ApplicationGuide.pdf

https://www.portvancouver.com/development-and-permits/project-and-environmental-reviews/technical-guidelines/

https://www.portvancouver.com/development-and-permits/project-and-environmental-reviews/technical-guidelines/

https://www.portvancouver.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/PER-Construction-Environmental-Management-Plan-CEMP-Guideline-UPDATE.pdf

https://www.portvancouver.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/PER-Construction-Environmental-Management-Plan-CEMP-Guideline-UPDATE.pdf

https://www.portvancouver.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/2018-2-15-FINAL-Construction-Outside-of-Regular-Work-Hours-Guideline_CheckboxForm.pdf

https://www.portvancouver.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/2018-2-15-FINAL-Construction-Outside-of-Regular-Work-Hours-Guideline_CheckboxForm.pdf

http://www.bclaws.ca/civix/document/id/loo96/loo96/376_2004

http://www.bclaws.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/376_2004

http://www.registrelep-sararegistry.gc.ca/species/speciesDetails_e.cfm?sid=347#docs

http://www.registrelep-sararegistry.gc.ca/species/speciesDetails_e.cfm?sid=347#docs

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/S-15.3.pdf

http://www.bclaws.ca/Recon/document/ID/freeside/46_263_90



VFPA. (2017). Anthem Duncan Developments LP. Water Lot Structures Demolition. Port of Vancouver. Vancouver Fraser Port Authority Project and Environmental Review Report and Permit. Date of Approval: May 12 2017, Date of Expiry: February 28, 2018, VFPA Permit No. 16-154.


Appendices


Appendix 1 Sediment Remediation Report

December 21, 2017 Mr. Nick Kasidoulis Anthem Duncan Developments Ltd. #300 – 550 Burrard Street Vancouver, BC V6C 2B5 Dear Mr. Kasidoulis: Re: DRAFT #1 (December 21, 2017)

Recommended Sediment Management Areas VFPA Water Lot – 177 Duncan Street, New Westminster, BC

Project No. 13008 The purpose of this letter is to identify sediment areas that require risk management to support future construction and remedial activities at the Vancouver Fraser Port Authority (VFPA) Water Lot, which is located adjacent to 41 – 177 Duncan Street, New Westminster, BC (Anthem Lands). The identified risk management areas are based on the results of previous investigations that have been performed on the VFPA Water Lot, which have identified constituent concentrations of metals, hydrocarbons and organo-metals in sediments that were determined to pose unacceptable risk to aquatic life (based on criteria detailed in the BC CSR).

Keystone Environmental Ltd. (Keystone Environmental) was retained by Anthem Duncan Developments Ltd. (Anthem) to provide risk management recommendations for the VFPA Water Lot. It is understood that Anthem has acquired the lease to the VFPA Water Lot and is seeking to decommission infrastructure within the water lot to attain Site closure. The VFPA has requested that Anthem consider partial remediation of the Fraser River sediments within the VFPA water lot while conducting decommissioning activities of the existing timber wharf structures, to support the construction of a foreshore flood protection dike. Keystone Environmental understands that recommendations provided in this letter will be used to support the necessary permitting to initiate activities related to the decommissioning and physical remediation of the VFPA Water Lot. The decommissioning of structures and partial remediation of river sediments would facilitate Anthem to return the VFPA Water Lot to the VFPA, as per the lease agreement.

DRAFT #1 (

BAC1.

The VFPthe mainWater Lothe earlyindustries

This asse

• KeysPrelimWest

• Keysand SStree

• KeysAsse

The KeyassessmKeystoneenvironm

• PGL Febru

• PGL West

• AdvisMarin

• AdvisRepo

The Keysedimentto humanremediatthe follow

• Impadeline

• Impacompare rebe dis

(December 21, 2

KGROUND

PA Water Lo channel of ot have beey 1900s. Forms, and wood

essment reli

tone Envirominary Risktminster, BCtone EnvironStage 2 Updet, New Westone Envirossment, 41

ystone Envirment in Keye Environme

mental report

2015a. Enuary 2015. 2015b. Pha

tminster, BCsian 2016. ne Structuresian 2017. Aort. February

ystone Envirt metals, hydn health andtion and/or wing:

cted sedimeeation critericted sedim

pliant to BC emoved for sposed of at

2017)

ot is located the Fraser R

en primarily mer operatio

dworking ope

ed upon the

onmental 20k Assessme

C. October 20nmental 201date, Detailestminster, BCnmental 20to 177 Dunc

ronmental (2ystone Envental (2017ts:

nvironmental

ase I and II EC. May 2015.

DFO Self-Ss Demolition

Anthem Propy 16, 2017.

ronmental (2drocarbons,

d/or the envifurther inv

ents outsideia and undeents within CSR park lgeotechnicat an approve

near the eaRiver divergused for indons such as erations hav

e following p

017a. Repoent and Re017. 17b. Report ed Site InveC. October 217c. Report

can Street, N

2017a) repovironmental a) reference

l Status, 4

Environmen. Screening An Works. Deperties 41 an

2017a) preli and organoronment. Th

vestigation.

e of the dikergo further inthe footpri

and use staal purposes,ed off-site fa

VFPA

2

astern point e. The Anthdustrial, comshipyards, f

e been locat

revious envi

rt of Findinemediation P

of Findings estigation an2017. t of FindingsNew Westmi

ort was prep(2017b) a

ed informat

1 – 175 D

ntal Site Inve

Assessment cember 14,

nd 175 Dunc

iminary risk o-metals werhe risk assesThe prelim

e footprint bnvestigation nt of the p

andards (PL, it was recocility.

RecomA Water Lot – 177

of Lulu Islanem Lands lo

mmercial andfuel, storageted at the Si

ironmental re

ngs – SuppPlan, 41 to

– Preliminand Remediat

s – Human inster, BC. O

pared to ideand Keystontion provide

Duncan Stre

estigation, 4

– Anthem 2016.

can Street Sh

assessmenre at concenssment iden

minary risk

be delineate to support d

protection dL). In the eveommended t

mmended Sedim7 Duncan Street

Project 13

nd where thocated adjacd residentiae facilities, mite since the

eports:

plemental So 177 Dunc

ary Site Invetion Plan, 4

Health andOctober 2017

entify areas ne Environ

ed in the fo

eet New W

41 – 175 Du

Duncan D

horeline Hab

nt determinentrations thantified priorit

assessmen

d to the prodetailed risk ike be capent that impthat the imp

ent Management, New Westmins

3008 / December

e North Armcent to the V

al purposes marine fabrice early 1900s

ite Investigacan Street,

stigation Sta1 to 177 Du

d Ecological 7.

requiring fumental (20

ollowing pre

Westminster,

ncan Street

Development

bitat Assess

ed that idenat may pose y areas requ

nt recomme

oposed sediassessmen

pped by mapacted sedimpacted sedim

t Areas ster, BC

r 2017

m and VFPA since

cation s.

ation, New

age 1 uncan

Risk

urther 017c). vious

BC.

t New

ts LP

sment

ntified risks

uiring ended

iment nt aterial ments ments

DRAFT #1 (December 21, 2017) Recommended Sediment Management Areas

VFPA Water Lot – 177 Duncan Street, New Westminster, BC

3 Project 13008 / December 2017

• In the event that detailed risk assessment identifies unacceptable risks to human health and/or the environment outside of the dike footprint, additional dredging and/or capping of these areas as a risk mitigation measure is recommended.

The Keystone Environmental (2017b) preliminary site investigation Stage 1 and 2 (PSI 1 and 2) Update, detailed site investigation (DSI), and remediation plan was performed to collect additional sediment data to further delineate the extent of the identified metals, hydrocarbons, and organo-tin contamination previously determined in the VFPA Water Lot.

Constituents of Concern (COCs) identified in the Keystone Environmental (2017b) investigation and determined to be remaining on the Site were carried forward for assessment in the Keystone Environmental (2017c) detailed human health and ecological risk assessment (HHERA). The Keystone Environmental (2017c) risk assessment determined that human health exposure pathways were inoperable in the VFPA Water Lot, and thus exposure to identified sediment and porewater/surface water COCs was limited to ecological receptors. The risk assessment assessed sediment COCs identified in the Keystone Environmental (2017b) DSI to the following CSR SEDQCss sediment screening levels in Table 1. The risk assessment also assessed porewater/surface water COCs identified in the Keystone Environmental (2017b) DSI to the following BC Water Quality Guidelines in Table 2.

Table 1 Residual Contamination Remaining in Sediment within the VFPA Water Lot

Constituent of Concern

Maximum Concentration

(µg/g)

Screening Levels (CSR SEDQCSS) Identified as a

COC for Aquatic Life Receptors?

Ecological Health (µg/g)

Inorganics Arsenic 915 11 Yes Cadmium 4.9 2.2 Yes Copper 4,550 120 Yes Lead 1,350 57 Yes Mercury 1.57 0.3 Yes Zinc 11,800 200 Yes Acenaphthene 0.58 0.055 Yes PAHs Anthracene 0.82 0.15 Yes Benzo(a)anthracene 1.3 0.24 Yes Benzo(a)pyrene 1 0.48 Yes Chrysene 1.3 0.53 Yes Fluoranthene 3.2 1.5 Yes Fluorene 0.76 0.089 Yes 2-methylnaphthalene 0.18 0.12 Yes






(µg/g)

Screening Levels (CSR SEDQCSS) Identified as a


Ecological Health (µg/g)

Naphthalene 0.25 0.24 Yes Phenanthrene 4.0 0.32 Yes Pyrene 2.8 0.54 Yes Organo-metals Tributyltin 13 0.073B Yes

Notes: COC – Constituent of Concern B - Puget Sound Dredged Disposal Analysis (PSDDA) program

Table 2 Aquatic Life COCs in Porewater and Surface Water (VFPA Water Lot)



(µg/L)

Screening Levels (BC WQG AW) Identified as a


Ecological Health (µg/L)

Total Copper 15.6 2.67 ab2 – 10ab Yes Dissolved Copper 3.06 2.67 ab2 – 10ab Yes Total Iron 4480 1000 Yes Total Zinc 20.5 7.5 ab7.5 – 187.5ab Yes Dissolved Zinc 14.2 7.5 ab7.5 – 187.5ab Yes

Notes: BC WQG AWFW – British Columbia Water Quality Guideline for the Protection of Aquatic Life - Freshwater n/g – No Guideline COC – Constituent of Concern a – BC WQG is hardness dependent, mean hardness of VFPA surface water/porewater = 66.81 mg/L CaCO3 b – BC WQG for total inorganics c – BC WQG is pH dependant

COCs determined to be greater than screening levels detailed in Tables 1 and 2 were quantitatively evaluated in an ecological risk assessment. The Keystone Environmental (2017c) ecological risk assessment (ERA) determined the following in the VFPA Water Lot:

• Aquatic life COCs (copper, iron and zinc) have been identified in porewater and/or surface water in the VFPA water lot. The source of total iron concentrations in surface water are unknown (Keystone Environmental 2017b); elevated total concentrations may be related to turbidity in the lotic environment and background Fraser River water quality. The overall risk for aquatic vegetation, aquatic invertebrates and the fish community with the potential to be in contact with porewater and/or surface water in the VFPA Water Lot is expected to be negligible to low.

DRAFT #1 (

• AquaThe opotenlow. Dinopeveget

• AquaThe oto bezinc, high exposmanawas Wate

• Bioacsedimmay expos

The Keyan applicresults ouncertaineither reminformati

APPL2.

In Britishmanaginthe CanaAct. As sprovincia

Recogniztaken in approachwithin thsediment(WDNR Canadianmanagem

(December 21, 2

atic life COCoverall risk ntial to be inDirect contaerable. Conttation at the

atic life COCoverall risk f in contact wacenaphtherisks and a sure pathwaaged to makconsidered

er Lot. ccumulative ment are of nforage for fsure pathwa

stone Envirocation for a Bof the risk anty were demediate areon should be

LICABLE SC

h Columbia, g contaminaadian Envirosuch, it is nal requireme

zing that thethe Keysto

h that conse VFPA Wat quality gu2003) were n regulationment goals i

2017)

Cs (see Tabfor the curr contact wit

act risks to vtact with alVFPA Wate

Cs (see Tabfor the currewith VFPA Wene, anthrac

high degreays. Direct cke the expos

of negligib

and non-bnegligible tofood in the ay.

onmental (2BC ENV Ap

assessment etermined inas identifiede obtained t

CREENING

the federal ated sedimenonmental Precessary tonts.

e VFPA wane Environmidered bothater Lot. Houidelines co

not considens, and wen mind.

le 1) have brent and futuh VFPA Wa

vegetation cal other seder Lot. le 1) have b

ent and futurWater Lot secene, fluorene of uncertacontact riskssure pathwable risk to t

bioaccumulato low risk to

VFPA Wate

2017c) ecoloproval in Prisuggested the VFPA

d to have theo reduce the

LEVELS

and provincnts and theirrotection Act

have a har

ter lot is unmental (201h federal anowever, unlikompiled by ered in this ere not nec

VFPA

5

been identifiure rooted a

ater Lot sediman be risk miment COC

been identifire benthic indiments (i.e

ne, and pheainty were ids to the beny inoperablethe benthic

tive COCs current or fu

er Lot, this

ogical risk asinciple (AiP)that moderaWater Lot.

e potential toese uncertai

cial governmr effects in tht (CEPA) anrmonized ap

nder federal7a) investig

nd provinciake the Keysthe Wisconassessmen

cessarily pr


ied in sedimaquatic and ments (i.e.,

managed to s was cons

ied in sedimnvertebrate c., arsenic, cnanthrene) dentified forthic invertebe. Contact w

invertebrat

associated uture semi-awas determ

ssessment w). The reportate to high

Additional o cause risknties.

ments sharehe environmnd, the BC pproach that

jurisdictiongation was aal approachestone Environsin Departmnt, since theroduced wit


Project 13

ment in the Vriparian vegarsenic, copmake the exsidered of n

ment in the Vcommunity wopper, lead,is low, hower some contbrate commwith all otherte communi

with the Vaquatic wildl

mined to not

was performt concluded risks and awork was r

k to aquatic

e authority foment, under t

Environment considers

, a similar aapplied andes for manonmental (2ment of Na

ese guidelineth the sam


3008 / December

VFPA Wategetation witpper, and zinxposure patnegligible ris

VFPA Watewith the pote, tributyltin (Tever moderaaminant-recunity can ber sediment City in the V

VFPA Wateife receptorst be an ope

med in suppothat some o

a high degrerecommendelife, or addit

or assessingthe Fisheriesntal Manageboth federa

approach to involved a aging sedim

2017a) approatural Resoues fall outsie environm

t Areas ster, BC

r 2017

r Lot. h the nc) is thway sk to

r Lot. ential TBT), ate to ceptor e risk COCs VFPA

r Lot s that

erable

ort of of the ee of ed to tional

g and s Act,

ement al and

o that dual

ments oach, urces de of

mental




Consistent with Keystone Environmental (2017a), the following regulations and site-specific screening levels were considered in the selection of toxicity reference values (TRVs) for comparison of analytical sediment results.

2.1 Provincial Regulations

The applicable provincial regulations, used for comparison of analytical results, are contained in the following documents:

• Environmental Management Act (EMA), ([SBC 2003], Chapter 53 assented to October 23, 2003 and current to November 1, 2017).

• Contaminated Sites Regulation (CSR) (375/96 O.C. 1480/96, includes amendments up to BC Reg. 184/2016, July 19, 2016).

• Hazardous Waste Regulation (HWR) (BC Reg. 63/88 O.C. 268/88, includes amendments up to BC Reg. 179/2016, July 19, 2016).

The CSR provides numerical standards for sediment, as published in Schedule 3.4. Sediment refers to soils located within freshwater, estuarine, and marine ecosystems, and the criteria provide a basis for defining acceptable concentrations of chemicals of potential concern at a site relative to the protection of aquatic life, wildlife, and/or human health. The sediment categories are summarized as follows for both marine/estuarine and freshwater environments:

• Sensitive Sites (SedQCSS) • Typical Sites (SedQCTS)

The BC Ministry of Environment and Climate Change Strategy (BC ENV) considers the areas to the west of the western tip of Mitchell Island to be a marine aquatic environment1 and the areas above/east the Pattullo Bridge to be freshwater. The Site is located between these two areas in which the BC ENV recommends measuring the salinity of the river to determine the applicable water use standards. The Keystone Environmental (2017b) investigation determined that the freshwater standards are applicable to the Site. Therefore, a similar approach was employed in this evaluation.

The Keystone Environmental (2017c) risk assessment determined that sediment benthic invertebrate communities generally consisted of chironomids and oligochaetes, which would not be considered sensitive sediment taxa. Additionally, there has been a long history of industrial activities in the area of the VFPA Water Lot. Therefore, based on the industrial history of the VFPA Water Lot and the biological observations which suggested a low quality benthic environment, the BC CSR SEDQCTS standards were considered applicable for this evaluation. This is consistent with recommendations in Keystone Environmental (2017a and 2017b). Keystone Environmental (2017c) considered BC CSR SEDQCSS sediment standards in evaluating sediments; however, it was noted in this report that this was a conservative approach.

1 http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/epd/remediation/q-a/#standards

DRAFT #1 (

2.2 F

The Cantwo asserepresenrarely. Thwhich ad

Since theto aquatconsistenprelimina

2.3 S

KeystonechemistrycollectedSED17-2performe

• Sedim• Whol

10-d • A ben• Sedim

Based oconcludeat these were conselected the Keysare summ

SELE3.

Site-specdeterminconsistenfollowing

1. If preTRVscollectarge

2 http://ce

(December 21, 2

ederal Reg

nadian Sedimessment va

nts the conche upper va

dverse effect

e purpose ofic life, the Pnt with thary assessm

Site-specific

e Environmy, a benthic

d from seven28 and Sed included:

ment chemise sedimentmidge larvanthic invertement bioacc

on the resuled in Keystolocations. A

nsidered profor evaluatio

stone Enviromarized in A

ECTION OF

cific remedied betweennt with the a two excepti

evious BC Es derived frocted during

ets were sele

eqg-rcqe.ccm

2017)

ulations

ment Qualitylues. The l

centration balue, referredts are expec

f this assessPEL freshwhe approacent.

c Toxicity Re

mental (201invertebrate

n locations (ED17-29)

stry results fot toxicity tee (Chironombrate taxonoumulation te

ts of toxicitne Environm

As a result, motective of adons as a sitenmental (20

Appendix A.

SITE-SPEC

ation targetn the BC ENapproach preions:

NV CSR SEom supplem

the Keystoected as the

e.ca/downloa

y Guidelinesower valueelow which d to as the

cted to occur

sment is to awater guidelin

ch employ

eference Va

7c) performe community(i.e., SED17within the

or total metaesting involvmus dilutus) somic surveyesting using

ty testing amental (2017maximum codverse effece-specific TR17c) supple

CIFIC REME

ts selected NV CSR SEeviously emp

EDQCTS andental data (i

one EnvironTRV for tha

ad/en/317

VFPA

7

s for the Pro, referred tadverse bi

probable effr frequently.2

assess sedimnes were a

yed in the

alues

med whole y survey, an7-17, SED17

VFPA W

als, PAHs, aving a 14-survival and

the oligocha

nd benthic 7c) that signonstituent cocts to the beRV. Maximumental toxic

EDIATION TA

for the SiEDQCTS andployed by Ke

d CCME PELi.e., toxicity mental (201

at constituent


otection of Ato as the thiological efffect level (P2

ment areas tapplied to the Keyston

sediment nd bioaccum7-19, SED17

Water Lot.

and organo-t-d amphipodd growth test

ate, Lumbric

invertebratenificant adveoncentrationenthic inverteum sedimentcity and bent

ARGETS

te were thed the CCMEeystone Env

L guidelinestesting and

17c), then tt.


Project 13

Aquatic Life hreshold efffects are ex

PEL), defines

that pose unhe VFPA We Environ

toxicity temulation testi7-21, SED1

The Site-

ins d (Hyalella t.

culus variega

e communityerse effects s measuredebrate commt concentratthic inverteb

e more coE PEL guidvironmental

s were less benthic inve

the site-spe


3008 / December

are expressfect level (Txpected to os the level a

nacceptable Water Lot. Th

mental (20

esting, analing on sedim7-23, SED1-specific te

azteca) a

atus

y survey, itwere not ev

d at each locmunity, and ions evaluat

brate assess

nservative velines. This(2017a), wit

than site-spertebrate su

ecific remed

t Areas ster, BC

r 2017

sed in TEL), occur

above

risks his is 017a)

lytical ments 7-25,

esting

nd a

t was vident cation were

ted in sment

value s was th the

pecific urvey) iation




2. As discussed in Section 2.0, TRVs derived in Keystone Environmental (2017a) using guidelines recommended for the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, were not considered in the present evaluation.

Site-specific remediation targets selected to aid in the identification of sediment management areas requiring remediation are provided in Table 3.

Table 3 Criteria for Identifying Sediment Management Areas Requiring Remediation


BC CSR Schedule

3.4 SEDQCTS CCME PEL

Site-specific TRV derived

from Keystone Environmental

(2017c)

Selected Remediation

Target (µg/g) Source

Inorganics Arsenic 20 17 15.2 17 CCME PEL Cadmium 4.2 3.5 0.49 3.5 CCME PEL Chromium (total) 110 90 43.4 90 CCME PEL

Copper 240 108 119 119 Site-specific TRV

derived from Keystone Environmental (2017c)

Lead 110 91.3 33 91.3 CCME PEL Mercury 0.58 0.486 0.203 0.486 CCME PEL

Zinc 380 271 250 271 CCME PEL

PAHs Acenaphthene 0.11 0.0889 0.02 0.0889 CCME PEL Acenaphthylene 0.15 0.128 0.02 0.128 CCME PEL Anthracene 0.29 0.245 0.04 0.245 CCME PEL Benzo(a)anthracene 0.46 0.385 0.12 0.385 CCME PEL Benzo(a)pyrene 0.94 0.782 0.11 0.782 CCME PEL Chrysene 1.0 0.862 0.13 0.862 CCME PEL Fluoranthene 2.8 2.355 0.31 2.355 CCME PEL Fluorene 0.17 0.144 0.04 0.144 CCME PEL 2-methylnaphthalene 0.24 0.201 0.07 0.201 CCME PEL Naphthalene 0.47 0.391 0.12 0.391 CCME PEL Phenanthrene 0.62 0.515 0.16 0.515 CCME PEL Pyrene 1.1 0.875 0.25 0.875 CCME PEL Organo-metals

Tributyltin n/s n/g 0.348 0.348 Site-specific TRV

derived from Keystone Environmental (2017c)




Keystone Environmental (2017c) determined that sediment concentrations of bioaccumulating substances were not at concentrations likely to be a risk to higher trophic level organisms that may periodically forage for food items in the VFPA Water Lot. Supplemental bioaccumulation testing was performed in Keystone Environmental (2017c) and was used to refine semi-aquatic organism dietary exposure models to calculate potential exposures to sediment COCs that may accumulate in the tissues of prey items, and determined that risks to these higher trophic level organisms were negligible (i.e., Hazard Quotients < 1). Therefore, identification of Site-specific remediation targets did not quantitatively consider bioaccumulation. However risk management within the VFPA in areas that exceed Site-specific remediation targets are anticipated to provide further protection against effects to higher trophic level semi-aquatic organisms that may be exposed to sediment COCs through their diets.

Notably, the decommissioning and partial remediation of sediments within the VFPA Water Lot is anticipated to also reduce concentrations of COCs in porewater/surface water through source removal (i.e., dredging and capping of source sediments), or through increasing the source length required for groundwater to reach the Fraser River receiving environment (i.e., dilution). Therefore, following physical remediation, confirmatory sampling may be warranted to confirm that COCs in porewater/surface water have decreased to concentrations less than BC WQGs.

3.1 Results

Sediment analytical data reported in Keystone Environmental (2017b) are provided in Appendix B. These results were screened against site-specific remediation targets selected for the VFPA Water Lot and are presented graphically in Figure 1. Based on the results of these analyses, three sediment management areas were identified. The three sediment management areas are described in Table 4 and depicted in Figure 1.

Table 4 Recommended Sediment Management Areas that are Recommended for Remediation

Sediment Management

Area Constituents of Concern identified in the top 1m

Area Requiring Remediation

(m2) SMA 1 Organo-metal: Tributyltin 28

SMA 2

Metals: arsenic, copper, lead, mercury, zinc PAHs: acenapthene, anthracene, benzo(a)anthracene,

benzo(a)pyrene, chrysene, fluoranthene, fluorene, phenanthrene, pyrene

Organo-metal: Tributyltin

1,800

SMA 3 Metals: arsenic, copper, lead, mercury, zinc

PAHs: acenapthene, anthracene, benzo(a)anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene, chrysene, fluorene, phenanthrene, pyrene

680

Total




Rationale for sampling locations with surficial sediment (<1 mbg) COC concentrations greater than the proposed site-specific remediation targets that were not included in the sediment management areas are provided below:

• SED17-22: Concentrations of copper were measured at 222 µg/g at a depth of 1 metre below grade (mbg), which was slightly greater than the site-specific remediation target of 219 µg/g. Unfortunately, total metal concentrations were not measured at more surficial sediment layers, however sediment metal concentrations were less than standards at sampling locations surrounding the SED17-22 sampling location to the north (SED17-36), west (SED17-37), east (SED17-24), and south SED17-25. Although surficial sediment concentrations are a source of uncertainty at the SED17-22 location, measured surficial sediment concentrations (i.e., 0.1 to 1.0 mbg) from sediment sampling locations in close proximity to SED17-22 were less than screening levels and, therefore, risks were considered to be low.

• SED17-26: Concentrations of copper were measured at 228 µg/g at a depth of 0.5 mbg, which was slightly greater than the site-specific remediation target of 219 µg/g. Since this location was located outside the main areas of contamination, and sediment concentrations were less than the site-specific remediation target at surrounding locations (i.e., SED17-24, SED17-35, SED17-41, SED17-31, SD10, SD14, and SED17-27), this appears to be a localized effect and is likely of low risk.

• SED17-9: Concentrations of copper and zinc were identified at concentrations greater than the site-specific remediation target at a sediment depth of 0.7 mbg; however, concentrations were less than the site-specific remediation target at a more surficial depth of 0.4 mbg. Since the majority of biological activity tends to occur in the upper 0.35 m of the sediment profile (USEPA 2015), risks were considered low.

• SED17-20: Sediment concentrations for copper greater than the site-specific remediation target were located greater than 1 mbg. Notably, a more surficial sediment sample was collected at 1.0 mbg at this location, and was determined to have concentrations less than screening levels. Therefore, exposure pathways were determined to be inoperable.

Notably, the Keystone Environmental (2017c) ERA previously recommended that additional investigation was required to either remediate areas identified that have the potential to cause risk to aquatic life, or additional information should be obtained to reduce these uncertainties. These uncertainties were addressed as follows:

• Tributyltin: Additional work was recommended for the evaluation of the significance of the tributyltin measured in the VFPA Water Lot, in particular, a review of toxicity information of tributyltin to bivalves, as these receptors are considered one of the most sensitive to this contaminant. Although toxicity to tributyltin has been well documented in marine species, less is known regarding freshwater toxicity. Notably, Leung et al. (2007) conducted a literature review of relevant freshwater chronic toxicity testing with tributyltin and identified H. azteca as the most sensitive freshwater species. Since effects on H. azteca survival and reproduction were not observed during site-specific toxicity testing, the selected remediation target for tributyltin was considered appropriate for protection of the benthic invertebrate community. Since the recommended sediment management areas encompass remaining sediments identified to be containing tributytin concentrations greater than the site-specific remediation target for tributyltin, physical remediation of the sediment management areas is anticipated to reduce uncertainties regarding the risk of tributyltin to aquatic receptors in the VFPA Water Lot.

DRAFT #1 (

• Mercconcesite-seach concepathwremeconsi

• Iron:in suturbidwas rthe Fbe anVFPAunceconfirhave

RECO4.

Sedimenpresente

Accordinanticipatemanagemrecommerequiringidentified

Table 5

Notes: 1 Volumes 2 0.5 m of c

The tota155 m2 l(2017a) p

(December 21, 2

cury: Furtheentrations inspecific data

of the sentrations gways betweeediation of idered neglig Keystone Erface water

dity in the lorecommend

Fraser Rivernticipated toA Water Lotrtainty relatermatory samdecreased

OMMENDAT

nt remediatioed in Figure

g to Figureed to be capment areas ended to be remediatio

d in the VFPA

SurfaWater

Sediment M

estimated are clean fill is reco

al estimatedess than thprior to refin

2017)

er work was n the VFPA Wa. However,sediment logreater than en mercury a

the sedigible. Environment

were unknootic environmed to provid. Remediatio

o reduce cont were the sed to the sompling may bto concentra

TIONS

on is recom1.

e 1, impactpped by impo

of the VFPremediated

on are provA Water Lot

ace Areas ofr Lot

ManagementSMA 1 SMA 2 SMA 3 Total

rounded to theommended to b

surface are preliminaement base

also recomWater Lot, a the recom

ocations whCCME PEL

and aquatic iment man

tal (2017c) rown, and thment and bade context inon of sedimncentrations ource of iro

ource of ironbe warranteations less th

mmended for

ted sedimenorted clean fA Water Lo. Estimated ided in Tab.

f Sediment

t Area

e nearest tensbe infilled abov

rea requiringry estimatesd on the add

VFPA

11

mmended to as this is a hmended sed

here mercuL sediment receptors a

nagement

reported thahat elevatedackground Fnto the fate, ents within of iron in sun identified

n identified ined to confirmhan BC WQG

r the three

nts within thfill material.

ot and locatesurface area

ble 5 for th

Manageme

ve contaminate

g remediatios of 1800 mditional inves


address unigh priority sdiment man

ury concentquality guid

are anticipateareas, and

at the source total conce

Fraser Rivertransport anthe identifieurface waterin surface wn surface w

m that COCsGs.

identified se

he footprintSediments wed outside as of the arehe three se

ent Areas id

Su

ed material

on is approm2 provided stigations.


Project 13

ncertainty resubstance wnagement atrations wedelines. Theed to be inod thus ri

e of total iroentrations mr water qualnd potential ed managemr assuming waters. How

waters, follows in porewa

ediment ma

t of the prowithin the idthe footprinteas outside ediment ma

dentified in t

urface Area (m2) 180 940 525

1,645

oximately 1,in Keyston


3008 / December

egarding mewarranting gr

reas encomere identifieerefore, expoperable follosks would

on concentramay be relatlity. Further toxicity of ir

ment areas wsediments o

wever, due twing remediater/surface w

anagement a

otection dikeentified sedit of the dikethe dike foonagement a

the VFPA

,645 m2. Thne Environm

t Areas ster, BC

r 2017

ercury reater

mpass ed at osure owing d be

ations ed to work

ron in would of the to the ation, water

areas

e are iment e are

otprint areas

his is mental

DRAFT #1 (

HoweverprotectioBased onWater Lapproximand are s

Table 6

4.1 C

Remediaaquatic lresult, it acceptab

LIMIT5.

Findings on the Vanalytica(geologicthe data documenskill normprofessiothe workpresent o

This repoand the VKeystoneaforemenwhich oththe respodamagesthis repo

(December 21, 2

r, due to chan dike. Thn the new pot located

mately 2,503summarized

UpdaVFPA

Sediment M

Conclusion a

ation in the idife to sedimis our opinio

ble levels wit

TATIONS

presented iVFPA Wateral results rec, hydrogeol

collected dnted in this lemally exercon practisingk, this letter or past site e

ort has beenVancouver Fe Environmentioned parther parties monsibility of s, if any, sufrt.

2017)

anges in thehe updated roposed devoutside them2. These in Table 6.

ted SurfaceA Water Lot

ManagementSMA 1 SMA 2 SMA 3 Total

and Recom

dentified sedent concent

on that thesethin the VFP

n this letter r Lot by Keyeflect conditogic, and ch

during theseetter have bised by oth

g under simiis not intend

environment

n prepared sFraser Port ental Ltd. anties agree thmake of thissuch partie

ffered by ot

e developmelocation of velopment s

footprint oupdated sed

e Areas of S

t Area

mmendation

diment manatrations preve remedial a

PA Water Lot

are based uystone Enviions encounhemical cha

e investigatiobeen prepareher memberlar circumstded, nor is ital conditions

solely for theAuthority pu

nd Anthem Dhat they wills report, or aes. Keystonther parties

VFPA

12

ent plan, a nthe flood p

scenario, sedof the dike diment mana

Sediment M

agement areviously deteractions are st.

pon the resuronmental antered at a

aracterizationons. Conseqed in a mannrs of the eances in theit able to pros.

e internal usursuant to thDuncan Dev review andany reliancene Environmas a result


new locationprotection didiment manand requiri

agement are

anagement

Su

eas is anticiprmined to be

sufficient to r

ults of previoand others.a specific ten) may varyquently, whner consiste

environmentae area at theovide a tota

se of Anthemhe Masters velopment Ld use the ree on or decimental Ltd. a

of decisions


Project 13

n was propoke is depic

nagement aring remediaeas are dep

t Areas iden

urface Area (m2) 180

1,604 719

2,503

pated to redue of unaccereduce risks

ous investig Geologic o

est location.y from that eile findings

ent with that al science e time of the

ally compreh

m Duncan DService Agr

Ltd. By usineport in its esions madeaccepts no s made or a


3008 / December

osed for the ted in Figu

reas of the Vation would picted in Figu

ntified in the

uce exposureptable risk. s to aquatic l

ations conduobservations. Site condextrapolated and conclulevel of careand enginee performanhensive revie

Developmentreement betwng the reporentirety. Any based on itresponsibilit

actions base

t Areas ster, BC

r 2017

flood re 2.

VFPA total

ure 2

e

res of As a

life to

ucted s and itions from

sions e and eering nce of ew of

t Ltd., ween

rt, the y use t, are ty for ed on




We trust this is the information you require at this time. Please contact us should you have any questions.

Sincerely,

Keystone Environmental Ltd. Brett Lucas, M.Sc., R.P.Bio. Adam Radlowski, M.Sc., R.P.Bio. Environmental Risk Assessor Senior Risk Assessor Scott Steer, MET, R.P.Bio, CSAP Environmental Toxicologist \\key-fs2012\Common\13000-13099\13008\Phase 00105 - HHERA\Report\2017\REPORT\Capping update\Memo\13008 171221 DRAFT1 December 2017 Sediment Remediation_SS Comments_BTL_SS.docx ATTACHMENTS: • Figure 1 – Sediment Management Areas • Figure 2 – Sediment Management Areas (New Design Dike) • Appendix A – Maximum concentrations Evaluated in the Supplemental Investigations • Appendix B – Sediment Analytical Chemistry Results from Keystone Environmental (2017b)

Data Gap Investigation

DRAFT Former New Westminster Gas Works 231 12th Street, New Westminster, BC

88 Project 10423 / April 2010

6. PROFESSIONAL STATEMENT

This report has been prepared and reviewed by Keystone Environmental Ltd.11 approved

personnel who have the credentials and knowledge of the applicable public laws, regulations

and/or policies which apply to this report.

This report was prepared by Jaclyn Kalesnikoff and reviewed by Brent Olson, Cam Patterson

and Bill Donald, and is subject to the General Terms and Conditions appended at the end of the

report.

April 6, 2010 Date Jaclyn Kalesnikoff, P.Geo. Brent Olson, M.Sc. Geoscientist Project Manager Cam Patterson, P.Geo. William R. Donald, P.Eng. Senior Hydrogeologist President

11 Keystone Environmental Ltd.’s corporate address is:

Suite 320 – 4400 Dominion Street, Burnaby, BC V5G 4G3 Telephone: 604-430-0671 / Facsimile: 604-430-0672 / Internet: www.keystoneenviro.com

DRAFT

DRAFT

DRAFT

DRAFT










report.




DRAFT

DRAFT

DRAFT

DRAFT










report.




DRAFT

DRAFT

DRAFT

DRAFT

DRAFT #1 (

REFE6.

Advisian S

Advisian R

KeystoneRO

KeystoneSS

KeystoneA

Leung K.dC

PGL 201

PGL 20N

(December 21, 2

ERENCES

2016. DFOStructures De

2017. AnthReport. Febru

e EnvironmeRisk AssessmOctober 2017

e EnvironmeStage 2 UpdStreet, New W

e EnvironmeAssessment,

.M.Y, Grist Edevelopment Chemosphere

5a. Environm

15b. PhaseNew Westmin

2017)

O Self-Screeemolition Wo

hem Propertuary 16, 201

ntal 2017a. ment and Re7.

ental 2017b. date, DetaileWestminster,

ental 2017c41 to 177 D

E.P.M., Morleand reprodu

e 66: 1358-1

mental Statu

e I and II nster, BC. M

ning Assessorks. Decemb

ties 41 and 7.

Report of Finemediation P

Report of Fd Site Inves, BC. Octobe

c. Report ouncan Stree

ey N.J., Morruction of the366.

us 41 – 175 D

Environmenay 2015.

VFPA

14

sment – Antber 14, 2016

175 Dunca

ndings – SupPlan, 41 to 17

Findings – Prstigation ander 2017.

f Findings et, New West

ritt D., Cranee European

Duncan Stre

ntal Site In


them Dunca6.

an Street Sh

pplemental S77 Duncan S

reliminary Sd Remediati

– Human Htminster, BC

e M. 2007. Cfreshwater s

et New Wes

nvestigation


Project 13

an Developm

horeline Hab

Site InvestigStreet, New

Site Investigaion Plan, 41

Health and C. October 20

Chronic toxicsnail Lymna

stminster, BC

41 – 175


3008 / December

ments LP M

bitat Assess

ation, PrelimWestminster

ation Stage 11 to 177 Du

Ecological 017.

city of tributyaea stagnalis

C. February 2

Duncan S

t Areas ster, BC

r 2017

Marine

sment

minary r, BC.

1 and uncan

Risk

yltin to s (L.).

2015.

Street,


Appendix 2 Engineering Drawings for Dike Construction


Appendix 3 Nesting Bird Behaviour Information

Nesting Bird Behaviour Information

Nest Types

If you see or suspect there is a nest nearby, or suspect a nest is being disturbed...

Stop work immediately and report it to the site supervisor.

Floating Nests Ducks, Grebes, Swans

Scrape Shorebirds

Large Stick Nests Raptors

Clay Nests/Bank Burrows Swallows

Cup Shape Nests in Trees or Shrubs Songbirds

Cup Shape Nests on Ground Songbirds

Ground Nests with Downy Feathers Ducks

Cavity Nests Songbirds, Woodpeckers, Owls, Ducks

There are several types of nests with the potential to occur at project sites across Canada:

Wildlife Awareness InformationAmericas Region

Normal Nesting Behaviour that may Indicate the Presence of Nests

Understanding bird behaviour may assist in providing clues to identify potential nests. Bird nesting behaviour varies throughout the breeding season. In general, it can be categorized by five reproductive stages. The stages are courtship, nest building, egg-laying, incubation, and nestling and are described below.

Courtship• Presence of singing males. • Presence of males and females together.• Copulation (mating). • Food offering.Nest Building• Frequent flights to the same area carrying

nest material (e.g. grass, moss, twigs).• Presence of males ‘guarding’ or ‘following’

females carrying nest material.Egg-laying• Presence of adults on a nest. • Males will occasionally fly towards the

nest and reveal its position.Incubation• Presence of adults on a nest.• Presence of eggs.• Non-frantic vocalizations indicating

they are no longer on nest. • Frantic or continuous vocalizations

indicating they are stressed.Nestling• Presence of young.• Chicks can be heard begging. • Frequent flights to find and bring back food.• Adult birds carry fecal sacs away from the

nest (like carrying a drop of water).

Abnormal Behaviour Indicating Nest Disturbance

Birds tend to exhibit specific behaviours when they are stressed or feel threatened. If any bird exhibits these behaviours, clearing or construction activities must cease immediately, the Advisian Wildlife Ecologist must be notified immediately to decide upon a suitable course of action. If the matter is serious (i.e. non-compliance with the Act), Regional Biologists must be notified. The following is a list of abnormal behaviours birds may display if distressed:

Continuous/Frantic Calling • Frantic call that is usually short in

duration and sharp in sound.• Occurs almost continuously until

the threat has left the area.Leaving the Nest • Adults away from a nest can indicate disturbance. • If away from a nest in response to disturbance,

they can usually be seen displaying some combination of the listed abnormal behaviours.

Abruptly Stops Normal Activities • Birds abruptly stop normal activities (see

previous section for normal behaviours)• Birds focus their attention (i.e. become

vigilant) on the disturbance. Hovering/Circling • Hovering directly above the disturbance (i.e.

equipment, vehicles, and personnel). • While hovering, the bird will call defensively.• Call is usually short and sharp (or squawking,

screeching, or similar sounds) repeated until the disturbance has left and the nest is safe.

Swooping/Diving • Bird will gain altitude and swoop or dive

in an effort to drive the threat away. • Swooping or diving may continue

continuously until the threat has left.Distraction Displays • Typical of shorebirds (e.g. killdeer, sandpipers, etc.).• Simulation of an injury (e.g. feigning a broken wing). • Wing is dragged along the ground (i.e. not folded

into the body), will appear to be broken. • Bird will call continuously and when approached,

will walk quickly away or fly a short distance to encourage the ‘threat’ to follow.

Photo CreditsNational Park Service (NPS). 2014. Yellowstone’s Photo Collection. Yellowstone National Park, National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. Photos Accessed August 8, 2014: http://www.nps.gov/features/yell/slidefile/index.htm

Construction Environmental Management Plan€¦ · report for Anthem Duncan Developments LP solely...

Documents

Transcript of Construction Environmental Management Plan€¦ · report for Anthem Duncan Developments LP solely...