Changes / Updates to DFO Regulations. September 16, 2014

Transcription

1 Changes / Updates to DFO Regulations September 16, 2014

2 Changes / Updates to DFO Regulations Agenda and Purpose Understand the role of DFO and differentiate from other approval agencies Recognize our responsibilities in design / permitting process Outline past and present DFO approval processes Zone 1 Watermain Case Study The RVA Competitive Advantage

3 Fisheries and Oceans Canada DFO is guided by five key pieces of legislation 1. the Oceans Act; 2. the Fisheries Act; 3. the Species at Risk Act; 4. the Coastal Fisheries Protection Act; and 5. the Canada Shipping Act, 2001.

4 Fisheries and Oceans Canada With prescribed exceptions (1) No person shall carry on any work, undertaking or activity that results in serious harm to fish that are part of a commercial, recreational or Aboriginal fishery, or to fish that support such a fishery. - Fisheries Act, Amended Nov. 25, 2013

5 Fisheries and Oceans Canada When conducting a project near water, it is the responsibility of the PROPONENT to avoid causing serious harm to fish in compliance with the Fisheries Act

6 Former DFO Approval Process Level II Fish Habitat Agreement ¾ Conservation Authorities recommended DFO reviews for projects that could impact fish habitat

7 Changes to DFO Regulations November 25, 2013 Latest update to Fisheries Act Focus on significant threats to fish habitat Promoting streamlining and regulatory efficiency

8 Changes to DFO Regulations Applicant s guide:

9 Changes to DFO Regulations Timelines for DFO staff response Is my application complete? Do I need DFO authorization? 60 Days After above confirmation, how long until approval / refusal? 90 Days

10 Changes to DFO Regulations So how exactly is this approval process streamlined?

11 Changes to DFO Regulations Proponent undertakes self-assessment Criteria: Types of waterbodies Project activities and criteria

12 Water Bodies Exempt from Review Any water body that never contains fish Artificial water bodies not connected to a water body containing fish at any time, such as: Commercial ponds SWM ponds Drainage ditches

13 Examples of Projects Exempt from Review Bridges Maintenance and removal activities Repairs: No increase in footprint below the High Water Mark (HWM) No new fill placed below the HWM Construction of temporary and clear-span bridges: No earth fill below the HWM No obstruction to fish passage during timing windows High Water Mark Refers to the bank-full level (often the 1:2 year flood flow return level)

14 Examples of Projects Exempt from Review Culverts Maintenance activities Where flooding, extreme downstream flows, increased sediment, and fish stranding can be mitigated prevented Repairs No increase in footprint below the HWM No new fill placed below the HWM Replacement No channel realignment / narrowing or fill added below HWM Provides for fish passage (no obstruction in timing windows) Work can be done in isolation of flowing water Removal Work can be done in isolation of flowing water

15 Examples of Projects Exempt from Review Stormwater and Wastewater Management New Stormwater Management Facilities No work below the HWM of a nearby waterbody Outfalls (Construction / Repair / Removal) No increase in previous footprint below HWM No new fill below HWM Drainage Channels (Construction / Cleanout) Cleanout has occurred in past 10 years Work under dry or frozen conditions

16 Examples of Projects Exempt from Review Complete list can be found here:

17 Upper Middle Road Kitchen Reservoir BRONTE CK Case Study: Zone 1 WM Mainway BRONTE CK TRIB. Fisheries Interaction: 1. Creek crossings 2. Dewatering 3. Commissioning Future Zone 2 BPS FOURTEEN MILE CK Self-assessment: LEG 1 1. Trenchless 1800 mm diameter not watermain covered Burloak WPP to CN Rail 2. Dewatering Zone 2 Booster Tunnel Shaft Pumping Station generally Segment covered tunnel 3. Commissioning FOURTEEN MILE CK not covered Burloak WPP LGL Limited obtained site specific advice and prepared recommendations 17

18 The RVA Competitive Advantage Methods to optimize schedule Experience Relationships Navigating the approval process Emphasize changes to DFO legislation Threats Opportunities

19 Conclusions 1) It is the proponent s responsibility to comply with the latest version of the Fisheries Act 2) Start early when DFO reviews are warranted or where there is uncertainty 3) Self-assessment process has potential to streamline approvals 4) Rely on the environmental professionals