Maliseet Nations. TransCanada Energy East Project Technical Review Update. May/June 2016 MSES. Prepared by. Brian Kopach, PhD

Transcription

1 TransCanada Energy East Project Technical Review Update Maliseet Nations May/June 2016 Brian Kopach, PhD Sarah Hechtenthal, MSc, P. Biol. Ave Dersch, PhD Prepared by MSES

2 MSES Who are we? Management and Solutions in Environmental Science Who: Network of senior scientists & engineers we work for Aboriginal groups across Canada to review Environmental Assessments through an Aboriginal lens (pipelines, oil and gas, mining, roads, marine shipping, forestry, hydro-dams, wind farms, etc ) What we do: It s challenging to make sense of regulatory processes and decisions that affect big projects like Energy East. MSES will provide independent expert technical advice & guidance. Served as independent science advisors for the Maliseet since 2012 Sisson Mine, Mactaquac Dam, Energy East. MSES

3 Agenda for Today 1. Overview of proposed TransCanada Energy East project 2. Explain Regulatory Process 3. Discuss how the Maliseet are currently involved in the review process 4. Present preliminary technical concerns with Energy East 5. Gather input about how Energy East may directly/indirectly impact you

4 Proposed Energy East Project - Overview A 4,600 km pipeline to transport 1.1 million barrels of crude oil/day from Alberta and Saskatchewan to refineries in East and a new marine terminal in NB. Energy East will move a variety of crude oil types: conventional crude oils, light oil from shale deposits (SK), diluted bitumen (AB) and synthetic crude oil (AB). -Convert 3,000 km of existing natural gas pipeline to oil pipeline. -Construct 1,600 km of new pipeline (most in Québec and NB) -Build 3 new oil storage terminals (AB, SK and NB). -Pipeline ends at new Canaport Energy East Marine Terminal (Saint John).

5 Energy East Project - Pipeline All NEW pipeline being built in New Brunswick 416 km long plus 5 pump stations Private lands = 62% Crown lands = 38%

6 Energy East Project - Pipeline Pump stations - push oil along the pipeline -includes monitors and control systems - monitor line pressure, valves, temperatures, flows, etc

7 Energy East Project - Pipeline Pump stations - push oil along the pipeline -includes monitors and control systems - monitor line pressure, valves, temperatures, flows, etc Shut-off valves - regular intervals along the pipeline incl. pump stations. Construction Right of Way (RoW): 40m wide in agriculture, 30m wide in forest New permanent access roads to access pump stations and valves 327 watercourse crossings in NB largest crossings: Rivière Vert, Tobique River, Salmon River, Canaan River and the Kennebacasis River.

8 Energy East Marine Terminal in St. John Canaport Energy East Marine Terminal (6 km southeast of St. John) New Tank Terminal = 22 oil storage tanks (store total of 13.2 million barrels of oil at terminal). Marine Shipping = Estimate 281oil tankers/year (compared to 100 now at existing port) Tanker traffic in the Bay of Fundy = roughly 5 tankers/week Dock and load 2 oil tankers at once

9 Energy East Project The Regulator National Energy Board (NEB) - independent federal regulator - Responsible for construction & operation of interprovincial/international oil and gas pipelines June 2016?? Hearing = 21 months total Oct 2014 Original Dec 2015 Amended The easier to read Consolidated Application delivered to NEB by TransCanada on May 19, It is 38,885 pages!

10 Energy East Project The Regulator National Energy Board (NEB) - independent federal regulator - Responsible for construction & operation of interprovincial/international oil and gas pipelines Hearing = 21 months total When Application deemed complete = schedule Hearing Hearings are run by a 3-person Panel Maliseet are Intervenors and can provide evidence to the Panel Panel reviews all evidence and decides if Project is in the national interest - makes recommendation to Federal Government Federal cabinet makes final decision on project approval.

11 Direct Engagement on Energy East Maliseet already hired lawyers and experts to assist them to become informed about Project and gather critical evidence for upcoming Hearing. Started key studies: TLU Study Not project specific so will be very useful to Maliseet going forward. Not a cheap study! Ave to discuss later. Technical Studies Reviewing Application + CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ANALYSIS (Maliseet territory) + preparing a Community Impact Assessment to go to TransCanada and NEB.

12 Why Participate in Technical Reviews? Get Accurate Project Information helps you make informed decisions about the Project and gain powerful negotiation tools. Ensures Meaningful Involvement Maliseet concerns need to be meaningfully addressed throughout the Project review process. Participate at the decision-making table Allows for intensive involvement in review process and have a voice in the project planning, make recommendations for mitigation measures, monitoring programs, and beyond. Key way for you to hold TransCanada s feet to the fire!

13 Oil Pipelines in General Main Project Phases 1. Construction 2. Operations and Maintenance 3. Decommission and Abandon

14 1- Construction Clearing and Grading a Right-of-Way (RoW) Stringing the Pipe, Welding and Inspection Ditching, Coating and Pipe Installation Backfilling, Cleanup

15 How do they cross watercourses? 3 Main Types of Watercourse Crossing Methods: 1. Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD) trenchless = no construction in watercourse means lowest risk for fish. A hole is drilled under the waterway and the pipe pulled through. Used at large crossings (where technically feasible). Downside = drilling mud or fluid blowout. 2. Open Cut (Isolated) trenched - requires construction in watercourse use culvert or dam to redirect water from the upstream side to the downstream side. Downside = temporary sedimentation which poses risk to fish. Isolated better than open cut. 3. Open Cut (Dry) trenched - requires construction in watercourses used when water flow or depth does not need a dam. Downside = temporary sedimentation. Method at each crossing decided by TCPL based on a number of variables (16 /327 watercourse crossings in NB will be HDD rest trenched)

16 1- Construction Clearing and Grading a Right-of-Way (RoW) Stringing the Pipe, Welding and Inspection Ditching, Coating and Pipe Installation Backfilling, Cleanup 2 - Operations and Maintenance Maintain access to RoW Keep vegetation low along RoW (no weeds) Maintenance of Pumps, Valves, Pipeline Monitor for spills and leaks 3 - Decommission and Abandon No exact date for this (min. 40 yrs) Empty pipes and leave in place Cap/fill under road, railway, and watercourse crossings Above-ground facilities removed Reclaim areas to equivalent land capability

17 Preliminary MSES Technical Concerns

18 Culture and Jobs TCPL says Energy East will benefit Maliseet by offering employment, training, business opportunities BUT they cannot really assess economic or cultural impacts on Maliseet (good or bad) because they don t know much about current socio-economic conditions in Maliseet communities/ households, society, language, health, or culture. No reliable estimate can be made for numbers of jobs for Maliseet and/or types of training and business opportunities. Jobs - Most jobs are during construction and require a trained/skilled workforce. MSES estimates that 52 to 98 Aboriginal individuals in NB might secure employment for 3 years of construction.

19 Accidents and Malfunctions Modelling impacts and behaviour of spilled crude oil into aquatic systems is complex! Crude oil is thick - typically very little transport over land (limited area impacted by spill). When in contact with water crude oil can disperse far away = impacts to ecosystems can be severe and long-lasting. Diluted bitumen is unique because when spilled into water bitumen part sinks. Difficult to predict with any certainty: 1) that an accident will/will not occur, 2) the size/magnitude of a spill. TCPL modelled many accident/malfunction spill scenarios (freshwater, coastal, marine) BUT. Spill scenarios assume unrealistic behaviour of spilled oil into freshwater and are simplistic so might not be looking at worst case scenarios. Scenarios did not consider the possibility of a crude oil spill in an ice-covered river or brook.

20 Preliminary MSES Technical Concerns Dust Impact of noise levels on traditional land users & wildlife Increased human access to traditional lands Habitat loss, loss of species, decreases in biodiversity Herbicide use on RoW What will the land look like after? e.g.) what is equivalent land capability? Long-term effects of leaving the pipeline in the ground? Impacts to water quality, quantity and loss of fish habitat

21 Water Key impacts to Surface Water = increase in floating sediments from construction. TCPL concludes, using standard mitigation, no significant residual impacts to surface waters due to the project. BUT. Baseline water quality data - not capture seasonal variation or current levels of suspended solids or concentrations of potential contaminants (these levels needed in case of spill or accident) Did not assess: Impacts from accidental release of drilling mud/fluids at trenchless crossings. Impacts to lakes and wetlands near pipeline RoW Not adequately address potential impacts from spill of crude oil into freshwater. Main risk to groundwater is from a spill. TCPL concludes, using standard mitigation, no significant residual impacts to groundwater from the project. BUT Incomplete assessment of spill scenarios not look at specific NB geology. Chance of migration of contaminated groundwater to surface water not assessed.

22 Freshwater Fish TCPL assessed potential impacts to fish populations and productivity - used Brook Trout and Atlantic Salmon as indicator species. TCPL concludes, using standard mitigation, no significant impacts on fish and fish habitat and no serious harm under Fisheries Act (no offsetting needed) assuming all mitigation effective and no spills. But Watercourse crossings High fisheries value sites = trenchless / Low fisheries value sites = trenched BUT. Criteria used for choosing crossing method and ranking sites unclear, subjective and inconsistent Not provide contingency crossing methods (makes it difficult to quantify impacts of construction on fish)

23 Marine Ecosystem Bay of Fundy is rich in biodiversity, provides food, habitat for many types of fish, birds, marine mammals. Provides resources for commercial and recreational fisheries, eco-tourism, leisure. TCPL did poor job identifying all potential biological, chemical, physical, and socioeconomic impacts of the project on Bay of Fundy. Marine ecosystems are complex and impacts should be considered as a whole! Tankers/Shipping - Already busy area for marine shipping. Collisions a major threat to marine mammals. No details on types and sizes of additional tankers/day and specific risks to ecosystem. Cumulative effects -should assess using all ongoing or proposed projects in the Bay. Risks of spills and leaks - TCPL does not link risks to potential impacts on the marine ecosystem and traditional resources (physical, chemical, biological, cultural, economic). Should assess potential impacts on contamination levels, water quality, habitat loss, survival and mortality rates, other life cycle parameters.

24 Heritage Resources Progress to Date: In 2013 and 2014 Stantec completed walkover surveys In 2015 Stantec completed 1,200 shovel tests (and located a number of historic sites). Maliseet over-sight was provided by Ramona Nicholas The 2016 field work plan is currently not yet defined but there are about 50,000 shovel tests left to do Going Forward: shovel testing (baseline data collection) must be completed before a decision can be made on how significant the impacts of the pipeline will be on heritage resources it is critical that all archaeological work be completed in collaboration with First Nations and that their perspectives and knowledge be included and respected in the process

25 Traditional Land Use- Maliseet The Maliseet are completing their own Traditional Land Use Study (TLUS) in order to understand potential impacts of the proposed project on Maliseet Rights The first part of this study is the portion that has been ongoing under the direction of Peter Armitage and included detailed traditional land use mapping. This study will wrap up in June The second part of the study starts today and includes documenting your issues and concerns with the proposed project. Today can you please share with us your ISSUES and CONCERNS with the proposed project including specifics about: traditional resources traditional land use Have you experienced impacts from pipelines or other linear corridors (hydro lines) in the past?