DRAFT STAFF ANALYSIS KILGARD CREEK REMEDIATION

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "DRAFT STAFF ANALYSIS KILGARD CREEK REMEDIATION"

Stewart Dean
5 years ago
Views:

1 DRAFT STAFF ANALYSIS KILGARD CREEK REMEDIATION Company Kinder Morgan Canada (KMC) for Trans Mountain Pipelines ULC (TMPU) Project Name Kilgard Creek Remediation Order / Certificate OC-2 Number NEB File Number OF-Surv-Inc Report Date 24 March 2017 NEB Incident Number INC NEB Remediation Number REM-0165 Location Near Abbotsford, British Columbia NEB staff (by ID number) 2654 (Inspection Officer, Environmental Specialist - Field Operations, Environmental Protection) 2619 (Environmental Specialist, Inspection Officer in Training - Field Operations, Environmental Protection) 2275 (Inspection Officer, Technical Specialist Environment - Field Operations) Background: On 08 July 2005, an incident on the Trans Mountain Pipeline resulted in the release of crude oil onto a residential property at Ward Road, Abbotsford, British Columbia. The leak, estimated at 210 cubic meters, moved into soil surrounding the pipeline, an adjacent wetland and a watercourse known locally as Kilgard Creek. Following the incident, TMPU took steps to remediate the site. NEB regulatory oversight of the site continues in order to verify compliance with regulatory requirements including the Onshore Pipeline Regulations (OPR) and the Board s remediation expectations as described in its Remediation Process Guide. Scope: This review focuses on the four areas listed below: 1. 1:1 Habitat Compensation Commitment; 2. Adequacy of Restoration; 3. Operations and Maintenance Work in 2014; and 4. Remediation Process - Current Status of this Site.

2 - 2 - Documents Reviewed: Documents Reviewed # Title Document Date Reference Inspection Report 29-Aug-06 RDIMS Jacques Whitford Axys - Final Kilgard Creek Riparian Restoration and Planting Plan 9-Jan-08 RDIMS Jacques Whitford Axys Environmental Impact Statement 29-Jan-08 RDIMS Board Letter Groundwater Monitoring Well Decommissioning 5-Mar-08 RDIMS Stantec Consulting Sumas -Ward Road Incident Long Term 5 Monitoring Dec-12 RDIMS Remediation Closure Report: 6 Sumas-Ward Road Incident 15-Jul-13 RDIMS Inspection Report 13-Dec-13 RDIMS O&M (off site) 19-Mar-14 Filing A TMPU IR Response 2-Nov-16 RDIMS City of Abbotsford IR Response 8-Nov-16 RDIMS TMPU IR 2 Response 12-Jan-17 RDIMS TMPU IR 3 Response 17-Feb-17 RDIMS Record of Communication with TMPU 17-Feb-17 RDIMS Staff Analysis: 1. 1:1 Habitat Compensation Commitment On 9 January 2008, TMPU committed to off-site habitat compensation in the Kilgard Creek Riparian Restoration and Planting Plan (Reference # 2, Page 2 of 9). The commitment specifies the restoration of off-site areas totaling 1300 m 2 at a ratio of 1:1. TMPU s commitment is restated in the 29 January 2008 Environmental Impact Statement (Reference # 3, Page 31 of 74). On site, some riparian areas were determined to be too small or too narrow to provide habitat benefits. TMPU made the commitment to consult with the City of Abbotsford to establish suitable off-site riparian areas for compensation (planting of an appropriate composition of willow stakes and shrubs). Following a 2013 Inspection, staff found that TMPU and the City of Abbotsford were working together and making progress towards completing the implementation of TMPU s commitment. Subsequently after a meeting between the two parties, staff was satisfied that TMPU and the City of Abbotsford were working together to identify suitable off-site areas and staff determined that no further follow-up was warranted.

3 - 3 - In fall of 2016, Information Requests (IRs) focused on the off-site commitment were sent to TMPU and the City of Abbotsford. Upon receiving response to their IRs, staff understood that the commitment remains outstanding. However, based on the information contained in the TMPU and City of Abbotsford IR Responses (References # 9 and #10), staff did not identify concerns with TMPU's plan going forward, which involves continued work with the City of Abbotsford to identify suitable locations to meet the 1:1 habitat compensation commitment in This Information Request to TMPU also included questions about engagement. TMPU s response indicated that the Sumas First Nation and other stakeholders were engaged with respect to the creation of the initial reclamation plan, and that they had received no adverse feedback regarding the plan. TMPU further stated that, since TMPU has not deviated from the initial reclamation plan and continues to work with impacted parties, TMPU has not re-engaged the Sumas First Nation and other stakeholders. Staff accepts this rationale given that remediation and reclamation at the Kilgard Creek site have been completed and that only off-site habitat compensation is outstanding. However, Staff note that upon identification of a suitable site for the compensation with the City of Abbotsford, TMPU is expected to engage with local stakeholders, including First Nations and other government agencies (as per Section 5.2 of the Remediation Process Guide). A representative of the City of Abbotsford confirmed willingness to work with TMPU to identify potential off- right-of-way (RoW) areas where TMPU could conduct habitat compensation (Reference # 10). A commitment was made by TMPU to update NEB staff on these activities no later than 30 September Of note, TMPU s Response to IR 1 contained a typographical error (30 September 3017); staff confirmed with TMPU that the correct date is 30 September 2017 (Reference # 11). No non-compliances were identified with respect to this commitment at the time of review. If noncompliances are identified in the future appropriate action will be taken. 2. Adequacy of Restoration TMPU retained an environmental consultant (Stantec) to monitor the site prior to restoration, and for an additional five years following restoration. Environmental monitoring included aquatic and terrestrial habitat components, slope stability and riparian vegetation recovery, Himalayan blackberry regrowth, insitu water quality, gravel distribution as well as monitoring of benthic invertebrates and amphibians (Reference # 6, Page 7 of 42). The restoration area included three zones: off-site compensation (discussed in preceding section) and areas upstream and downstream of Ward Road. Downstream of Ward Road, the Restoration Plan (Reference # 2) is focused on restoring the channel using three boulder complexes, re-establishing channel substrate, and the mitigation of Himalayan blackberry regrowth (Reference # 2, Page 2 of 9). Upstream of Ward Road, the Restoration Plan included placing woody debris to provide amphibian habitat as well as planting native shrubs to provide additional bank stability (Reference # 2, Page 1 of 9). Staff notes that in 2012, the environmental consultant recommended no further removal of Himalayan blackberry from the site (Reference # 5, Page 9 of 42). The consultant indicated that further removal of the plant may increase the risk of de-stabilizing the steep creek banks, and that with extensive amounts of the plant present off-site, recolonization would be difficult to prevent.

4 - 4 - Long-term monitoring was conducted at the site by an environmental consulting company. Staff understands that TMPU considers restoration work to be complete on site, with the exception of the offsite1:1 habitat compensation commitment. At this time, staff have not identified non-compliance with respect to TMPU s restoration work at the site. Should future non-compliance be identified, appropriate enforcement action would be taken. Two NEB Inspections have been conducted at the site following the incident; a 2006 NEB Inspection (Reference #1) and a 2013 NEB Inspection (together with other sites) (Reference # 7). The 2013 Inspection was completed after the last year of monitoring that was conducted as per the monitoring plan (Reference # 5). No non-compliances were identified at this site during the two inspections. 3. Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Work in 2014: Staff reviewed Reference # 8, a 2014 O&M Notification in order to determine if the Notification was related to the remediation of the site. The Notification indicates that in addition to the NEB, TMPU notified the landowner and the City of Abbotsford prior to conducting the work. The securement of a Water Act approval from the British Columbia Oil and Gas Commission was also reported. Staff confirmed with the company that this work was unrelated to the remediation work and the site. The purpose of the work was a validation dig conducted in response to an Inline Inspection (ILI) tool run. Staff confirmed that no product was released or discovered during the work. In conclusion, staff did not identify any issues with this work, which was determined to be unrelated to remediation work at the site. 4. Remediation Process - Current Status of this Site Staff reviewed remediation work conducted to date at this site. During the review, staff identified one potential issue: communication to the Board in advance of the decommissioning of a set of groundwater monitoring wells at the site. A 2016 annual update from TMPU indicated that a group of groundwater monitoring wells were decommissioned in July of 2015, and that no groundwater monitoring wells currently remain at the site. Staff noted the following in a 5 March 2008 Board letter to TMPU (Reference # 4), sent in response to a filing in accordance with the Remediation Process: Trans Mountain shall advise the Board of the status of the remaining wells and seek Board approval prior to removing any additional wells. In addition, the Board expects an update on the progress of restoration upstream and downstream of Ward Road by 1 April In order to clarify the current status of the monitoring wells, staff sent IR 2 to TMPU. As part of the IR 2 Response (Reference # 11), the company provided communication between TMPU and NEB staff regarding the wells. Staff notes that these communications are dated prior to the decommissioning of the

5 - 5 - wells. Communications included those during the 2013 NEB Inspection, as noted below in the Inspection Report (Reference # 7, Page 2 of 2): The week of November 2013, TMPU is expected to have 22 monitoring wells from the site removed with the use of a drill rig. When asked how the wells would be removed, TMPU representatives indicated that wells will be removed according the required BC MoE procedures where wells deeper than 4.5 meters will have additional work done with bentonite plugs being inserted. Information Request 2 also confirmed that the wells were decommissioned in accordance with provincial groundwater regulations. Staff does not have concerns regarding the decommissioning of groundwater wells following the review of the IR 2 (Reference # 11). Information Request 3 was sent to TMPU to verify whether an update on the progress of restoration was provided to the Board. As part of the IR 3 Response (Reference #12), the company submitted communication dated 1 April 2008 from TMPU to NEB staff which included an update on the restoration progress upstream and downstream of Ward Road. In order for this site to be granted a remediation closure letter, TMPU will need to complete the following steps to the satisfaction of the Board: Completion of the 1:1 habitat compensation commitment; and Closure request filing. Conclusion: No non-compliances regarding environmental protection were identified by staff during the file review. TMPU has been reminded to follow appropriate mechanisms when notifying or seeking approval of the Board. Based on the information reviewed, TMPU has adequately managed this site in accordance with the NEB s Remediation Process. The NEB continues to monitor the site until the above steps are complete to the satisfaction of the Board.

Environmental Setting

Environmental Setting Trans Mountain is seeking approval for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (CPCN) from the National Energy Board (NEB) for a $5.4 billion expansion of its oil pipeline system from Strathcona