PORT MOODY ARM PROPOSED CHANNEL DREDGE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW DOCUMENT

Transcription

1 PORT MOODY ARM PROPOSED CHANNEL DREDGE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW DOCUMENT Proposed by: Mr. Andre Olivier, P.Eng. Manager, Engineering Pacific Coast Terminals Ltd Columbia Street Port Moody, BC V3H 5J9 Prepared by: Andrew MacKay, M.E.S., EP (EMSLA) Suite Esplanade West North Vancouver, BC V7M 1A5 Mark Adams, B.Sc., R.P.Biol Envirowest Consultants Inc. Suite Broadway Street Port Coquitlam, BC V3C 6M2 Version Date: May 12, 2015

2 Page ii TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION PROPOSED DREDGE WORKS DREDGE LOCATION PROJECT REGULATORY FRAMEWORK Environment Canada Requirements Department of Fisheries and Oceans Regulatory Requirements Fisheries Act EXISTING CONDITIONS Dredge Material Properties Biota Local Marine Conditions ALTERNATIVE DREDGE AND DISPOSAL OPTIONS CONSIDERED Alternative Disposal Options Dredging Equipment Considered Detailed Dredge Option Evaluation OPERATIONS PLAN, POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION OPERATING PLAN Phase I: Containment Berm Construction Phase II: Dredge and Placement OPERATING MITIGATION MEASURES POTENTIAL RESIDUAL PROJECT IMPACTS PROJECT MONITORING PLAN Measured Parameters and Sampling Protocols Sample Locations Sample Scheduling & Frequency Post Dredge Bathymetry HABITAT RESTORATION GEOTECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS GENERAL CRITERIA CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OF CONTAINMENT AREA COMMUNITY AND FIRST NATIONS PRELIMINARY COMMUNICATION ACTIVITIES PLANNING ALIGNMENT CONCLUSION... 41

3 Page iii LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Sampling Summary... 6 Table 2: Comparative Cadmium Levels, At Depth and Surface... 9 Table 3: Summary of 2013 Sampling... 9 Table 4: Individual Equipment for Disposal at Sea (Transit to Pt. Grey) Table 5: Dredge Option Summary - Combined Equipment for Local Placement Table 6: Air Emission Summary Table 7: Proposed Planning & Operations Schedule Table 8: Proposed Sampling Frequency LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Planned Dredge and Containment Berm Locations... 3 Figure 2: Map Location of DAS Samples, Port Moody Arm... 8 Figure 3: Map Location of Sediment Ponar Grab Samples, Port Moody Arm Figure 4: Map Location of Benthic Visual Survey Transects, Port Moody Arm Figure 5: Dredge Equipment Operating Locations Figure 6: Six Inch IOCO Pipeline Section* Figure 7: Twelve Inch Pipeline Cross Section Figure 8: Planned Placement Area Berm Figure 9: Planned Berm Construction Profile Figure 10: Proposed Shoreline Sample Locations LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix I: 1995 Letter from EC to BERC Appendix II: 2009 Sediment Sample Results Appendix III: Professional Chemist Opinion on AVS-SEM Appendix IV: 2012 Sediment Sample results (ponar grab) Appendix V: 2012 Sediment Core Sample Results (3m core) Appendix VI: Benthic Organism Summary Table Appendix VII: 2012 Sediment Core Sample Logs Appendix VIII: Columbia Noise Assessment August 22, 2012

4 Page iv Appendix IX: An Island Complex: concepts for Habitat Creation / Restoration Appendix X: Test Dredge Notification Appendix XI: Proposed Project Letter of Advice, Brian Naito, February 26, 2014

5 Page INTRODUCTION The section of Port Moody Arm navigation channel in front of Reed Point Marina is a shipping restriction for loaded vessels departing Pacific Coast Terminals (PCT). Vessels currently require up to 4.0m of tidal assistance to navigate the channel posing a significant safety and economic restriction for PCT and its shipping partners. The proposed project involves capital dredging within the navigation channel to increase channel depth from 10.5m to 13.5m. The added depth enable more ship schedule flexibility by allowing loaded vessels to safely sail from PCT with less dependence on tides. The Port Moody Arm was most recently dredged in 1995 with Vancouver Port Corporation as the proponent. Including the approach channel and turning basin, approximately 280,000m 3 was dredged and placed behind a sub-tidal berm that was constructed adjacent to the turning basin as e pe i e tal fish ha itat e ha e e t. In 2009 at the request of PCT, Port Metro Vancouver (PMV) initiated planning and designs to deepen the navigation channel by further dredging westward from PCT. In the interim, PMV deemed PCT as the sole beneficiary of the dredge. Consequently, PCT is now the project proponent. The revised dredge plan is to operate variable hours (including 24 hours a day, 7 days a week for the navigation channel dredge only) to efficiently relocate approximately 550,000m 3 of sediment within an expanded area including the existing and an additional containment perimeter berm in Port Moody Arm. Dredging is planned to involve an effective combination of three equipment types: 1) Trailing Suction Hopper Dredge, with modified piping, for the navigation channel; 2) Clamshell for precision in the immediate vicinity of the submerged Ioco pipeline (located within the dredge cut) and dockface; and, 3) Cutter dredge, with floating pipeline, for the turning basin. The berm construction and dredge works are proposed to last for approximately seven (7) and 10 weeks respectively. The creative project plan achieves a balanced approach that supports Port Metro Vancouver initiatives for a sustainable enterprise. Expected benefits include vital business process efficiency at PCT through more timely and safer shipping; temporary and minimal to no residual environmental impact; restored historical fish habitats; new seabed elevations that will provide the potential for future compensation works (outside the scope of this project); a dredge plan that makes good financial sense; and potential opportunities to partner with local First Nations.

6 Page PROPOSED DREDGE WORKS Pacific Coast Terminals is planning a modified approach to the dredge that was conducted in After considerable research, PCT is proposing an innovative combination of hopper, cutter suction and clamshell dredges with direct placement in an expanded version of the containment basin established in Keeping the dredge spoils within Port Moody Arm will achieve many advantages ranging from significantly reduced emissions and shorter work duration to helping restore fish ha itat i p e iousl d edged a eas i a 96 s he the original site was developed). Provided below and in subsequent sections is the sustainable, holistic decision-making framework used to achieve desired engineering objectives, optimize cost effectiveness, minimize environmental impacts and restore historical fish habitats through placement of dredged material. The operations plan will involve sequential dredging from west to east at an average of 7,800 m 3 / day using the three equipment types. The berm will be constructed of readily available course granular fill and / or other material suitable for subsurface and subterranean containment. Material to construct the berm will consist of a gula pit u o k sou ed f o nearby suppliers. Alternative sources including dredging within the harbour at first and / or second narrows and clean concrete from demolition sites will also be considered if adequate supplies can be secured on a timely basis. Free-draining imported material was selected instead of using dredged sediment for berm construction to ensure stability of placement. The very short interval between berm construction and sediment placement would not allow the sediment berm enough time to consolidate. The excessive pore pressure during material placement could therefore result in berm failure. 2.1 DREDGE LOCATION The proposed dredge is located in Port Moody Arm from the west side of Reed Point Marina progressing eastward to the PCT turning basin. The dredge channel is approximately 1000m long by 150m wide before expanding into the semi-circular vessel turning basin at the east end

7 Page 3 of the dredge area (see Figure 1). The proposed dredge area remains unchanged from the dimensions originally designed by PMV in PROJECT REGULATORY FRAMEWORK The application and this document have been submitted to PMV as a e ui e e t of the Po t s project review process. The PCT project team has separately consulted with DFO, Environment Canada, Transport Canada and the City of Port Moody for respective permits and approvals. Please see the section immediately below for more details.

8 Page 4 FIGURE 1: PLANNED DREDGE AND CONTAINMENT BERM LOCATIONS

9 Page Environment Canada Requirements In a letter dated January 11, 1995 from Adrian Duncan of Environment Canada to Nancy Yates of BIEAP, the dredge and placement project completed in 1995 was deemed not a disposal project under Environment Canada but a construction project accepted by DFO as an experimental fish habitat enhancement (see Appendix I for a copy of the letter). Due to changes in the Fisheries Act, DFO would not render an opinion on proposed fish habitat enhancement. As a result, the proposed project has proceeded through Environ e t Ca ada s Disposal at Sea permitting process. Dredge material will be carefully placed behind an existing and new berm (adjacent to the Pacific Coast Terminals turning basin). Placement will restore the historical bathymetry of the sea bottom at this location. Ecological services, including those benefiting fishery species, will also be restored. The planned outcome, through restoration of the sea bottom, is to enhance production of fishery species. See Section 4.0, Habitat Creation for full details. There must be evidence that the placement can be done so it does not result in deleterious effects to the marine environment or conflict with other legitimate uses of the sea. The proponent should provide additional detail substantiating how this criterion is met. The proponent plans to employ a holistic approach that will prevent deleterious marine effects and not obstruct other uses of the sea. Additional factors considered include minimizing air pollution, noise and minimizing turbidity. Controls for protection of marine habitat (namely water column turbidity) will include use of customized silt curtains; operational modifications including installation and placement of a diffuser close to the seabed; minimizing dredge pressure that will lower the velocity at the diffuser; and placing material that meets Environment Canada Disposal at Sea (DAS) criteria. Please see Section 3.0 for additional details on operations and mitigation measures. The material must be clean and the proponent should provide additional detail substantiating how this criterion is met. For example, material destined for the marine environment must be below the lower action levels as set out in the Disposal at Sea Regulations under CEPA Since 2009, 82 surface and sub-surface sediment samples from the planned dredge and placement areas have been analyzed as per Disposal at Sea requirement for chemistry and biological testing. The 20 surficial samples analyzed in 2009 (PMV) and 10 surficial samples in 2012 (PCT) respectively indicated compliance with DAS requirements. The most recent and extensive round of sampling in 2013 indicated conformance with DAS criteria as supported by biological test results and supplemental analysis. See sections and for additional details.

10 Page Department of Fisheries and Oceans Regulatory Requirements Fisheries Act The Fisheries Act is the prevailing legislation administered by DFO for this project. In late June, 2012, Omnibus Bill C-38 received Senate approval, thereby introducing several changes to the Act. Under the new legal framework, the project will not involve the release of deleterious substances (Section 34.1) as defined by the Act. As previously mentioned potential turbidity generated by dredging and placement activities will be effectively controlled using several mitigation measures including sediment curtains, containment berms (including extra height to accommodations for sediment bulking factors), use of a discharge diffuser, regular monitoring and possible operational adjustments to further reduce discharge velocity. In the context of the Fisheries Act, with the application of appropriate mitigation measures noted above, DFO has determined in their letter of advice dated February 26, 2014 (Brian Naito) that the project will not result in serious harm to fish. Section 35(1) of the Fisheries Act states that No perso shall arry o ork, u dertaki g or a ti ity that results i serious harm to fish that are part of a commercial, recreational or Aboriginal fishery, or to fish that support such a fishery. The A t defi es serious har to fish as the death of fish or a y per a e t alteratio to, or destru tio of, fish ha itat. DFO interprets a permanent alteration to fish ha itat to e of a spatial s ale, du atio o intensity that limits or diminishes the ability of fish to use such habitats as spawning grounds, or as nursery, rearing, or food supply areas, or as a migration corridor, or any other area in order to carry out o e o o e of thei life histo p o esses. DFO i te p ets the dest u tio of fish ha itat to e of a spatial s ale, du atio, o i te sit that fish a o lo ge el upo su h habitats for use as spawning grounds, or as nursery, rearing, or food supply areas, or as a ig atio o ido, o a othe a ea i o de to a out o e o o e of thei life p o esses. Temporary impacts resulting from the dredge are not a HADD. The guild of organisms represented within sediment samples and observed during underwater camera surveys (conducted in September, 2012) is dominated by polychaetes. These worms readily recolonize disturbed sediments. The community structure represented this winter, when dredging is to occur, will be replicated by the structure of the bottom community for the following winter. From a fish habitat perspective, this dredging program is akin to transfer pit dredging that occurs within the Fraser River. The invertebrates of the river bottom readily colonize disturbed areas. An Authorization is not issued for transfer pit dredging within the Fraser River. The bottom sediments are composed predominantly of mud and clay, with some fine sand. The sediments are anoxic, with the odour of hydrogen sulfide otte eggs evident when brought to the surface during sampling. The thin top layer of sediments is poorly consolidated.

11 Page 7 Eelgrass was not observed or captured during sampling. Macroalgae, less than 150mm in length, occurred on the surface of the 1995 gravel retention berm. Macroalgae were not observed on the soft bottom of the disposal area. Plumose anemones occurred sporadically through the disposal area, wherever debris allowed attachment and adequate anchorage. Fish were not observed during the underwater camera surveys. Dungeness crabs were observed along the landward margin of the proposed disposal area. The crabs occurred upon the face of the transitory slope between the bottom of the disposal area and the sea bottom outside of the disposal area, in proximity to the eastern margin of land based activities of Pacific Coast Terminals. Please see more details in Section 3.0 of this document regarding potential operational environmental impacts. 2.3 EXISTING CONDITIONS Dredge Material Properties Dredge materials within the defined project area were examined by PMV in 2009 and by PCT in 2012 and As shown in the Table 1 below, sampling methods resulted in obtaining material from the sediment surface and depths of 0.5m, 2.0m and planned channel depths (e.g., 4.0m or more). Material properties (predominantly fine sediment) and chemistry were largely homogenous. TABLE 1: SAMPLING SUMMARY Year Method Depth Location # of Samples Analysis Results 2009 Divers Surface Load Channel 20 DAS Chemistry exceedances 2012 Ponar Surface Load Channel / Reference AVS-SEM passed DAS 10 DAS Chemistry exceedances Passed DAS Biological 2012 Vibracore 3m Load Channel 3 DAS Chemistry exceedances 2013 Ponar Surface Load Channel, Receiving and Reference Sites 2013 Vibracore 0.5m, 2.0m and channel depth Load Channel, Receiving and Reference Sites 17 DAS Chemistry exceedances 32 DAS Chemistry exceedances 17/18 passed biological testing; one failure attributed to high background H2S

12 Page PMV Sampling Results When the dredging project was originally conceived by PMV in 2009, Mr. Dave Hart, Operations Dredging Specialist, defined the dredge area by conducting surficial seabed sampling using divers. A total of 20 composite samples were submitted for analysis. The approach taken and results were reported as follows: Twenty (20) sites within Port Moody Arm were sampled on July 21, Samples were collected at about 20cm below the surface using divers. Two (2) samples were taken at each site ranging between 5 to 10m apart. Samples were submitted for analysis of PAH s, PCB s, full etal suite plus load dete tio for Cadmium. Numerical values for Cadmium were exceeded on all samples. To further explore the elevated Cadmium levels we carried out an AVS-SEM test (measure of the biological availability). See Appendix II for analytical results. Based on the results from all the tests conducted, Environment Canada advised the results support disposal at sea. Since the 2009 sampling program, Environment Canada has modified DAS requirements, substituting biological testing (Microtox Solid Phase, Amphipod Survival, Echinoid Fertilization) for AVS-SEM. Envirochem, supported by the opinion of a professional chemist, believe that the AVS-SEM test remains a credible predictor of contaminant (metals) bioavailability. Please see Appendix III for professional opinion rendered by Mr. Jamie Downie, P.Chem PCT 2012 Sampling Results In advance of conducting the channel dredge, PCT had planned in 2012 to undertake a small scale (4000m 3 ) trial using the FRPD hopper dredge. In support of the trial, ponar (surface) and vibracore (sub-surface depth) sampling was conducted to: Assess compliance with Environment Canada Disposal at Sea criteria; and, Examine particle size to determine hopper dredge effectiveness. Regarding DAS compliance assessment, a total of 10 discrete samples for chemical analysis and four composite samples (including a reference point) for biological testing was collected using ponar grab. DAS sampling was done by Envirochem in the presence of Roanna Leung of Environment Canada. Figure 2 below shows DAS sample locations.

13 Page 9 FIGURE 2: MAP LOCATION OF DAS SAMPLES, PORT MOODY ARM Summary DAS results for regulated chemical requirements were as follows: Cadmium: all sites, including reference, exceeded the limit. Mercury: no exceedances. Lead: eight sample points, including reference, exceeded the limit. PCB: no exceedances. PAHs: two exceedances. Othe etals of i te est, spe ifi all a se i, oppe a d zi, also e eeded the DAS criteria at various sample locations. Biological tests conducted were Microtox, Amphipod Survival, and Echinoid Fertilization as per Environment Canada DAS requirements. Testing was initiated on January 12 and 13, Maxxam Analytical reported that all samples passed each biological test none were considered toxic according to the Ocean Disposal Guidelines. Please see Appendix IV for chemical and biological test results. Core sampling was conducted in three locations within the defined dredge area. Sampling sites were proximal to ST1A (west side of Reed Point Marina); ST1C (mid Marina); and on the east side of ST2B opposite Reed Point (see Figure 2 above). Cores varied in depth, from 1.5m to 2.1m. Within each core, three discrete samples were collected to form a single composite. All three composites were analyzed for DAS chemistry - all regulated parameters met DAS criteria with the exception of cadmium as expected (high background levels). As seen in Table 2 below, the at depth o e sa ple eadi gs fo ad iu e e eithe elo o odestl highe that surface (ponar grab) samples collected in the near vicinity on January 6, Furthermore, all results are well below conservative BC Contaminated Site Regulation sediment quality limits of 2.6 mg/kg (SedQCscs) and 5.0 mg/kg (SedQCtcs) respectively (see Appendix V for analytical results).

14 Page 10 TABLE 2: COMPARATIVE CADMIUM LEVELS, AT DEPTH AND SURFACE Type Sample Locations West / ST 1A Central / ST 1C East / ST2B Depth Samples (mg / kg) Surface Samples (mg / kg) In December 2012, Environment Canada determined that the 30 samples collected and analyzed to date did not fully characterize the planned dredge volume (530,000m 3 ). PCT was subsequently instructed to conduct further sediment testing PCT 2013 Sampling Results A sampling plan was submitted to and subsequently approved by Environment Canada in April Please see the 2013 sediment sampling compendium (separate report) for details. During the week of May 6, 2013, a total of 49 discrete samples were acquired in the presence of Sean Standing of Environment Canada and submitted to ALS Environmental for DAS chemistry analysis. The samples acquired are presented in Table 3 below. TABLE 3: SUMMARY OF 2013 SAMPLING Location Depths Method # of Samples Reference Site Surface; 0.5m, 2.0m, channel depth Ponar, vibracore 4 Load Site Surface; 0.5m, 2.0m, channel depth Ponar, vibracore 37 Receiving Site Surface Ponar 8 General conclusions derived from the DAS chemical analysis: Historical (e.g., 2012) and most current (2013) surface sample results were very similar Organic contamination (total PAHs and total PCBs) were non-detect below 0.5m There were no PCB exceedances at any station Metal concentrations declined with depth The e e e o e ide t o ta i a t hot spots DAS exceedances in reference, load and placement stations < typical CSR SedQ. Please see the 2013 sediment sampling compendium (separate report) for details on sediment chemistry interpretation and core logs. Due to the DAS sediment chemistry exceedances, PCT was instructed to conduct biological tests (Microtox, Amphiod Survival and Echinoid Fertilization) on the sediment originally acquired during the week of May 6, Biological tests were done by Maaxam Analytical. A total of six samples were assembled as follows:

15 Page 11 One discrete at Reference Station surface Two composites each of four load stations at surface One discrete at 0.5m depth of Load Station #12 Two composites each of four receiving stations at surface. A total of 18 tests were conducted (i.e., the six samples were subject to each of the three biological tests). Summary results were as follows: 17 of the 18 samples met DAS biological test criteria (i.e., not toxic); One sample, from Load Station #12 at 0.5m depth, failed the Amphipod Survival test. The low level of contaminants identified during chemical analysis did not cause the dramatic drop in survival to 11%. As verified by third party opinion rendered by Integrated Resource Consultants (see letter in the separate sediment compendium report), sample failure was caused by highly elevated pore water H 2 S, calculated to be 669 times the CCME probable effects level (PEL). Based on these data, PCT concluded that no additional sediment characterization was required. Environment Canada subsequently concurred with this statement Risk to marine organisms from the temporary release of H 2 S entering the water column during operations (sediment disturbance during berm construction and dredging) is low based on the following: Potentially high H 2 S containing sediment from load station #12 at 0.5m depth represents less than 10% of the total dredge volume The material with an elevated H 2 S level will not be suspended all at once Mitigation controls (diffuser and silt curtains) will help contain material No fish kills were reported in previous 1995 dredge. During a September 13, 2013 meeting between PCT, PMV, Environment Canada and Department of Fisheries and Oceans, a former PMV Environment Department Director (J. Bauman) stated that the H 2 S should not be a concern during project operations Biota Benthic Organisms The design footprints of the proposed navigation channel, turning basin, and placement area are characterized by soft bottom benthic communities. Mud typically comprises greater than 90 percent of bottom sediments (Burd and Brinkhurst ) and subsequently verified during the January, 2012 core sampling event described above. 1 Burd, B.J., and R.O. Brinkhurst Vancouver Harbour and Burrard Inlet benthic infaunal sampling program, October Canadian Technical Report of Hydrography and Ocean Sciences No p.

16 Page 12 Burd and Brinkhurst (1990) present data, for the portion of the project that interfaces the terminal, revealed that a benthic invertebrate community of low diversity and abundance. Member species included the deposit feeders Capitella capitata (oligochaete-like polychaete), Pectinaria californiensis (tube-dwelling polychaete) and Macoma calcarea (clam), and predators Nephtys cornuta franciscanum (errantiate polychaete) and Philine polaris (sea slug). The presence of Capitella capitata is notable as it often occurs in areas characterized by organic pollution (Tsutsumi , Dean ). That portion of the project seaward of the terminal is described by Swanston ( ). He des i ed the su st ate as e soft, a o i ud o e lai a thi la e of o sedi e t. Little visible marine life was apparent. Several Clevlandia ios, a small goby, were noted. Plumose anemones (Metridium farcimen) were attached to debris. Adams et al. ( ) provide a contemporary description of the benthic environment similar to that of Swanston (2011). Adams et al. (2012) sampled the benthos of the proposed dredge material disposal area and adjacent areas outside of both the proposed disposal area and the 1995 dredged material disposal area. These adjacent areas are characterized by depths shallower than that of the proposed disposal area. Benthic sampling was conducted utilizing a Ponar Grab sampler. Visual surveys of the sea bottom, utilizing an underwater camera, were also conducted. Benthos sampling locations are presented by Figure 3. In general, bottom sediments were predominantly comprised of fines and clays; fines were typically dark grey to black; clays were typically light grey, and occurred as colloidal clumps. The smell of hydrogen sulfide was evident during processing. Shell fragments and small fibrous wood debris were conspicuous but never dominant within any of the samples. Fine sand occurred infrequently, and when it did, it was a very small component of the overall mass of sediments. As for Swanston (2011), the surface of the benthic samples was characterized by a thin layer of brown sediment. 2 Tsutsumi, H Population dynamics of Capitella capitata (Polychaeta; Capitellidae) in an organically polluted cove. Marine Ecology Progress Series Vol. 36 pp Dean, H.K The use of polychaetes (Annelida) as indicator species of marine pollution: a review. Rev.Biol.Trop (Int.J.Trop.Biol.ISSN ) Vol.56 (Suppl.4): Swanston, D Subtidal Biophysical Inventory East of a Proposed Marine Expansion Reed Point Marina, Port Moody. BC. Seacology, North Vancouver, BC. 17p. 5 Adams, M.A., C. Gibson and C. Dillman Pacific Coast Terminals -Subtidal Benthic Survey of Proposed Dredged Material Disposal Area. Letter Report addressed to Andrew Mackay, Envirochem Services Inc., North Vancouver, BC. Envirowest Consultants Inc., Burnaby, BC.

17 Page 13 FIGURE 3: MAP LOCATION OF SEDIMENT PONAR GRAB SAMPLES, PORT MOODY ARM Soft sediments did not characterize all of the samples. Samples 1-1 and 2-5 were characterized by sands and gravels with some fines. The sample locations correspond to the location of the 1995 dredged material retention berm. The guild of benthic organisms is representative of the soft sediments observed (see Appendix VI). Predaceous errantiate (i.e., wandering, motile) polychaetes (e.g., Sigalionidae, Glyceridae and Nereidae) are numerically dominant. Sedentary (e.g. Terebellidae and Pectinariidae), oligochaete-like burrowing polychaetes (e.g., Capitellidae) and tubificid oligochaetes occur scattered throughout the samples. In terms of clams, very small soft shell clams (Macoma sp.) and cockles (Clinocardium nuttallii) were numerically dominant, while the numerically dominant snail was Nassarius mendicus. Interestingly, arthropods are poorly represented within the proposed dredged material disposal area. Nearshore shallow subtidal samples (in particular samples 1-4, 1-5 and 1-6), less than 4.5 metres below chart datum were characterized by relatively high numbers of Corophium sp., a tube dwelling amphipod of soft sediments. This amphipod is accompanied within the samples by cumaceans, another arthropod. The nearshore shallow subtidal samples are characterized by the highest number of species and highest number of individuals of all the samples collected. The visual surveys were conducted along two transects ( Figure 4).These transects traverse the general areas sampled for benthic organisms. The surveys were conducted with an underwater camera tethered to a boat; a cable transmitted images from the camera to a monitor onboard the boat. The camera was equipped with lights.

18 Page 14 FIGURE 4: MAP LOCATION OF BENTHIC VISUAL SURVEY TRANSECTS, PORT MOODY ARM The sea bottom was flat and homogenous. Observed structural complexity was poor. Where the occasional boulder or piece of wood debris occurred, it typically functioned as an anchoring point for plumose anemones. The brown surficial sediments were readily disturbed and suspended when the camera touched the bottom. Relatively high structural complexity was limited to the face of the 1995 retention berm. The berm was characterized by large gravels and small cobble. The berm displayed the highest density of plumose anemones. A single adult Dungeness crab (Cancer magister) was observed on the berm along Transect 2. Numerous (>20 adults) Dungeness crabs were observed at the inflection point (220m) of Transect 1, along the slope that marks the transition between the 1995 dredged material disposal area to the nearshore shallow subtidal environment not affected by 1995 material placement. The crabs were observed moving across and buried within soft sediments. The location of the crabs is outside of the proposed dredged material disposal area. Fish were not observed along either transect. Eelgrass (Zostera marina) was not observed. Macroinvertebrates, other than Dungeness crab, observed along the transects on the sea bottom were comprised entirely of errantiate polychaetes. The polychaetes were very conspicuous and active.

19 Page Fish From a fisheries perspective, species of note within Port Moody Arm include salmon and flatfishes. The City of Port Moody ( ) states: Two local hatcheries on Noons and Mossom Creeks release tens of thousands of salmon fry and smolts into local streams and into the Arm annually. Juvenile salmonids are known to use the foreshore areas of Burrard Inlet as rearing grounds (Naito and Kwang, ). Salmonids captured included coho salmon, chum salmon, pink salmon, chinook salmon, and cutthroat trout. Use of marine and estuarine environments by juvenile salmonids is focused within nearshore areas, in particular intertidal mudflats and marshes, and the immediate nearshore subtidal environment. The project engages the bottom of Port Moody Arm substantively below local low water, below intertidal and shallow subtidal (<4 m below local low water) environments. The project will not directly affect these environments, thereby mitigating interactions with juvenile salmonids and their habitats. Commercial flatfishes occur throughout Burrard Inlet (Levings and Ong ). English sole is the most common bottom fish species in Port Moody Arm. Although fish were not observed during the visual surveys, it is anticipated dredging activities will engage bottom fish species within the navigation channel and within the placement area Local Marine Conditions Burrard Inlet has been described as narrow deep water fjord in which tides transport silt into the Port Moody Arm to be deposited on the mudflats located at the east end of the Arm (Eikos Consultants, 1972). It is therefore expected that this eastward deposition pattern will favour containment of suspended sediment generated by the project within the Arm. Overall, marine conditions in the Arm are expected to have minimal effect (e.g., sediment transport) on the proposed dredge. Modest tidal currents (e.g., cm. /s; Jiang et al., 2002) and low fetch resulting in minimal to low erosion characteristics of the area will enhance turbidity control and enable dredged material to settle within the containment berms. 6 City of Port Moody What Swims Beneath: A Fish Survey of Port Moody Arm. City of Port Moody, British Columbia. 40p. 7 Naito, B. and J. Hwang Timing and distribution of juvenile salmonids in Burrard Inlet, British Columbia: February to August Canadian Data Report of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences p. cited in: City of Port Moody Levings, C., and S. Ong Fish communities and life history attributes of English sole (Pleuronectes vetulus) in Vancouver Harbour. Marine Environmental Research 57(1-2):

20 Page ALTERNATIVE DREDGE AND DISPOSAL OPTIONS CONSIDERED Clamshell, Hopper and Cutter-Suction dredging options were evaluated against relevant environmental and economic factors Alternative Disposal Options Upland Disposal Upland disposal was immediately eliminated due to prohibitive cost, impractical logistics including barge to land transfer and traffic generated by thousands of dump truck trips, prolonged duration for construction, excessive air emissions, and no prospect for improving the marine habitat (i.e., wasted resource) Disposal at Sea (DAS) Sediment sampling results ultimately indicated conformance with DAS criteria. Disposal at Sea would only be feasible if the material were to remain in Port Moody Arm at a newly designated disposal site, ot essels t a siti g Bu a d I let a d disposi g at E i o e t Ca ada s approved site (e.g., Pt. Grey). To prove the point, only a far less efficient combination of clamshell / barge and closed hopper dredger could be used in the scenario for disposing at Pt. Grey (i.e., cutter suction is not mobile). The consequences of the transit option would include: Increased navigational traffic in the harbour; Elevated air emissions of either option for tug assist for scows or transit of the hopper vessel; Vastly extended project duration (potential noise and visual impacts); No potential for marine habitat improvement using dredge material in Port Moody Arm; and, Unwarranted and unacceptable costs. For these reasons, Disposal at Sea, with distant transit to Pt. Grey, is NOT a viable option for this project. The viable option for this project is to follow a similar approach used in The process will involve relocating dredge spoils to defined areas behind the existing berm and a newly constructed berm for containment. With knowledge accumulated since the 1995 dredge, the proponent will employ additional planning and operational mitigation measures including the key objective to minimize turbidity. Benefits of keeping the material in Port Moody Arm under a Disposal at Sea permit will include reduced harbour traffic, vastly reduced air emissions, much shorter project schedule (reduced potential for noise and visual obstruction) while using the material to improve current marine habitat conditions (instead of treating the material as a waste with no value). Details of each option, including dredgers, are discussed below. Figure 5 shows the planned equipment operating locations.

21 Page 17 FIGURE 5: DREDGE EQUIPMENT OPERATING LOCATIONS

22 Page Dredging Equipment Considered Clam Shell Dredge A clamshell dredge, (e.g., FRPD McKenzie), located on a barge, would collect material in an approximately 5m 3 - bucket, then place on a bottom dumping scow. The full scow would then be towed by tug to the disposal site where the dredge material would be released. Multiple scows (e.g., two or three) would be anchored in proximity to the clamshell to enable continuous loading. The process would require up to 212 days to complete the entire dredge for the disposal at sea scenario. Under the local placement approach, it would be used for up to approximately 10 days for precision dredging in the vicinity of the Ioco pipeline and dock face and to shape the new containment berm Hopper Dredge The FRPD 309 is 124m long sea-going, self-propelled vessel equipped with two suction pipes designed to trail along the side of the vessel. At the lower end of the suction pipe is a drag head which will contact the sea bed exhuming sediments through the combined process of erosion and excavation. Loosened sediments are transported from the drag head through the suction pipe to the vessel by sucking water through the drag head inlets forming a slurry mixture. Suction is provided by pumps inboard the vessel, which discharges the mixture of sediment and water into the hopper. The vessel will transport the slurry to the disposal area and discharge through a pipe connected to a diffuser located at or near the seabed. There will not be bottom discharging from the bottom gates through the water column to the seabed. Dredging occurs with the vessel on the move at approximately 1.5 to 2.0 knots. The hopper dredge has a capacity of approximately 4900m 3 (rounded). Results from the 2012 sediment sampling episode (see section ) near Reed Point Marina indicated largely fine particle sized silts and clay (see core logs in Appendix VI). Based on this knowledge, the expected load within the FRPD 309 vessel hold would be comprised of approximately 20% sediment and 80% water (e.g., 980m 3 of sediment). Considering this relative operational inefficiency combined with long transit distance to the (Point Grey) disposal site and operating cost ($20 million), the hopper dredge was not considered viable for disposal at sea to Point Grey. However, with much shorter transit distances between one to three kilometres in the local placement scenario, the hopper dredge would only be needed for approximately 42 days instead of 225 days in the disposal at sea scenario. Overall, the FRPD 309 is only viable for local dredging and disposal within Port Moody Arm.

23 Page Cutter-Suction Dredge The FRPD Columbia cutter suction dredge operates a suction tube with a cutting mechanism at the suction inlet. The cutting mechanism loosens the bed material and transports it to the suction mouth. The dredged material is subsequently sucked up by a wear-resistant centrifugal pump and will then be discharged through a pipe line and diffuser at the designated placement site. The material is fine enough that a booster pump will likely not be required for moving the sediment. A number of operational modifications will be attempted (e.g., lower pressure; diffuser at discharge point) to reduce dredge and placement turbidity respectively. The Columbia would be used to dredge the turning basin, requiring approximately 21 days Detailed Dredge Option Evaluation The table and text below summarizes the key variables in selecting the most appropriate dredge option. Environmental, economic and social factors were considered. Table 4 shows conditions and costs for the disposal at sea option using clamshell or hopper dredge. TABLE 4: INDIVIDUAL EQUIPMENT FOR DISPOSAL AT SEA (TRANSIT TO PT. GREY) Dredge Option Dredge Turbidity Limit Dredge Duration (days) Air Emissions tco 2 e *Sediment recovered per bucket (clamshell) or hopper. Comparison Variables Material Recovery / Load* Economic: Dredge Only Economic: DAS Fee ($0.47 /t) Total Economic / Cost Clamshell Complies 212 5, % $8 million $250,000 $8.3 million Closed Hopper Complies , % >>$19.8 million $250,000 >>$20 million Table 5, shows applicable conditions and costs associated with local placement using a combination of hopper, clamshell and hopper dredges.

24 Page 20 TABLE 5: DREDGE OPTION SUMMARY - COMBINED EQUIPMENT FOR LOCAL PLACEMENT Comparison Variables Dredge Option Dredge Turbidity Dredge Duration (days) Air Emissions tco 2 e Placement Logistics Material Recovery Economic: Dredge Only Economic: Berm Construction Total Economic / Cost Clamshell Comply Good 80-85% $100,000 Closed Hopper Cutter- Suction Comply 42 2,810 Good 20-25% $5.0 million Comply Best 80-90% $670,000 Totals Comply 73 3,970 Good - $5.8 million $2.3 million *$8.1 million *includes overdredge, engineering and mobilization Turbidity All dredge options are expected to remain in compliance with typical turbidity restrictions (e.g., 75 NTU above background set in the 1995 dredge). The fine particulate sediment will remain predominantly as a solid mass in the water column when dredged by the clamshell bucket and when released into the placement area from a bottom dumping scow. The FRPD 309 will discharge at a depth in the designated disposal areas via floating pipeline connected to a diffuser for discharging near the seabed and bottom of the water column. With respect to the cutter-suction method, turbidity generated at the cutter-head is expected to remain at depth. The majority of sediment will be collected by suction and the cutter head and placed via surface pipeline with a diffuser at depth in the placement area Dredge Duration Under the disposal at sea option requiring transit to Pt. Grey, clamshell and hopper dredges are expected to require 212 and 225 days, respectively. These are reduced to 10 and 42 days, respectively, with the cutter suction dredge requiring 21 days under the local disposal option. Similarly operating efficiency for the hopper dredge is expected to increase from 2900m 3 /day (disposal to Pt. Grey- only three trips) to at least 8800m 3 /day (local disposal up to nine trips). The significantly shortened duration for works will result in lower emissions and a decreased potential for noise disturbance and visual impacts Air Emissions Under the disposal requiring transit option, the clamshell and hopper dredge will generate 5,910 and 15,050 of CO 2 equivalents (GHG) respectively. The total air emissions estimate for local disposal, including berm construction, using the combined equipment option is projected

25 Page 21 at 3,970 tonnes of CO 2 equivalents. This option will reduce air emissions between 33% and 74% from the same operating equipment. As indicated in Table 6 below, other contaminants including particulate matter (PM), Carbon Monoxide (CO), Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx), Sulphur Oxides (SOx) and Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) will also be substantially lower (e.g., 50%-75% less) in the combined equipment / local placement option than the disposal at sea option. These potential emission savings are clearly aligned with PMV air quality conservation initiatives. TABLE 6: AIR EMISSION SUMMARY Dredge Option Dredge Duration (days) GHGs (t CO 2 e) Individual Equipment for Disposal at Sea Transit to Pt. Grey Comparison Variables PM (t) CO (t) NO x (t) SO x (t) VOCs (t) Clamshell 212 5, Closed Hopper , Combined Equipment for Local Disposal Port Moody Arm Clamshell Closed Hopper Cutter- Suction 42 2, Totals Economic Considerations Including berm construction, the local disposal approach cost is estimated as low as $7.5 million (with potential overdredge adjustments) to $8.1 million. Disposal at sea with transit estimates are $8.3 million to over $20 million. As such, savings for the local disposal option are significant (e.g., between $800,000 to nearly $12 million) Local Disposal Logistics Under the local disposal option, the cutter suction dredge fitted with floating pipeline and mobile diffuser head will be very efficient means to distribute sediment within the planned containment areas. The FRPD 309, with careful navigation within the placement area can achieve very similar results, including prevention of voids progressing from higher to lower elevations on the sea bed.

26 Page Lighting Dredge vessel lighting is required for safe operation and navigation. Operations will require predominantly spot rather than flood lighting (i.e., used to illuminate large areas). The cutter suction (Columbia) uses lights from the gantry (pointed downward to a ladder), deck and spud lights and navigation lights. The FRPD 309 uses lights on deck, in the hopper well and navigation lights. Similarly, lighting on the clamshell will remain localized, including deck, crane and navigation lights. Lighting systems on cranes are mounted to minimize light throw during the raising and lowering of the equipment (keep the lights pointed down), no matter what the position of the gantry arm. Potentially sensitive receptors (e.g., Pleasantside waterfront homes) will be at least 400m from any dredge vessel during the project, a distance that should reduce light intensity to tolerable non-intrusive levels. Additionally, light cast from any of the dredgers is not expected to affect marine life or birds. The dredge contractor, FRPD, has not received a light-related complaint on any project to date. As a result, light-related impacts are expected to be low to negligible Noise Peak noise levels from operations are most likely to remain at or below background in nearby residential locations on the north side of Port Moody Arm. With engines located on deck, the Columbia cutter-suction dredge may generate more noise than the hopper and clamshell dredges. A noise survey of Columbia operations was conducted by FRPD staff on August 22, 2012 (see Appendix VIII). Results showed that noise level readings declined from a high of 90 dba adjacent to the Columbia to an average of 61 dba located 122 metres (400 ft.) from the Columbia. Given that the closest residential community will be located in excess of 400m from the Columbia at any time, noise levels from operations should approximate should conform to the City of Port Moody Sound Level By-law for activity zones during daytime hours. Additionally, the Columbia will be operated only within the Sound Level By-law construction hour period between 7:00 am to 8:00 pm, Monday through Saturday. Engines on the FRPD 309 are enclosed below deck. A recent noise survey (February 2015) conducted by FRPD indicated that the 309 will operate largely within or very close to City of Port Moody Sound Bylaw activity zone criteria (continuous or non-continuous day and nighttime sound levels). The survey was conducted on the Fraser River where conditions are not the same as Port Moody Arm, however, they provide a reasonable basis for project planning. The 64dBA, 67dBA and 58dBA readings represent dredging, transit (sailing) and sediment discharging sounds at 500m from the vessel. The closest residence from the channel dredge work area is approximately 520m (Google Earth). It is proposed that the FRPD operate 24 hours and day, 7 days a week for maximum operational efficiency which, in turn, reduces project duration and probability for community disturbance at expect sound levels.

27 Page 23 Furthermore, dredging operations are planned during seasonally poor weather (e.g., October through January-February), when most people are inclined to insulate themselves indoors from precipitation and, therefore, possible noise from the project Dredge Material Recovery Bathymetric analysis suggests that upwards of 83% of the material dredged in 1995 (using the Columbia) remained in place behind the constructed berm located east of the turning basin (see Section 3.0 for details). Over 90% containment is expected using the Fraser FRPD 309 and Columbia combined with silt curtains and expanded berms Summary Conclusion for Dredge Type After comparing dredge types under disposal at sea with transit versus local disposal options, the combined equipment approach with local disposal in Port Moody Arm was clearly the preferred option. Through operating efficiencies, it has: The lowest environmental impact, including shortest duration to minimize potential community disturbances; The best value (lowest cost) to achieve the desired outcome (13.5m channel depth); and Potential for sediment to be used as a valued resource to help improve marine habitat instead of an opportunity lost as a waste.

28 Page OPERATIONS PLAN, POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION 3.1 OPERATIONS PLAN The estimated planning and operations schedule is shown in Table 7, which includes the elapsed period from PMV project review to completion of berm construction and dredging. TABLE 7: PROPOSED PLANNING & OPERATIONS SCHEDULE PMV Application Review First Nation Consultation PMV, TC & EC - DAS Permits PCT Detailed Planning / FRPD Mobilization PCT Berm Construction PCT Dredge Notes: Approximate Timeframe March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec PMV = Port Metro Vancouver; TC = Transport Canada; EC -DAS = Environment Canada Disposal at Sea; DFO Letter of Advice for construction was obtained February 26, 2014 no approval / authorization required x Jan 2016 Feb Mar - July Fisheries Window In addition to environmental, community and cost considerations, operations planning has also accounted for navigational safety and coordinating with a separate project to remove decommissioned pipelines that are currently located within the dredge cut. With respect to navigational safety and related logistics: Marine construction and dredging equipment will be stored within the new containment berm. A laydown area outside the project footprint will not be required. During dredging, the FRPD 309 and Columbia will temporarily mobilize outside the active dredging areas while vessels transit to and from PCT docks. With approximately 30 vessels calling over the dredge period duration, extensive communications between the contractor, Pilots, Harbour Master, etc., will ensure equipment is moved well in advance of vessel traffic in Port Moody Arm. Contingencies have been inserted into the p oje t s hedule fo these sta d pe iods. A Noti e of Wo ks u de T a spo t Ca ada s Navigation Protection Program has been submitted to the Pacific Region office. The FRPD ill efuel as pe PMV s u ke i g p o edu e at a desig ated lo atio to e confirmed (e.g., Lynnterm). All other equipment will be fueled using the FRPD Fred Barber fuel barge which is being retrofitted to Transport Canada requirements including secondary containment.

29 Page 25 Among the earliest stages of the dredging project will be the removal of two decommissioned pipelines owned by Imperial Oil Corporation (IOCO). The six and twelve in pipelines are located south of and adjacent to Reed Point Marina (see Figure 5 above for pipeline easement). Figure 6 and Figure 7 show the parallel six and twelve inch pipeline cross sections within the planned dredge cut. Sediment Surface Elevation 6 Pipeli e Ele atio FIGURE 6: SIX INCH IOCO PIPELINE SECTION* Sediment Surface Elevation 12 Pipeli e Ele atio FIGURE 7: TWELVE INCH PIPELINE CROSS SECTION (*Note: these images were derived from the Preliminary Port Metro Vancouver Project Review Application Burrard Inlet Pipeline Removal report prepared by Golder Associates, December 18, 2013.)

30 Page 26 The pipelines were cleared of contents and idled since In 2013, the pipeline was cleaned pigged and elevations surveyed. As a result, each of the six and twelve inch pipeline segments located within the dredge channel will be safely cut and capped through a separate project permitted by PMV. The PCT project team will coordinate with PMV, IOCO and its contractor to ensure that dredging is only initiated subsequent to pipeline removal. More details for berm construction and dredging are provided below Phase I: Containment Berm Construction An evaluation of recent bathymetric data furnished by Department of Fisheries and Oceans (2012) indicated that available volume for placement behind (east of) the existing berm is limited to approximately 55,000m 3. With a total dredge volume estimated at 550,000m 3, building a second berm is required to accommodate the remaining volume. Design and construction concepts are summarized below Berm Design Concepts The new berm will be located west of the existing berm, adjacent and no closer than 31m to the turning basin. The structure will proceed linearly to a 6.5m contour north of the turning basin and make a right angle until it intersects with the existing berm at 4.5m chart datum. This triangular alignment creates a full enclosure at depth (see Figure 8). Combined with the existing berm, there will be total containment of 655,000m 3. This volume was selected for two reasons:

31 Page 27 FIGURE 8: PLANNED PLACEMENT AREA BERM

32 Page 28 To accommodate the planned load site volume (550,000m 3 ); and, To accommodate sediment bulking factor demonstrated by Tarbotton et al. (1999 9, using a US Army Corp of Engineers method - sediment column test). The factor indicates volumetric consolidation of suspended sediment over time (see Section for additional details). Using a final bulking factor of 1.2 times the planned sediment volume, including a conservatively high 95% retention, results in a final volume of 627,000m 3. The berm will be built with 2.5:1 side slope and 4.5m chart datum, an elevation that will not cause a navigable water obstruction. This was confirmed with the PMV dredge specialist (D. Hart). Up to 33,000m 3 of material (including 5% contingency for settling into the soft bottom seabed) is required to build the berm. Pit run angular aggregate from local suppliers (e.g., Mainland or Pitt Rive Quarries) will be the most likely source for berm construction material. Alternative sources for clean, eusa le ate ial ill also e o side ed e.g., lea e-purposed concrete from demolition sites or dredged aggregates from First or Second Narrows should they be available on a timely basis) Berm Construction Berm construction will take place exclusively waterside. Clean material will be towed to the designated site and released from the surface via bottom-dumping scows. One or two derricks will be used to shape (trim) the berms to the specified side slopes and cap. Final elevations will be confirmed to ensure compliance with the planned 6.0m and subsequent 4.5m chart datum heights along the length of the berm. Construction will require approximately thirty days including material transport, dumping and trimming. The preferred option for berm construction scheduling is to begin late August / early September 2015, followed immediately by dredging and disposal in late October, early November 2015 through February 2016 (shown in Table 7 above). The retention berms in the planned configuration would have a slope of 2.5: 1 (H: V) and a minimum crest width of 1.0m. The berm would be placed directly on the ocean floor. The purpose of the berm is two-fold: Short-term containment of the bulk of the dredged material as it is being placed. Finer sediments would most likely be hydrodynamically suspended in the water column and be controlled more with silt curtains. 9 Tarbotton, M., M. Mattila, and J. Jordan Underwater Containment of Hydraulic Dredge Material Pacific Coast Terminals, Vancouver Harbour British Columbia. In Proceedings of the 1999 Canadian Coastal Conference. May Royal Roads University, Victoria, British Columbia. pp

33 Page 29 Long-term containment of all settled materials as consolidation takes place and pore pressures within the dredge fill are reduced. Although the consolidated fill would strengthen, the berm would serve as a slope stabilizer and thus eliminate any subterranean slides within the fill to the west. This design concept is based on keying in the berm fill materials into the ocean sediment with coarse materials and a presumption that no lateral failures would occur under the disposal area, including the berm i.e., o eak ho izontal layer in the ocean floor subgrade that could fail laterally under load. Note: the berm is being placed per the 1995 experience and there are no specific static or seismic design criteria for stability. The presumption is that localized failure of the berm and/or liquefaction of the dredge fill would be of negligible consequence. The berm volume is approximately 33,000m 3 in place and would be free-draining; in 1995, a i e g a els e e used. Ideall, the e ate ials ould e ho oge eous, ut variances in gradation and material type would be allowed to maximize use of readily available materials. There would be two main soil profiles in the berm: Base: the layer placed directly over the ocean floor sediments. Berm Fill: the import material that would form the berm. The Base should comprise a well-graded 500mm minus blast rock (min fine gravel/coarse sand size, less than 1% fines) that would be placed in a single layer directly on the ocean floor to a nominal thickness of 0.5m above the sea bed. The angular rock would settle into the sediments and the finer fill fractions would serve to contain sediment loss in the Base structure. The Berm Fill would typically comprise the flowing: Core to comprise 150mm 200mm minus, well-graded, min particle size of medium gravel, less than 5% fines. Coarser material, up to 900mm minus (same gradation) to be placed on the outer slope and est o l, as e ui ale t a ou. The conceptual design will use suitable and readily available coarse granular material. Actual berm material and final design may vary. As noted above, materials may include blast rock, bank run (oversize and blends with granular rejects), crushed concrete etc. Coarse refuse (uncrushed concrete, old shoreline armour, timber cribs) may also be selectively considered, but in the shallower areas of the berm. Asphalt particulate, fine soils, rail ballast, waste ore, ceramics, contaminated fill, organics, plastics, general domestic or industrial refuse etc. would not be acceptable. The trend to fill placement would be coarser from the inner fill slope to the exposed outer slope. The generalized berm profile is illustrated in Figure 9 below:

34 Page 30 Ocean 900mm minus mm minus Dredge Fill Coarser 500mm minus base FIGURE 9: PLANNED BERM CONSTRUCTION PROFILE It would not be our intent to limit any particular fill material, but the selection process would be such to control the overall level of heterogeneity, drainage performance and stability at the design slopes within the context of supply and placement cost and project sustainability Phase II: Dredge and Placement Historical Perspective The proposed dredge and placement plan builds on the 1995 program. At that time, approximately 280,000m 3 of marine sediments were dredged to create a new turning basin at Pacific Coast Terminals (Tarbotton et al ). A berm was constructed at the opening of the basin to retain dredged material. The berm was successful in retaining material, creating 130,000m 2 of seabed at an elevation of 4.5m (local chart datum) (Tarbotton et al ). The 1995 dredging program tested the sediments to be dredged to identify physical properties. The properties of the sediments strongly influenced the methodology employed for removal and placement. These properties included: higher than anticipated dredged material production or bulking factor; a high degree of sediment bulking; and, difficulty with dredge positioning and anchoring as the soft sediments had poor holding ability (Tarbotton et al ). Upon discharge, sediments comprised a slurry that flocculates and settles rapidly as demonstrated by settling column tests (Tarbotton et al ). Three types of settlement behaviour were observed:

35 Page 31 Zone settling (0 to about 8 hours): zone settling is the initial rapid and linear settling of the slurry/supernatant liquid interface. The mean rate of settling of the interface during zone settling was 0.11m per hour. Consolidation settling (8 hours to about 150 hours): consolidation settling is the nonlinear settling that occurs after the initial zone settling. During this settlement water is being squeezed out of lower layers of sediment as the weight of the overlying layers bear down. The bulking factor decreases with increasing settlement. Consolidation (150 hours onward): consolidation is the final stage of settlement during which the settling essentially stops. The settling column test results displayed a bulking factor of approximately 2 at 150 hours. In essence, for every cubic metre of sediment excavated, 2m 3 of material would prevail (settle) after 150 hours. Over time, settlement would proceed, with the bulking factor decreasing, and the volume of material placed at the disposal site approaching that initially dredged. The material was placed within the basin in April, 1995 to an elevation of 4.5m. The material was surveyed in April Intuitively, after 17 years, it is expected that settlement would have resulted in a lower elevation, whereby the sea bottom is deeper than what was determined in Indeed, the 2012 survey data reveals that this has occurred, with a typical bed elevation of approximately 6.0m. Settlement has apparently manifested a decrease in the height of placed material of approximately 1.5m. The dredging program comprising Phase 1 would be similar to that employed in 1995 including new and existing placement areas previously described. Disposal would consider the initial bulking factor of eight (8) associated with settling column test results of Tarbotton et al. ( ). The bulking factor decreases dramatically to approximately 3.5 after 10 hours. The operations work plan will modify the rate of dredged material disposal to ensure that the new retention berm is not overtopped by the unconsolidated slurry Dredge and Disposal Operations Plan Dredging will require approximately 70 days. Sequenced activities are generally planned as follows (and subject to change pending equipment performance): Begin with the Fraser FRPD 309 to dredge the navigation channel operating 24 hours per day and 7 days per week (24/7). The overflow chute will be closed. The FRPD 309 will take on approximately 980m 3 of sediment and 3820m 3 of water, then transit to the new contained disposal area to discharge the hopper contents then return to the dredge channel work area. It is expected to make approximately 9 to 10 sailings per day and complete this section of the dredge in approximately 42 days. The next major step is to dredge turning basin using the Columbia cutter dredge. It will take an estimated 21 days to dredge and dispose via the floating pipeline and diffuser. Plans are to operate from 7am to 8pm, Monday through Friday, with the occasional Saturday if needed to keep on schedule.

36 Page 32 The clamshell may operate concurrently with the cutter-suction dredges for seven days to dredge the dockface. It will otherwise add approximately three days duration to complete precision dredging near the Ioco pipelines. PCT is regular communication with Imperial Oil for safe operations in this area. The pipeline has not been used for over 25 years, but the pipeline has been cleaned of all contents. The average dredging rate using all three dredgers will be approximately 7800m3 / day. Dredge spoils will be placed in multiple locations within each containment area. The new containment area will be used as the primary placement site. The area behind the existing berm will be used for contingency, most likely for short durations (e.g., <24 hours) to allow settling in the main (new) containment area. This may change pending operational conditions (i.e., this is an adaptive plan). The operators will attempt placement of material from higher to lower elevations to encourage more even settling and minimize voids. 3.2 OPERATING MITIGATION MEASURES Building on the knowledge obtained from the 1995 dredge, several planning and operational controls will be implemented to minimize and / or prevent environmental and social impacts resulting from the project. The project will be timed to occur: Within a fisheries window so as to not interfere with sensitive juvenile salmonid development stages. During the early to mid-fall season where most residents will be indoors due to typically poor weather. This will help reduce visual obtrusion and potential noise disturbance. Within the City of Port Moody Sound Level By-law construction hours limits as much as possible. Berm construction, dock face dredging (clamshell) and turning basin dredging (cutter suction) will take place between 7am and 8pm. PCT has request from the City to operate the FRPD 309 on a 24/7 basis for up to 10 weeks. Multiple turbidity control measures: While maintaining operational efficiency, pump velocity rates may be adjusted to help minimize potential turbidity (1995). Diffuser installation to reduce discharge velocity (verified by Tarbotton et al. ( ) to reduce turbidity). Deployment of silts screens (geotextile, sisal, etc.) to a depth of 6m (20ft) near the diffuser to trap sediments in the water column that may otherwise escape from the placement area. Berm design that accommodates time required for suspended volumes to settle within the planned containment area. Allow for temporary shutdowns if indicated by monitoring, although none where necessary during the 1995 dredge.

37 Page 33 Potential to further reduce dredge pump rates to, in turn, reduce discharge velocity if and when necessary when using the cutter suction. Timely Project Notification: PCT will work with PMV to ensure that First Nations and stakeholders, including local residents and water based businesses and interest groups are informed of project timing and potential short-term impacts (noise, turbidity). Project notification will follow previous project communications undertaken by PCT and PMV (see Section 6.1, Preliminary Communication Activities) for additional detail. Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) Construction Assessment On February 26, 2014, Mr. Brian Naito of DFO issued a letter of advice indicating that the proposed works (berm construction and dredging) will not create serious harm to fish if prescribed mitigation measures are implemented. No fo al app o al is e ui ed from the Program under the Fisheries Act in order to p o eed ith ou p oposal. See Appendix XI for a copy of the letter. 3.3 POTENTIAL RESIDUAL PROJECT IMPACTS There are no long-term residual negative impacts expected as a result of the proposed dredge and placement activities. This is supported by available historical information and related interpretations as follows: Recent bathymetric analysis confirmed that 83% of the planned dredge volume (231,000m 3 out of 280,000m 3 ) was successfully deposited behind the berm. It is otherwise assumed that the remaining 17% entered the water column and was subsequently deposited elsewhere in the Arm and Burrard Inlet. Consequences of a likely sediment rain were likely positive in a short-term nutrient distribution followed by rapid recovery of the benthic community through colonization and reproduction. Post 1995 dredge monitoring conducted by Tarbotton et al. ( stated that ongoing site e i o e tal o ito i g i di ates a full e o e of the lo al ha itat. Material properties led to rapid settlement as demonstrated by monitoring data accumulated during dredging. Data indicated quick settling within 100m of the discharge point and that material largely remained near the seabed after discharge from the diffuser. F o a positi e i pa t pe spe ti e, the p oje t offe s se e al lo g-term environmental benefits: As a result of an elevated sea bottom (to 4.5m chart datum) achieved through material placement, the duration and intensity of light reaching the sea bottom is enhanced, increasing primary productivity (likely through green algae) and hence, foraging opportunities for benthic invertebrates. Further, as demonstrated by the Ponar Grab sample data of Adams et al. (2012), there appears to be a relationship between the abundance of both number and species of invertebrates and subtidal bottom elevations;

38 Page 34 samples collected at elevations less than 4.5 m chart datum displayed the highest number of individuals and species. Many of the benthic invertebrates documented at the shallow elevations are common prey for commercial fishery species, including flatfishes and Dungeness crab (see Adams ). As such, an increase in bottom elevation may result in an increase in the number of food organisms available to fishery species. Increased prey availability will likely result in an increase the consumption of prey, and an increase in growth, vigour and survivorship of fishery species. An opportunity to reuse clean construction material and aggregates for developing habitat instead of losing the material as waste to landfills or disposal at a distant Environment Canada disposal site (e.g., Pt. Grey). Protecting air quality by selecting the most efficient approach of dredging and direct placement within the Arm. This approach also offers the shortest duration of potential noise and visual disturbances to local citizens. 3.4 PROJECT MONITORING PLAN The proposed monitoring plan significantly expands the geographical and technical scope undertaken in Changes include increasing the number of on-shore sampling locations from two to eight in order to get a more accurate indication of turbidity within the Arm; and biophysical parameters to assess potential changes caused by sedimentation. The approach includes logic and correction for natural seasonal events (e.g., avoid algal bloom) and anthropogenic sources (e.g., tracking in water works). The monitoring program scope will cover the pre-dredge, dredge and post-dredge periods Measured Parameters and Sampling Protocols Total Suspended Solids Total Suspended Solids (TSS) provides a measure of the loading of solids within the marine environment; it will provide an indication of the: potential of sedimentation of intertidal habitats; fouling of the gills of marine organisms; and the attenuation of light throughout the water column. Nephelometric Turbidity Units Nephelometric Turbidity Units (NTU) provides of measure of the attenuation of light throughout the water column which, if it persists over an extended duration, can have an effect on the vigor of benthic algae, kelp and eelgrass. 10 Adams, M.A Enhancement of Habitat for Fishery Species. Port Moody Arm Placement of Dredged Material. Letter Report addressed to Brian Naito, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Vancouver, BC. Envirowest Consultants Inc. Port Coquitlam, BC. 5p.

39 Page 35 Particle Size Distribution The distribution of particle sizes of TSS and of sediments will indicate what portion of the initial TSS readily settles within the immediate zone of influence and what portion may be transported outside the immediate zone of influence. Sedimentation Sediment plates will be utilized to measure sedimentation within the intertidal zone; sedimentation provides a measure of the prospective impact on benthic/epibenthic/encrusting invertebrates and algae. Areal Cover/Abundance of Intertidal Benthic/Epibenthic/Encrusting Invertebrates and Algae The measure of areal cover and abundance of invertebrates and algae provide an indication of the response of the biological component of the environment to TSS, NTU and sedimentation. Note that only CAEAL certified laboratories such as ALS Environmental and Maxaam will be used for sediment quality analyses Sample Locations Proposed open water and shoreline sample locations are outlined below and shown in Figure 10. Shoreline locations are situated to monitor the primary zone of influence in Port Moody Arm. Monitoring stations are not located within Indian Arm as factors extrinsic to project (e.g., currents, fetch, water uses, fluvial discharge) would confound monitoring data obtained from such stations. FIGURE 10: PROPOSED SHORELINE SAMPLE LOCATIONS Open Water Sample Locations One-hundred (100) and two-hundred (200) metres (to be confirmed) from dredge scow in aligned in direction of tide, both upstream and downstream (daily NTU during operations). Similar to the 1995 monitoring program, samples would be taken at one (1) metre gradations to