Re: Roberts Bank Terminal 2 Project Response to Comments on Environmental Impact Statement Completeness. Dear Chief James Thomas and Councillors:

Transcription

1 October 13, 2015 Chief James Thomas and Councillors Halalt First Nation 7973 Chemainus Road Chemainus BC V0R 1K5 By Re: Roberts Bank Terminal 2 Project Response to Comments on Environmental Impact Statement Completeness Dear Chief James Thomas and Councillors: Thank you for your letter of June 16, 2015 on behalf of the Halalt First Nation (HFN) regarding the proposed Roberts Bank Terminal 2 Project (the Project). In your letter, you provided comments on the completeness of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) In reviewing HFN s input, the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (the Agency) notes that the input fits into one of three categories as follows: 1. Comments on the Completeness of the EIS; 2. Comments on the Sufficiency of the EIS; and 3. Information not set out in the EIS. The attached table indicates how each of your comments was considered in preparing the identified requirements to Port Metro Vancouver (PMV). I would like to point out that numerous comments were received from Aboriginal groups and the public that relate to the sufficiency of the (i.e. the technical merit of the ) provided by PMV, rather than whether or not is required in the EIS. While some of this provides the Agency, PMV and other participants in the process with early notification of issues that may be relevant at later stages of the environmental assessment, it is not that the Agency requested of PMV at this time. Once the Review Panel has been appointed, it will conduct a sufficiency review in accordance with paragraphs 4.15 through 4.22 of the Review Panel Terms of. Those comments that you have identified relating to the sufficiency of the in the EIS will be considered by the Review Panel in conducting its

2 While the sufficiency review will include a public comment period of not less than 60 days, your comments are already on the public registry and do not need to be resubmitted. The Panel will consider these comments and determine any additional technical and analysis that is required for the Panel to complete its assessment of the Project. Further on the difference between the Agency s completeness review and Review Panel s sufficiency review can be found on the Registry at: The Agency received confirmation from PMV that the Marine Shipping Addendum is not expected to be submitted until late October Once this is received the Agency will hold a public comment period on the completeness of the Addendum. Feel free to contact me if you have any further questions or would like to set up a meeting to discuss next steps for the process for reviewing the Project and/or the consultation process for the Project. Yours sincerely, Analise Saely Crown Consultation Coordinator Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (604) Analise.Saely@ceaa-acee.gc.ca

3 Robert Banks Terminal 2 Project Consideration of Halalt First Nation Comments on the Completeness of the Environmental Impact Statement Thank you for your comments on the completeness of the Environmental Impact Statement. The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (Agency) has requested that additional be provided by the proponent; the additional requirements are available here: In the responses to your comments on the completeness of the Environmental Impact Statement, the additional requirement number is provided, when applicable, for ease of reference, and a rationale is provided if the request was not carried forward to the Proponent. Topic / Issue VOLUME 1: INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT INFORMATION Section 7.0 Engagement and Consultation VOLUME 2: EFFECTS ASSESSMENT METHODS AND PHYSICAL SETTING Section 9.2 Air Quality Criteria air contaminant and trace organic contaminant levels have exceptions that are predicted to be below air quality criteria on land. Section 9.5 Coastal Geomorphology Appendix 9.2-A Air Quality Study Main Report What impacts will these contaminant levels have on the environment, and will mitigation and/or monitoring be implemented? RBT2 project has not honoured this fact since Halalt has to date had only limited and inadequate participation in the preparation of the EIS. Halalt s input and the input of the Cowichan Nation Alliance would have added to the completeness of the EIS. More specifically Halalt s lack of participation in TAGs and the subsequent identification of Aboriginal related value components results in inadequate consideration of its Aboriginal rights. Air quality is a major concern and one that must be addressed to the finest details. for requesting (or not) for this item since the provided here is not a request that relates to the completeness of the EIS, but rather the working relationship with PMV. The causeway design does not include venting to generate more flow into and out of the intercauseway area. This has potential Project-related effects on water flow and intertidal health Report available on the Project website The issue still exists, despite being addressed by the one study. Are there other mitigation methods that could be investigated to limit the effect of the causeway on the inter-causeway Past experience at Roberts Bank has indicated that the tidal flats are sensitive to disturbance. During Project design, the addition of a flow passage channel was evaluated, but was determined to have adverse effects on the geomorphology of the tidal EIS on causeway design. The Panel will determine whether it requires additional 1

4 VOLUME 3: BIOPHYSICAL EFFECTS ASSESSMENTS Section 12.0 Marine Invertebrates Effects Assessment The effect of current baseline levels of heavy metals, contaminants, and pollutants in sediment along the causeway on clams and other shellfish. Concern about the large decrease in orange sea pen productivity. Section 13.0 Marine Fish Effects Assessment Eulachon and Sturgeon species are underrepresented as components effected by the Project. Concern that the existing infrastructure and the current Project will continue to negatively affect the health and/or availability of fish. In particular, how will these effects be controlled and regarding the environmental management plan? Concern that sockeye salmon have not received adequate consideration in the EIS. Salmon pooling areas near the mouth of the Fraser River have not been considered in the EIS. Concern that the exclusion of sockeye salmon as a focal species, the economic component to its catch for requesting (or not) water flow? flats. or clarification with respect to this Clearly stated impact of existing sediment conditions along the causeway on clams and other shellfish. What effect will the decrease in sea pen have on the marine environment? Will their predicted decrease affect marine health, and if so what mitigation methods could be implemented? An investigation into the Project-related effects on Eulachon and Sturgeon Will the environmental management plan be constructed with the consultation of First Nation communities? Will the environmental management plan be subject to review? 13.0 The EIS should consider salmon pooling at the mouth of the Fraser River and investigate Project-related impacts on sockeye salmon in this area. The baseline levels are well presented in the EIS; however, the effects on clams and other shellfish are unclear. The EIS clearly indicates an interaction of the orange sea pen with other marine organisms. The EIS predicts a 55% decrease in orange sea pen productivity, but fails to include regarding the impact this has on the marine environment. The marine fish LAA is too narrow and does not consider Project-related effects on species migrating through the Salish Sea and up the Fraser River. The study area only includes fish caught South of the Fraser River Canoe Passage. There is a predicted minor decrease in marine fish productivity with the Project. The EIS states that these effects can be partially mitigated through the implementation of environmental management plans and the creation of habitat. The scope of the field sampling program is too narrow to address all fish species that may be affected by the Project. The LAA used to assess representative species excludes important areas Northwest of Roberts Bank that are within the vicinity of the proposed on this item in its letter of July 31, 2015 to Port Metro Vancouver (page 12, #24). on these items in its letter of July 31, 2015 to Port Metro Vancouver (pages 4 and 5, #9 and #10). EIS. Port Metro Vancouver provided a rationale for not assessing effects to sockeye. The Panel will determine whether 2

5 value is not adequately assessed. Section 15.0 Coastal Birds Effects Assessment Concern that humans have not been considered in the Shorebird Opportunity Model. Section 16.0 Ongoing Productivity of Commercial, Recreational, and Aboriginal Fisheries Effects Assessment Concern that the data provided in the recreational fishing studies is not representative of the Project area. Section 17.0 Mitigation for Marine Biophysical Valued Components Request for details regarding lessons learned from previous habitat creation programs VOLUME 4: SOCIO-ECONOMIC EFFECTS ASSESSMENTS Section 20.0 Economic Development Effects Assessment Concerns about the labour market and economic development studies excluding Aboriginal members and/or communities located outside the Metro Vancouver region. Interest in procurement, training, employment, and other economic opportunities early, to ensure time 15.0 Why have humans been excluded in the opportunity model? 16.0 Suggestion that a study of recreational fisheries in the area should be included within the EIS What lessons were learned from previous habitat creation programs and how have these lessons been considered within the EIS Halalt First Nation wants the opportunity to explore contract procurement and joint venture opportunities, in addition to other economic development opportunities in the region. Halalt First Nation would like to see a commitment to further discussions. Project. Commercial fishing of sockeye salmon is recognized in the EIS; however, the effect of the Project on sockeye salmon is missing due to the narrow constraints of the LAA. The recreational fishing studies provide broad data for the entire Salish Sea. Basing local recreational fisheries from this data is unrepresentative of the fisheries around the proposed Project. It is limiting to First Nations communities, whom have recognized traditional use of the area, to be dismissed from the economic development of the area. The EIS does address these concerns, but a more personal commitment to further communication would for requesting (or not) it for this item since it was not required by the EIS. for this item since it is not required by the EIS. The Panel will determine whether it requires additional or clarification with respect to this to inform its sufficiency for this item since it is outside the scope of the Environmental Assessment. A commitment for further discussion is outside the environmental assessment, 3

6 for community preparation to respond. Interest in revenue sharing between Cowichan Nation Alliance and PMV Section 27.0 Human Health Effects Assessment Concern about the effect of increased marine traffic disturbing sediments containing coal dust deposits. The Edible Shellfish Study is not complete and the condition of diseased shellfish is unknown. VOLUME 5: ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, ABORIGINAL RIGHTS AND INTERESTS, CONCLUSIONS AND SUMMARIES Section 32.0 Potential or Established Aboriginal and Treaty Rights and Related Interests, Including Current Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes Concern that there will be a detectable effect to TFN s crab harvesting for traditional purposes in or near the Project area as a result of Project-related changes in access during the construction phase of the project. Also, concern that there will be a detectable effect during the operation phase due to the footprint of the Project terminal Is it possible that marine traffic could lead to the uptake of contaminants by both bivalve shellfish and Dungeness crab? Appendix 27-C Will the results of the Edible Shellfish Study affect the EIS with regards to the crab health assessment and future crab health predictions? If current conditions are related to contamination from coal dust, what additional assessment steps will occur? Explanation as to why potential adverse effects on crab harvesting is deemed negligible. (Suggest Halalt receive accommodation to compensate the loss of the crab harvesting area) be beneficial. The EIS clearly states that re-suspension of sediments containing coal dust deposits during the construction phase will occur. The EIS does not include any regarding the release of coal dust during the operation phase. If the study results are positive for contamination from coal dust, the EIS will need to be updated to address this. While the EIS does address these issues, it fails to recognize the importance of the effects on crab harvesting, which are stated in the EIS as negligible. Crab harvesting occurs in the direct vicinity of Roberts Bank, and the inability to harvest due to Project-related changes in access is an issue. for requesting (or not) however training, employment and other related issues are already in the EIS. The Panel will determine whether it requires additional or clarification with respect to this to inform its sufficiency EIS. In this case Port Metro Vancouver concluded that the effects from the project would be negligible. The Panel will determine whether it requires additional or clarification with respect to this 4

7 Interest in being involved in the Archeological Monitoring and Management Plan 32.0 Will the management plan included First Nations communities consultation Halalt First Nation would like to be involved in the process to ensure the protection of our traditional territory. Halalt has demonstrated Aboriginal rights immediately at and surrounding the RBT2 project site. The project area site and the surrounding area fall within Halalt s traditional territory in its own right and in conjunction with other First Nation members of the Cowichan Nation Alliance with whom Halalt is aligned. Halalt is very much concerned about cumulative impacts and how the RBT2 project will affect its ability to exercise its Aboriginal rights. For example, a quick review of ethnographic evidence will highlight Halalt s traditional rights in the Roberts Bank area. The EIS does little to address Halalt concerns. for requesting (or not) This is a statement rather than a comment on completeness. Therefore additional was not requested by the Agency. on this item in its letter of July 31, 2015 to Port Metro Vancouver (page 1, #2). This item was not required by the EIS. Aboriginal groups are encouraged to describe to the Panel how past projects and potentially the RBT2 project have/will cumulatively impact First Nation s future ability to exercise asserted or established Aboriginal or Treaty rights. Section 33.0 Environmental Management Program Will First Nations communities receive copies of the Light Management Program? How will First Nations communities be involved with these management programs? Lighting is predicted to play a role in structuring predator-prey interactions. The Light Management Program should ensure minimal impact of lighting. on cumulative effects which are required by the EIS in its letter of July 31, 2015 to Port Metro Vancouver (page 8, #13). This should inform the cumulative environmental effects of the RBT2 project and may assist in understanding potential cumulative impacts on First Nation s future ability to exercise asserted or established Aboriginal or Treaty rights. already some on Management Programs provided in the EIS. The Panel will determine whether it requires additional or clarification with respect to this to inform its sufficiency 5