PORT METRO VANCOUVER DELTAPORT TERMINAL, ROAD AND RAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT PUBLIC CONSULTATION. Multi Stakeholder Meeting Langley December 8, 2011

Transcription

1 PORT METRO VANCOUVER DELTAPORT TERMINAL, ROAD AND RAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT PUBLIC CONSULTATION Multi Stakeholder Meeting Langley December 8, 2011 Notes from a multi stakeholder meeting for the Deltaport Terminal, Road and Rail Improvement Project, December 8, 2:00pm 4:00pm, at the Newlands Golf & Country Club, Langley, BC. Stakeholders: Port Metro Vancouver: Denni Bonetti, Langley Chamber of Commerce Paul Cordeiro, Township of Langley Jack Froese, Township of Langley Russ Jenkins, Township of Langley Fire Department Ed Kolla, Langley Chamber of Commerce Lee Lockwood, VALTAC Viveka Ohman, Vancouver History Society Bryant Ross, Township of Langley Fire Department Jennifer Szezepaniak, Langley RCMP Pat Walker, Township of Langley Fire Department Lynn Whitehouse, Langley Chamber of Commerce Judy Williams, Fraser River Coalition, VAPOR, Boundary Bay Conservation Committee, BC Shore Spawners Alliance, Pacific Spirit Park Society, Wreck Beach Preservation Society Chris Chok, Kirk & Co. Consulting Ltd., Facilitator Cliff Stewart, Director, Infrastructure Development Darrell Desjardin, Director, Sustainable Development Elaine Fisher, Environmental Specialist, Project Delivery Jody Addah, Sustainable Development Specialist Matt Skinner, Kirk & Co. Consulting Ltd., Meeting Recorder The record notes that the meeting commenced at 2:03pm Key Themes Participants expressed concern around the decision making process for expansion opportunities on the West Coast. Participants questioned the environmental review process, specifically the scope of studies and possible implications of results Participants inquired about the increase in road and rail traffic resulting from the Deltaport Terminal, Road and Rail Improvement Project, including anticipated traffic volumes and suitability of mitigation efforts Participants expressed concerns regarding safety measures and emergency response strategies for dangerous or toxic cargo Page 1 of 13

2 1. Chris Chok, Facilitator Welcome and Agenda Review Roundtable introductions were undertaken. C: Chris Chok: Good afternoon. My name is Chris Chok and I am with Kirk & Co. Consulting, and I will be facilitating this session this afternoon. Thank you very much for coming out. This is our sixth stakeholder meeting for this project. We completed two in Delta, one in Surrey, Richmond, Vancouver and now in Langley. We are also holding two open houses; one was last night at the Coast Tsawwassen Inn and the second is on Saturday at the Delta Town & Country Inn. In a second, I am going to ask the Port Metro Vancouver staff to introduce themselves and their roles, but I wanted to point out that my colleague Matt Skinner from Kirk & Co. is taking notes and we will be attributing your comments. This means that we will put your name with your comment in the notes, unless you let me know otherwise. We are recording but that is for Matt to check his notes. C: Cliff Stewart: Good afternoon, my name is Cliff Stewart and I am the Director of Infrastructure Development with Port Metro Vancouver, and my role is as the Program Director for the Container Capacity Program of which this Deltaport Terminal, Road and Rail Improvement Project is the first element. C: Elaine Fisher: My name is Elaine Fisher and I work as an Environmental Specialist on the Container Capacity Improvement Program. C: Jody Addah: My name is Jody Addah and I am a Sustainable Development Specialist for the Container Capacity Improvement Program C: Jennifer Szezepaniak: Langley RCMP. C: Paul Cordeiro: Manager of Transportation for the Township of Langley. C: Bryant Ross: Township of Langley Fire Department. C: Russ Jenkins: Township of Langley Fire Department. C: Jack Froese: Mayor of the Township of Langley. C: Lee Lockwood: VALTAC C: Viveka Ohman: Vancouver Natural History Society. C: Denni Bonetti: Langley Chamber of Commerce. C: Lynn Whitehouse: Langley Chamber of Commerce. C: Ed Kolla: Langley Chamber of Commerce. 2. Presentation of Deltaport Terminal, Road and Rail Improvement Project Discussion Guide C: Cliff Stewart: We will use the Discussion Guide to guide the conversation. Please feel free to jump in at any time with questions or comments, as we have found that this approach works best. C: Chris Chok: In addition to what Cliff has said about reference to the discussion guide, I would like to point out that we would like to get your feedback, and in the back of this discussion guide there is a feedback from and we are hoping to get that from you today because we know that Page 2 of 13

3 traditionally, if we don t get feedback on the day of a meeting, the chances of receiving it afterwards go down. That being said, it is available online and there is a feedback form on the web. The deadline for consultation is January 6 th. C: Cliff Stewart: If in any way you are not comfortable with this feedback process, we invite any type of written submissions that work best for you. I am going to jump right to page 5, and will explain why we are here talking about container capacity and then I will talk about specific elements of this program. On page 5, you will see a forecast, which is a result of an in depth study by Seaport Consultants. If you are interested in this, the Executive Summary is available on our website in the project section. But what the study basically told us is that there will be a shortage of container capacity on the West Coast between 2014 and The Deltaport Terminal, Road and Rail Improvement Project is the lowest cost, least environmental footprint and least overall impact option to provide additional capacity in the near term. It is not Terminal 2 and it is not related to Terminal 2 in the sense that it is a standalone project. So if you are here to talk about Terminal 2, we are certainly happy to hear your input, but this is a different project. The demand forecast is telling us is that we need to provide some more capacity. Turning over the page and putting this into historical context, page 6 includes a hindcast shows us the terminal improvements that have occurred on the West Coast of Canada over the last 15 years, both here and in Prince Rupert, compared to the throughput with is the red line. The dotted blue line is what we call the 85% line, which is the nameplate capacity that you can push through, and there is a point where you run into operational inefficiencies and things start to slow down. You may put more in total through but it ends up taking more effort. In the industry, we try to ensure that new capacity is available as we approach the 85% line so the customers don t see a degradation of service. You will see at certain times, there are points where those two lines came very close together and if you talk to customers, they will tell you what the world looked like for them at that point in time. Our intention is to ensure that we have new capacity available as we approach that 85% line. If you turn to page 5, you will see that we cross that line somewhere between Our target for this project is to deliver these facilities by Before I get into the specific of the projects, I really want to point out that this project really depends upon two other important transportation projects that are going on in the Lower Mainland. The South Fraser Perimeter Road, which is due for completion by the end of 2013, and the Roberts Bank Rail Corridor which is due for completion in 2014, since they are both intended to deliver mitigation in advance of the Deltaport Terminal, Road and Rail Improvement Project. Q: Denni Bonetti: I just wanted to clarify something. You had said that this is a completely different project than the Terminal 2 Project, but you are working together, correct? A: Cliff Stewart: They are both projects within the Container Capacity Improvement Program and I am responsible for both, but they are on very different time frames. This is a project that we hope we can begin construction on next year and complete in two years, and Terminal 2 is a 10 or longer year delivery timeframe. Page 3 of 13

4 C: Chris Chok: Cliff is about to get into it, but I think it is important to point out that these are improvements to the existing Deltaport Terminal, entirely within the existing footprint, rail right of way, road right of way and the terminal footprint. C: Cliff Stewart: And in particular, no marine works as we are not building any land. C: Denni Bonetti: I was just trying to point out that there is no sense in making these improvements if you are not taking into consideration the future of Terminal 2. A: Cliff Stewart: Everything we are doing here stands alone. So if there is not a Terminal 2, this project is self justified. However, when we work on Terminal 2, this project is cognizant of the past as well as what is proposed to being done here. We are not building capacity for T2 later. We are building capacity for this project. Q: Judy Williams: This compartmentalizing of these different projects; is this a deliberate attempt on the part of the Port to avoid a full environmental assessment procedure? Because if you put them all together, impact wise, they would have to go through a federal assessment process. So is this why you are doing one at a time and suddenly bringing one to us that is going to impact our orcas and our salmon and our water and our wetlands? A: Cliff Stewart: No, and just to clarify, anytime the Port is involved in a project, it does go through the Federal environmental review process. Each of those projects does have to do a Cumulative Effects Assessment which considers all other existing or foreseen projects. In terms of the public process point, you are correct to this extent, that this project is only required to go through a CEAA screening level assessment which does not have a significant public component. However, recognizing that is a public concern, we have layered on to the CEAA screening process a public consultation process part of which is what we are doing here today. We have also included public notification and there will be public review in the periods, similar to the review in a comprehensive study process. In order to address that concern, we are including a public process even though it is not a requirement. Q: Judy Williams: The public perception is that there should be a comprehensive plan and you should be putting all of your cards on the table instead of bringing them in piece by piece. That is the perception out there. A: Cliff Stewart: I understand that is the perception and my colleague, Darrell Desjardin, has joined us and will be able to speak about cumulative effects studies which are part of this. In essence what people would like us to do is look forward into the future and tell us everything that will ever happen in the future. Unfortunately that is not a realistic possibility. What I can tell you is for the Terminal 2 Project, when it comes along, we will be requesting to the Federal Minister of the Environment that it be a harmonized panel process, but ultimately it will be the Minister s decision. But this particular project has very limited impacts for the environment as a standalone project. Q: Ed Kolla: In 2002 improvements to Deltaport were done. At that point in time, there were projections that looked ahead, much like we see today. Has anyone looked back at past projections to determine how close or far away they were from the actuals? A: Cliff Stewart: Right up to 2008 when the economy crashed, they matched very well wasn t very close, and by the end of 2010, it was back to very slightly below to where it had been projected, and given the gravity of the world s situation, it was pretty close. Page 4 of 13

5 Deltaport Terminal, Road and Rail Improvement Project C: Cliff Stewart: Turning to pages 10 and 11, I will use the map to identify project elements. The volume that this project is expected to bring would result in an additional 1 train per day in each direction, or about 2 ½ trains in total. One of the reasons that a 33% increase in throughput only results in one extra train, is that trains are getting longer and moving up to 12,000 feet. The average length is about 10,000 feet moving up from 8,000 feet a couple of years ago. Everything that is being constructed as part of the project is within the current footprint. The logistics system is just a system that has components to it that all have to be sized together. The current capacity is 1.8 million TEUs and the purpose of this project is to increase that to 2.4 million TEUs. We are doing that within the footprint of the existing footprint, and we are doing that in two ways. The first one is buying more equipment like the cranes and other support equipment that is needed within the terminal. We are also altering the design of the rail yard itself and the associated infrastructure will have modifications that will increase the effective number of tracks on the terminal from 7 to 9, which is a 28% increase and gives the terminal the ability to handle this increase of 600,000 TEUs. In order for the terminal to be able to handle that volume increase, road and rail traffic has to be physically able to get there. There is a significant bottleneck currently just outside that terminal where the rail tracks and the road cross each other and as a result of that and in order to allow workers to get to and from work, there is an embargo on that crossing where the railroad is not able to push into the terminal for four hours a day. So, part of this project is to put an overpass on the causeway to separate road and rail traffic, which will allow rail to flow freely throughout the day and trucks to come and go. That s noted in orange and is the second major component. The third major component is ensuring you have enough capacity to receive and depart the trains and to disassemble them because as I mentioned they come in 12,000 foot lengths but the tracks on the terminal are 3,000 feet. So you have to take the trains apart, take the locomotives out, unload and reload the rail cards, and then put it all back together again to depart. The third major element is a number of rail works on the uplands adjacent to the causeway at Roberts Bank, and it includes three elements of rail. One is an additional arrival track starting up near the Boundary Bay Airport at 72 nd Street, there is a 12,000 foot arrival track paralleling the existing BC Rail line. Then running from 64 th Street, in line with that new track, there are a couple of running tracks being added that are about 12,000 feet long for the arriving and departing trains to be stored on. And then as the trains are broken down into these 6,000 foot sections, there are some storage tracks being built between Arthur Drive and 41B Street. Q: Lynn Whitehouse: What is the average amount of time that a 12,000 train takes to pass a normal crossing? A: Cliff Stewart: The speed limit is approximately 30 mph on the Roberts Bank Rail Corridor and the trains are about 2 miles long, so it should take about approximately 4 or 5 minutes. There is an Page 5 of 13

6 issue called creep where the train seems to take a lot longer, and the Roberts Bank Rail Corridor Program is designed to address that. What causes creeping is that trains aren t allowed to stop and obstruct crossings, and one of the major meet pass points at Mud Bay is where the trains aren t allowed to stop there and can only pass there. So if, for example, a train from the East is coming in and has to meet a train at Mud Bay, it cannot go at speed through Langley and then stop and wait at Mud Bay. So what the train does is slow down as to allow itself to arrive at Mud Bay at just the right time to meet the other train. Part of the Roberts Bank Rail Corridor Program is to eliminate those at grade crossings so the trains can go at speed and actually stop at the meeting points rather than creeping through. Q: Viveka Ohman: I am wondering what the main item is that passes through here is it coal or are there other goods that come through here too? A: Cliff Stewart: There are two terminals at Roberts Bank: a coal terminal and a container terminal. This project is an expansion of capacity at the container terminal. Q: Viveka Ohman: Looking down the road and seeing that there is anticipation that there will be a large increase in goods going through the ports. What happens if that is not the case? A: Cliff Stewart: That is certainly one of the things that has to be factored in. Those people who are investing in it, and there are really three investors; TSI Terminal Systems Inc., Port Metro Vancouver and the Province of BC. Those parties all have to factor in that risk assessment. Q: Viveka Ohman: Are those foreign investors or are they local? A: Cliff Stewart: TSI Terminal Systems is owned by the Ontario Teachers Pension Fund. Port Metro Vancouver is a non shareholder corporation owned by Canada. Q: Judy Williams: Who has been involved in the decision to go ahead and expand at Deltaport and not in Prince Rupert? Has there been any initial input before the decision about this? Who has made the decision, and why have we discarded Prince Rupert? A: Cliff Stewart: We haven t discarded the possibility of Prince Rupert and in fact, we are relying on the possibility of Prince Rupert. This project has a significantly lower impact on the environment than the project in Prince Rupert. There is no additional construction of land or impact on marine habitat whereas the project in Prince Rupert has to blast down the side of a mountain. Q: Judy Williams: If you are building on the upside of the causeway. We do have resident killer whales and juvenile salmon. And I don t understand why the public was not brought into the decision until now. This is a fait accompli. You are window dressing. That is not the same thing as soliciting input from the public. A: Cliff Stewart: This is not a fait accompli. This is a proposal that has to be approved by a thorough environmental assessment under the auspices of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency. And then the stakeholder funding partners, if the project is approved, have to approve the funding. The stakeholders are Port Metro Vancouver, TSI Terminal Systems Inc. and the Province of BC. C: Elaine Fisher: Another important thing to point out is that we have been in contact with a number of agencies and asking them if they would like to be a responsible authority and offer expert advice. We have contacted the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Transport Canada, Health Canada, Environment Canada, and the BC Environmental Assessment Office. So, we are consulting with these stakeholders as well as local governments and stakeholder such as yourselves. Page 6 of 13

7 Q: Judy Williams: How many extra ships will this bring? A: Cliff Stewart: I think probably the most interesting information regarding ship visits is that in 1999, the terminals that now comprise Port Metro Vancouver handled 1 million TEUs, and in 2010, they handled 2.5 million TEUs; two and a half times as much volume and there were less ship visits in 2010 for containers than there were in 1999, because the ships are getting bigger and the number of transfers per visit is getting bigger faster than the growth in the actual container volume. So in fact, you are getting less ship visits today then you had 11 or 12 years ago, but with significantly more volume. Q: Judy Williams: Are there any toxic materials in these containers? A: Cliff Stewart: Certainly some of them will. I can t tell you specifically. C: Darrell Desjardin: Usually those are in packaged drums and properly marked. You could also have cleaning detergents. There are a range of materials. For example, when you package salt into a container, it is classified as a dangerous good. Q: Judy Williams: Will there be any other aromatic hydrocarbons put on these trains? A: Cliff Stewart: I can imagine that there will. The transportation network is designed using a hazardous materials management program. Products are handled appropriately and first responders are aware of how to deal with this. C: Darrell Desjardin: To clarify, Canada mostly exports these materials. Q: Judy Williams: I am wondering what your liaison role is with the Vancouver International Airport and the specter of jet fuel that they would like to bring in by a tanker onto either arm of the Fraser River. A: Darrell Desjardin: This is completely unrelated and not linked. The linkage is that the Port, which administers the water, is the responsibility authority under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act. So, as a Federal agent of the Crown we have to make a decision on the project. That project is going through the BC Environmental Assessment and the Canadian Environmental Assessment is following under the auspices of the Port. But it is completely unrelated to Deltaport. C: Cliff Stewart: The fourth element of the project is road improvements. Currently, if a truck gets onto Deltaport Way off of Highway 17 and is not supposed to be there for any number of reasons, there are only two ways to turn it around. One is for it to go all the way to the terminal, or alternately it can exit at 41B or Arthur Drive off through very narrow country roads that were not designed to handle trucks. So we are proposing a truck turn around in the area of 41B. We are also proposing weigh in motion scales to tie in to the BC governments Weigh2GoBC weighin motion program. That does two things, one of which enables the truckers to report to further scales and not take them off their route of travel. Additionally, from the prospective of the community, they have good and documented comfort in knowing that there are no overweight trucks on their roads as a result of port operations. The final element is the installation of a Vehicle Access Control System and this has the intention to ensure that all trucks doing business at the terminal are licensed. That at a high level is the elements of the project. Q: Judy Williams: What credentials must truckers have before they can enter your site? A: Cliff Stewart: Good question. We actually have a truck licensing system which imposes quite strict environmental and safety standards. Using these standards that have been developed by the EPA in the US and Transport Canada, by 2015 we will require all trucks to have a 2007 or Page 7 of 13

8 newer engine platform. This is significant because it is the environmental equivalent of taking 59 of every 60 trucks off the road. That is how much cleaner the new engines are than the old ones. We want to make sure that the trucks that are coming to the port are using these standards. In addition, they will have to go through an annual or bi annual inspection depending on the engine age. C: Darrell Desjardin: On page 16 there is a little insert about the Truck Licensing System. As Cliff pointed out, the 2007 engine platform will be 100% of the port fleet when this project is delivered, and going forward, the program will work towards having no trucks older than 10 years. Q: Judy Williams: Have you mentioned how many trucks visit the port daily? A: Cliff Stewart: I haven t mentioned that, but if you would turn to page 15, currently there are about 3,000 truck trips per day; 1,500 in and 1,500 out. With the existing capacity, by about 2014 that would rise to about 1,750 visits each way. I should point out that this is Deltaport Terminal itself. And this project would add a further 500 truck visits a day, 500 in and 500 out. Given that, truck congestions is a significant concern, and there are a number of consultation topics that we have suggested, but we are certainly open to your feedback. There are several other issues of concern to the community such as agriculture land. Environmental Studies and Assessment C: Darrell Desjardin: As Cliff mentioned, this project is being built on the existing footprint of the terminal and road, and there will be an expansion within the existing rail right of way of rail track and that is being built on agricultural land. One of the key studies we are doing is the Agricultural Impact Assessment to evaluate the effects on agricultural productivity as well as the wildlife value associated. Some of the key consultation topics that have been identified consider how do we actually mitigate and compensate for the loss of agricultural productivity and how do we maintain the community values. For example, at the very minimum we could do a top soil relocation program, and there are other opportunities to increase agricultural productivity as well. This submission to the Agricultural Land Commission, which will be the approving agency for this portion of the work, is reliant on what you bring forward based on consultation with the community, with farmers, and other agencies. As Cliff mentioned, there has been no decision on this project, and in fact until we complete the environmental assessment we cannot make a decision on the Project. We have contacted the relevant federal agencies to determine whether they are providing expert advice. The intent of this process is an enhanced environmental assessment review. The Screening document will be released for review at the end of January, and we will have a 45 day public comment period. Environmental Studies underway Flipping over to page 20, it outlines the studies. We recognize that Roberts Bank is a unique ecosystem, so a lot of the studies that we are doing are building on studies done in the past. Terrestrial environment and wildlife study is an important one. Those areas adjacent to Roberts Bank serve as an important habitat for birds and mammals and reptiles. Specifically on the marine environment, this project is not having any impacts on the marine environment, but we are looking at indirect impacts. One of the key components that we have identified is looking at the impact on Southern Resident Killer Whales from any increased vessel traffic. Page 8 of 13

9 Coastal seabirds and waterfowl. This is a Western Hemispheric Shorebird Reserve Area, and an international bird area, so the birds that use either the foreshore or the wetlands or the immediate uplands are being monitored. One of the benefits that the Port has as a commitment through the Deltaport Third Berth Project is that we have been monitoring birds through the Adaptive Management Strategy and have actually taken all of this data and shared it with the Canadian Wildlife Service and Bird Studies Canada. Q: Viveka Ohman: Have you found out what the impacts are out there. I can t imagine that this project would not have an impact. It s going to have a detrimental impact. Have you come up with some kind of solution? A: Darrell Desjardin: We are in the study phase right now so we haven t completed the field studies. Q: Viveka Ohman: Regardless of what the report says, there will be an environmental impact. A: Darrell Desjardin: One of the key benefits of this project is that it is within the existing footprint. We aren t doing any in water work or fill or improvements within the marine environment. One of the key aspects is looking at indirect impacts, and these studies will form the basis of the report and will be taken out to the public for comment. Q: Judy Williams: Will there be some form of compensation? A: Darrell Desjardin: If there are impacts or residual effects, we will have to compensate. Q: Judy Williams: How do you compensate dead birds and whales? A: Darrell Desjardin: I don t think that this project is going to have a detrimental impact on birds or whales, but if they were, that would be a deleterious effect. Q: Judy Williams: Just remember the words of Chief Seattle. What we do to the birds and the beast we do to ourselves. Maybe the port people should swim in that water that our salmon swim in. A: Darrell Desjardin: I do, Judy. That s a good segue into water quality. Water quality is very important as well. This is the water quality of the surface water and the ground water so we want to make sure that the project does not have any direct or indirect effects on water quality. We have a good baseline framework for what the water quality looks like. Q: Judy Williams: When was the baseline established? A: Darrell Desjardin: We have been monitoring water quality since 2003, and it includes not only water courses that drain into Roberts Bank, but also the water quality at Roberts Bank. And that information is actually available on our website. Because we have a wealth of information, one of the features that we are going to be putting on our website to help people understand the environmental impact assessment is a bibliography of all of the studies and environmental review that have been done, whether by independent panels or other federal agencies. That will help assist people understand the process. Fish and Fish Habitat. We are actually not directly affecting any water courses; we are moving some water swales that drain into water concourses. So we want to make sure that any of the resident fish that are living in those areas are not impacted. We have already done some Page 9 of 13

10 surveys of these water courses. They are connected to Roberts Bank, so they have the potential for salmon to actually move up into this area. We have never found salmon within the last years when we have done sampling, but we are certainly treating it as fish bearing water. One of the key studies is the air quality. One of the commitments we made for Deltaport Third Berth was that we funded and are actually continuing to fund is the air quality station that now exists at Tsawwassen. It is the first time we have had real time air quality data and that is a full monitor that actually measures all of the primary air contaminants that would be found from port operations and traffic. These are criteria contaminants that include sulphur dioxide emissions, nitrous oxide, particulate matter such as the PM 10 and PM 2.5, and that is 10 micron and 2.5 micron as well as greenhouse gases. And the benefit is that anybody can go on the Port Metro Vancouver website and actually look at the air quality of the given day as well as a rollup of that process. So, the Air Quality Assessment that will be done for this particular project has the benefit of us having real time air quality data that we can actually compare our projections to. So one of the aspects and we actually have a little summary in this where we actually compare some of the data that has been produced by Metro Vancouver based on 2010 data. I already mentioned the Agricultural Assessment. That is a very key component. We will talk about the compensation side because we are looking at what is the best type of compensation to achieve agricultural productivity. Noise and vibration has been a big community concern with the residents in Delta and Tsawwassen, specifically the generators on the vessels and the noise that comes from trains. So, one of the benefits we have had with Deltaport Third Berth is that we have established noise monitoring points throughout the community and have actually been working with both the terminal operators and the railways to address noise. The other studies we are looking at include the archaeology study and the effects of First Nations issues, as well as socio economic and community, including the effects of accident and malfunctions and the effects on first responders. And then on top of that, as a requirement under the CEAA process, we have to do a Cumulative Effects Assessment, which means we have to look at the effects of this project layered on any past projects and that includes Deltaport Third Berth, South Fraser Perimeter Road or any other projects that are occurring right now or are occurring in the past, as well as any potential future projects. And that is where we would pick up projects like Terminal 2 or any other future development. And so what we have identified for now, we haven t actually completed the environmental assessment but our guess is that the scope of the cumulative environmental effects will look at air quality and noise, with noise being an issue that we have known that it has actually increased over time as well as air quality. It also will take a look at the marine environment, specifically Southern Resident Killer Whales, fish and fish habitat, the water resources and vegetation and wildlife. But based on the environmental assessment, we may actually add more topics to the Cumulative Effects Assessment. Page 10 of 13

11 Q: Judy Williams: You mentioned something about being done by the end of December. What if, it was found that there was no way that the impacts to the Municipality of Delta, the farmers and wildlife could be mitigated? Would you drop it and move it to Prince Rupert? A: Darrell Desjardin: If you can t compensate and mitigate, the project is deleterious and the project would not be approvable. The environmental studies will be complete by the end of December, and then you begin drafting the document to compare the results of the field studies with the project impacts. Q: Judy Williams: I notice that we have other organizations around the table; federal agencies, first responders, what about their input? How does their input come through to you? A: Darrell Desjardin: For those communities that are directly affected, we have an invitation for them to become part of the review process which will be convened in January. And that is where Provincial and Federal agencies and other interested parties such as municipalities will have an opportunity to hear the advice coming from these agencies. Q: Lynn Whitehouse: I noticed in your presentation that you said that this project would result in approximately 500 extra trucks trips a day each way. It says in this document that after the completion of the South Fraser Perimeter Road, trucks will be restricted from Highway 10 west of 91. A: Cliff Stewart: It is our understanding that the Province intends to restrict trucks on Highway 17 north of Deltaport way and from Highway 10, west of 91. Q: Lynn Whitehouse: In effect, once the South Fraser Perimeter Road is completed, and truck traffic is actually a major concern out here too, so we do have a lot of congestions on the Langley bypass and on Glover, this could actually be a blessing in disguise. A: Cliff Stewart: SFPR could certainly be a blessing in disguise. Remember that this is west of Highway 91. Q: Lee Lockwood: I noticed that you plan on breaking ground next summer. It sounds like you have a pretty compressed schedule. Just an observation. A: Cliff Stewart: Yes, there is a lot of work to do. C: Darrell Desjardin: We wouldn t be able to entertain that schedule if we didn t have almost 9 years of monitoring data to base that data on. We actually have 9 years of data that covers all 4 seasons. C: Lee Lockwood: That means everyone has been beaten into submission. C: Cliff Stewart: My life would be much simpler if it were like that. Our process assumes that we get favorable decisions along the way from a number of bodies, and the schedule we are describing assumes we get positive decisions along the way. Q: Ed Kolla: My observation is that you are going to be keeping traffic moving. You are improving the mobility, which is an improvement in air quality, and it is improving the mobility which is definitely a positive thing on the environment. A: Cliff Stewart: We believe that is the case. From a sustainability perspective, this project is all about getting more out of what we have here and we can t move it up to Prince Rupert. What we heard very clearly in Pre Consultation for Terminal 2 was that the public wants us to get more out of our existing facilities. Page 11 of 13

12 C: Judy Williams: We need to take an overview of our society. We bring in all of these goods from Asia and other points of call, we destroy our farmland and our environment, and it s a crying shame. We feel emasculated. What s the point of coming out to these meetings? We get worn down. Every time I drive Highway 1 and see the destruction of the trees that had bird nests, I get angry with you guys all over again. I don t think the South Fraser Perimeter Road was necessary. For what? To send hazardous goods up our water ways? You re never going to convince me. We are always going to have to feed each other, from our agricultural lands that are now being decimated. Shame on you. C: Cliff Stewart: Any other questions or comments? Q: Unknown: Will we get an extra rail yard or storage yard in Langley? C: Cliff Stewart: Not that I know of. C: Jack Froese: The 232 nd Street project is designed to allow extra siding space for trains to pass, as part of that project. C: Darrell Desjardin: It is being designed to allow it. C: Jack Froese: They are building an overpass over 232 nd Street to allow for the cars pass. So there are plans to increase capacity. C: Cliff Stewart: But nothing with respect to storage. C: Paul Cordeiro: Basically siding to allow the trains to pass. C: Cliff Stewart: Right now we are doing the work up to 72 nd street, which allows a meet pass at the start or the finish of the facility, in conjunction with the Roberts Bank Rail Corridor Program. The siding at Mud Bay is being extended to 14,000 feet and the at grade crossings are being removed so that allows the trains to pass there. The Pratt siding on the other side of the strip is being extended to 10,000 feet, which allows coal trains which are up to 8,500 feet to meet and pass with container trains. And then, as the Mayor has mentioned, the 232 nd Street and the advantage of the 232 nd Street overpass even without the extension at Rawlison. The coal trains can t get restarted if they stop at the current Rawlison siding. With the 232 nd Street overpass in place they could actually pull up over the crest of the hill, and stop and wait until the timing is such that they could go at speed through Langley without doing the creep thing to get the meetpass at either Pratt or Mud Bay. C: Ed Kolla: There is also a siding that will be built along Colebrook in Surrey. C: Cliff Stewart: The SRY are doing an extension on their line. Q: Viveka Ohman: One of the things that I am wondering about is the potential of derailment? Are you taking every precaution necessary to ensure that never, ever happens? Instead of a mile long train, we are looking at two mile long train, it would be an environmental disaster. I would assume that has been considered. A: Darrell Desjardin: Yes, it is part of the environmental assessment. We will be looking at accidents and malfunction. Q: Viveka Ohman: What were the results? A: Darrell Desjardin: The risk has been acceptable, there hasn t been a derailment. Part of that is because they have speed limits and operating procedures. C: Paul Cordeiro: The last incident that occurred in Langley was between a truck and train, so the overpasses increase the safety. Page 12 of 13

13 C: Darrell Desjardin: Yes, the Roberts Bank Rail Corridor project actually improves that risk even more. C: Chris Chok: Are there any more comments? We would like to get your feedback form. One thing I want to draw your attention to is the next steps. We are receiving feedback forms until January 6. My company, Kirk & Co., will prepare a consultation summary report. The Port will respond with a memo on how input has been considered. One additional opportunity for input, when the screening report is completed, you will have 45 days to comment. We will you if you are on our list. If there are no other questions, we will adjourn the meeting. The meeting ended at 3:35pm Page 13 of 13