1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. ("Enbridge") is proposing to construct up to a total of approximately 37 kilometres (km) of natural gas pipelines at different nominal pipe sizes (NPS) and pressure systems, in the City of Kawartha Lakes (CKL), and the Township of Brock in the Regional Municipality of Durham (Durham Region), Ontario, to serve the Community of Fenelon Falls (the Project ). The proposed pipelines will be located within existing road allowances in the Study Areas and is expected to operate at a pressure up to 400 psi in some sections along the pipeline route and less than 20% of the specified minimum yield strength (SMYS). Two separate Study Areas were identified for the reinforcement pipeline and the distribution pipelines as depicted in Appendix A, Figure No. A-1. These segments and the proposed routes are described below: Segment 1: also known as the Sunderland Reinforcement Segment (RS) will consist of approximately 8 km of NPS 6-inch steel extra high pressure (XHP) pipeline. The proposed pipeline will originate near the intersection of Highway 7/12 and Regional Road 10/Brock Concession Road 6 in the Community of Sunderland. The pipeline will travel east along Brock Concession Road 6, north on Simcoe Street, east along Farmstead Road, and terminate at Station Road, southeast of the Hamlet of Manilla, where it ties into an existing Enbridge NPS 6- inch pipeline. The reinforcement pipeline will run parallel to Enbridge s existing NPS 4-inch pipeline. Segment 2: also known as the Distribution Pipeline to Fenelon Falls Segment (DPFF) will originate approximately 1.2 km north of the intersection of Highway 7 and Taylor's Road in Oakwood. The pipeline will run north along Taylor's Road, continue east along Quaker Road, north along Eden Road and then east along Cambray Road/County Road 9 to rejoin Highway 35. From this point the TPFF will travel north to the Community of Fenelon Falls. The pipeline will terminate near the intersection of Bond Street and Colborne Street/ County Road 121, for a total of approximately 29 km of a combination of NPS 6-inch and 4-inch extra high pressure (XHP) steel, and NPS 6-inch high pressure (HP) polyethylene natural gas pipeline. Enbridge retained Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec) to undertake an environmental study of the construction and operation of the proposed natural gas pipelines. The environmental study included a route evaluation and selection process that was designed to identify the proposed route alternatives with the least potential environmental and socio-economic impact. 1.1
1.2 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY 1.2.1 Objectives A multidisciplinary team of environmental planners and scientists from Stantec conducted the environmental study. Enbridge provided environmental support and engineering expertise throughout the study, as required. The environmental study was undertaken in accordance with the Ontario Energy Board s (OEB) Environment al Guidelines for t he Location, Construction and Operation of Hydrocarbon Pipelines and Facilities in Ont ario, 6t h Edition (OEB Environmental Guidelines) (2011). The study was also undertaken to meet the requirements of relevant federal and provincial environmental guidelines and regulations. The principal objective of the environmental study is to confirm a preferred route from an environmental and socio-economic perspective. Another objective of the environmental study is to outline various environmental mitigation and protection measures for the construction and operation of the Project, while meeting the intent of the OEB Environment al Guidelines (2011). To meet these objectives, the environmental study was prepared to: Undertake a route evaluation process. Confirm a preferred route that minimizes potential environmental impacts. Complete a detailed review of environmental and socio-economic features along the preferred route and assess the potential environmental impacts of the Project on these features. Establish mitigation and protective measures that may be used to minimize or eliminate potential environmental and socio-economic impacts of the Project. Develop a consultation program to receive input from interested and potentially affected parties. Identify supplemental studies, monitoring and contingency plans. 1.2.2 Process The environmental study was divided into the following three main phases: Phase I: Inventory mapping and mapping of existing conditions; identification of route options. Phase II: Identification of preliminary preferred routes. Phase III: Confirmation of the route and preparation of this environmental report (ER). 1.2
The maps produced during the route evaluation and selection process are located in Appendix A and the maps of existing conditions are located in Appendix C. The following is a description of the steps involved in the various Project phases and also provides background on the extensive stakeholder engagement and engineering design carried out by Enbridge to arrive at the pipeline segment Study Areas that are the subject of this ER. Phase I: Inventory and Mapping of Existing Conditions; Identification of Route Options The environmental study began with delineating the Study Areas for each pipeline segment (Section 2.2) and notifying relevant federal and provincial agencies and authorities, municipal personnel, special interest groups, First Nation communities and Métis Nation of Ontario (MNO). Environmental features and conditions in the Study Areas were mapped and characterized using relevant published literature, maps and digital data. Geographically based environmental features were incorporated onto a series of digital base maps. Discussions with relevant agencies and municipalities provided information essential for compiling the existing conditions inventory and mapping. Route options within each pipeline segment were generated based on the routing objectives, Study Areas, and environmental and socio-economic constraints and opportunities identified in Section 2.3. To assist in the generation of route options, Enbridge and Stantec conducted multiple site visits, interpreted aerial photography, and mapped existing environmental and socio-economic constraints and opportunities. Phase II: Identification of Preliminary Preferred Routes The preliminary preferred routes were identified through a quantitative and qualitative comparative evaluation of the route options, as described in Section 2.4. Information Sessions were held to provide interested and potentially affected parties with an opportunity to comment on the Project, the route evaluation and selection process, and the preliminary preferred routes (Section 3). The original preliminary preferred route presented to stakeholders and the public through a newspaper notification in December 2013 and an Information Session in January 2014 included a pipeline from Lindsay to Fenelon Falls only. In 2014, the project was put on hold, pending the feasibility of expanding natural gas to Fenelon Falls. The project was re-introduced in September 2015 and in addition to the pipeline to Fenelon Falls, Enbridge also proposed to build a new pipeline south of Lindsay (between Bethany Hills Road and River Road) to reinforce the existing natural gas distribution network, referred to as the Fenelon Falls Reinforcement. A second round of Information Sessions was held in October 2015 in the communities of Lindsay and Fenelon Falls to re-introduce the project and to allow interested and potentially affected stakeholders to comment on the project proposal. 1.3
Following the 2015 notification, several meetings/discussions were held with the Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO) to address their concerns with the proposed routes south and north of Lindsay. Due to the MTO s expansion plans on Highway 35 south and north of Lindsay, the starting point of the proposed pipeline to Fenelon Falls was moved east of Angeline Street, near Highway7/35 and Lindsay Street intersection, and the pipeline was extended to Bobcaygeon, terminating near County Road 36 and Meadowlark Crescent. The addition of the extension of the pipeline to Bobcaygeon is consistent with the Ontario Government and Enbridge s goal to expand natural gas infrastructure to more communities in rural and northern Ontario. In addition, two reinforcement pipelines were proposed east of Highway 35, south of Lindsay along the municipal road network. A Notice of Project Change was then published in the local newspapers in November 2015 and provided to the revised Project contact list, describing the proposed routing changes (Section 3). A third round of Information Sessions was held in December 2015 in the communities of Lindsay and Bobcaygeon to allow potentially affected and interested stakeholders to comment on the revised preliminary preferred routes. Feedback received from stakeholders following the newspaper publication and the Information Sessions identified potential issues and concerns within the area of Highway 7/35 in Lindsay and the reinforcement pipeline sections south of Lindsay, particularly along Highway 35/115, and at Wild Turkey Road and Wilmont Road. Based on subsequent discussions with stakeholders and further analysis of the existing natural gas pipeline network, Enbridge made changes to the preliminary preferred pipeline routes from Lindsay to Fenelon Falls and to the reinforcement alignments south of Lindsay. The DPFF will now will originate approximately 1.2 km north of the intersection of Highway 7 and Taylor's Road in Oakwood, and will include a reinforcement pipelines near Sunderland, in the Townships of Brock, respectively. However, the expansion to Bobcaygeon is no longer part of this Project. A second Notice of Project Change was then published in the local newspapers in April 2016 and provided to the revised Project contact list, describing the proposed routing changes (Section 3). A fourth round of Information Sessions was held in April 2016 in the communities of Fenelon Falls and Sunderland to allow interested and potentially affected stakeholders to comment on the latest revisions to the preliminary preferred routes. Prior to the publication of each Notice, the revised Study Areas were re-delineated, the Project contact list revised and environmental features and conditions in the revised Study Areas were mapped and characterized. Following the 2016 Information Sessions, Enbridge determined through a detailed systems analysis that the Victoria Corners Reinforcement Segment will no longer be required to service the DPFF and therefore it has been removed from any further review in this ER. 1.4
Phase III: Confirmation of the Route; Environmental Report Based on feedback received during the consultation program (Section 3) and the evaluation of the alternatives, preferred routes were confirmed for the reinforcement and distribution sections. Phase III concluded with the preparation of this ER as well as Environmental Alignment Sheets to identify where site-specific mitigation and protective measures are recommended along the preferred routes (see Appendix D). 1.2.3 The Environmental Report The environmental study has relied on technically sound and consistently applied procedures that are replicable and transparent. The ER, which documents the environmental study, will form the foundation for future environmental management activities related to the Project. The ER is organized into the following sections: 1. : provides a description of the Project and the environmental study. 2. Route Evaluation and Selection: provides an overview of the pipeline route evaluation and selection process and confirmation of the preliminary preferred routes as the preferred routes. 3. Consultation Program: describes the consultation program. 4. Impact Identification, Assessment and Mitigation: describes the existing conditions, predicts potential effects and impacts, recommends supplemental studies, mitigation and protective measures, and considers net impacts. 5. Cumulative Effects: provides an analysis of potential cumulative effects associated with the proposed Project. 6. Monitoring and Contingency Plans: describes monitoring and contingency plans to address potential environmental impacts of the proposed Project. 7. Conclusion: provides a discussion and consideration of the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed Project. The ER also includes references and appendices for documentation. 1.2.4 The OEB Regulatory Process Once complete, the ER will be circulated to the Ontario Pipeline Coordinating Committee (OPCC) for their review and comment. The OPCC is an inter-ministerial committee that includes provincial government ministries, boards, and authorities with potential interest in the construction and operation of hydrocarbon transmission and storage facilities. The ER will accompany a future Enbridge Leave-to-Construct application to the OEB for the proposed Project. While the ER illustrates the general location of the preferred route, detailed design will be undertaken by Enbridge to determine the exact location of the running lines. 1.5
Detailed design will also be influenced by supplemental studies and site-specific requests from landowners and agencies. Information on the engineering and other matters will be included in the application to the OEB, along with additional required information. Upon receiving the application, the OEB will hold a public hearing. Communication about the hearing will include notices in local newspapers and letters to directly affected landowners, both of which will outline how the general public and landowners can get involved with the hearing process. If after the public hearing the OEB finds the Project is in the public interest it will approve construction of the Project. The OEB normally attaches conditions to a Project it approves. Enbridge must comply with these conditions of approval at all stages of the Project. 1.2.5 Additional Regulatory Processes Enbridge will also be required to obtain additional permits and approvals from federal and provincial agencies, including municipalities, and these are outlined in Table 1.1 below. This ER will serve to support these permit and approval applications. 1.6
Table 1.1: Summary of Potential Permits/Regulatory Requirements Permit/Approval Administering Agency Description FEDERAL PERMITS/APPROVALS Clearing of vegetation in accordance with the Migratory Bird Convention Act, 1994 (MBCA) Review and authorization under the Fisheries Act,1985 Review and Authorization under the Navigation Protection Act, 1985 (NPA) Environment Canada Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) Transport Canada (TC) Environment Canada does not require a permit to be issued for vegetation clearing, however, precautions need to be made so that no breeding birds or their nests are harmed or destroyed during the bird nesting season. Nest sweeps will be required at a maximum of 7 days prior to vegetation removal during the bird nesting season, (e.g., April 1 to August 31), as per the MBCA. Following determination of final crossing methods, a fish habitat impact screening (self-assessment) may be needed to determine if DFO review/authorization will be required. The proposed method for pipeline water crossings (i.e. horizontal directional drilling) will likely not require authorization provided measures to avoid causing serious harm to fish and fish habitat are followed during construction. These measures include completing the work during the appropriate timing window(mnrf designated construction windows note that In-water work is permitted from July 1 to March 14 for warm water crossings and from July 1 to September 15 for cold water crossings), installation of appropriate sediment and erosion control measures (i.e., silt fencing around disturbed areas, development of a contingency plan, etc.). If these measures are followed, a project of this nature is considered to be low risk to fish and fish habitat and can proceed without DFO review. TC confirmed that Fenelon River is a scheduled waterway. Works taking place on a scheduled waterway may fall under the Minor Works Order (Order). The Order exempts certain minor works from the application and formal authorization process under the NPA. A self-assessment should be completed to determine if the works falls within one of the exempted classes of minor works under the Order. A Notice of Works form should be completed if the works do not meet the criteria set forth in the Order. 1.7
Table 1.1: Summary of Potential Permits/Regulatory Requirements Permit/Approval Administering Agency Description In-water and Shoreline Works Permit under the Historic Canals Regulations, 2009 PROVINCIAL PERMITS/APPROVALS Approval under the Ministry of Infrastructure Public Work Class Environmental Assessment (Class EA) Development Permits under Ontario Regulation 182/06 for Kawartha Conservation Authority (KCA) and Ontario Regulation 179/06 for Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority (LSRCA)(Regulation of Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses), as per the Conservation Authorities Act, 1990 Register water taking activities on the Environmental Activity and Sector Registry (EASR) or Permit to Take Water (PTTW) as per the Ontario Water Resources Act, 1990 Parks Canada (PC) Ministry of Economic Development, Employment and Infrastructure (MEDEI)/Infrastructure Ontario (I O) KCA, LSRCA Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change (MOECC) Required for works within the Trent Severn Waterway (TSW) (i.e., Fenelon Riv er). Required to obtain an easement on MEDEI-owned/IO-managed lands. This will be determined during detailed design (e.g. Hydro One transmission corridor easements). Required for works within KCA and LSRCA Regulated Areas. If dewatering of more than 50,000 litres (L) per day but less than 400,000 L per day is required, the activity can be registered on the EASR. Should construction dewatering exceed 400,000 L/day, a Permit to Take Water (PTTW) will be required from the MOECC. Species at Risk Overall Benefit Permit under the Endangered Species Act, 2007 (ESA 2007) Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF) Consultation would be required with the MNRF to determine if a permit is required under the ESA 2007 permitting process. This permitting would be required for any protected species under the ESA. 1.8
Table 1.1: Summary of Potential Permits/Regulatory Requirements Permit/Approval Administering Agency Description Archaeological clearance under the Ontario Heritage Act(OHA) Review of Built Heritage and Cultural Landscape under the OHA Encroachment Permit under the Public Transportation and Highway Improvement Act, 1990 Crossing Approval MUNICIPAL PERMITS/APPROVALS Tree Cutting Notification Road Use Agreement Ministry of Tourism, Culture, and Sport (MTCS) M TCS M TO Hydro One Networks Inc. (Hydro One) CKL, Township of Brock, Durham Region CKL, Township of Brock, Durham Region As indicated in Section 9 (1)(a) of the ESA 2007, No person shall, kill, harm, harass, capture or take a living member of a species that is listed on the Species at Risk in Ontario List as an extirpated, endangered or threatened species. An archaeological assessment is required to identify areas of archaeological potential prior to any ground disturbances and/ or site alterations. The completed archaeological assessment reports are forwarded to the MTCS for review. The M TCS Heritage Checklist was completed to determine if protected heritage properties are present within the Study Areas. If identified, a Heritage Impact Assessment is required to determine the effects of the Project on heritage resources and provide methods to mitigate the impacts, if any. Required for works within a provincial highway right-of-way (RoW) (i.e. the Highway 35 corridor). Required for crossing Hydro One s electric transmission corridor. Needed if removal of trees for construction will occur on municipally managed lands. Required to lconduct pipeline construction activities within the municipal road allowance. Noise By-law Exemption Permit CKL, Township of Brock Required if construction activities will occur during the prohibited times outlined in the CKL Noise By-law 2005-25 and Township of Brock Noise By-law 2389-2011-PP. 1.9