4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 4-1 · 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 4.1 Assessment Approach 4.1.1...

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT......................................................................... 4-1 4.1 Assessment Approach......................................................................................................4-1

4.1.1 General......................................................................................................................4-1 4.1.2 Cumulative Effects Assessment ................................................................................4-1

4.2 Assessment Methods .......................................................................................................4-1 4.2.1 Issues Scoping and Selection of Environmental Components ..................................4-3

4.2.1.1 Regulatory Agency Consultation......................................................................4-3 4.2.1.2 Public Consultation ..........................................................................................4-3 4.2.1.3 Issues and Concerns .......................................................................................4-3 4.2.1.4 Identification of Valued Environmental Components........................................4-3

4.2.2 Identification of Past, Present and Likely Future Projects .........................................4-4 4.2.3 Boundaries ................................................................................................................4-6 4.2.4 Description of Existing Conditions ...........................................................................4-12 4.2.5 Potential Interactions, Issues and Concerns ...........................................................4-13 4.2.6 Residual Environmental Effects Evaluation Criteria ................................................4-13 4.2.7 Effects Analysis, Mitigation and Residual Effects Prediction ...................................4-13

4.2.7.1 Determining Whether Environmental Effects Are Adverse ............................4-13 4.2.7.2 Mitigation........................................................................................................4-15 4.2.7.3 Application of Evaluation Criteria for Assessing Environmental Effects.........4-15 4.2.7.4 Cumulative Environmental Effects .................................................................4-15

4.2.8 Overall Residual Environmental Effects Rating.......................................................4-16 4.2.8.1 Determining Whether Environmental Effects are Significant..........................4-17 4.2.8.2 Level of Confidence .......................................................................................4-17 4.2.8.3 Determining Whether the Significant Environmental Effects are Likely to

Occur..............................................................................................................4-17 4.2.9 Monitoring................................................................................................................4-17 4.2.10 Summary .................................................................................................................4-17

List of Tables

Table 4.2-1: Rationale for Valued Environmental Component Selection................................4-4 Table 4.2-2: Assessment Scenarios .......................................................................................4-5 Table 4.2-3: Boundaries for Assessment of Valued Environmental Components ..................4-9 Table 4.2-4: Environmental Effects Assessment Matrix Template .......................................4-14 Table 4.2-5: Residual Environmental Effects Summary Matrix ............................................4-16

List of Figures

Figure 4.2-1: Effects Assessment Methodology ......................................................................4-2 Figure 4.2-2: Local Study Area for Valued Environmental Components .................................4-7 Figure 4.2-3: Regional Study Area for Valued Environmental Components............................4-8

Jacques Whitford © 2006 PROJECT ABC 50541 October 2006 4-1

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

4.1 Assessment Approach

4.1.1 General

An EIA of the Project is required under the Environmental Assessment (Mandatory and Exempted Activities) Regulation of the Alberta Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act. An EIA is also required according to CEAA.

Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) and Transport Canada would be the responsible authorities for the federal review. The Province of Alberta will take the lead role in the project review, which will proceed in the spirit of the Canada-Alberta Agreement for Environmental Assessment Cooperation of June 2005 The Terms of Reference (ToR) for the EIA were issued by the Director of the Environmental Assessment within Alberta Environment (AENV). The ToR endeavour to meet the requirements of both provincial and federal legislation. The ToR are included in Appendix A.

4.1.2 Cumulative Effects Assessment

Determining cumulative effects of the Project is a requirement of the EIA, as identified in the ToR from AENV. It is also a requirement of CEAA, which observes that there are two possible ways to do cumulative environmental effects assessments (CEAA 1994):

• as a separate section summarizing the methodological approach taken and the result of the analysis

• as an integral part of the analysis

In the project EIA, cumulative effects are assessed as an integral part of the analysis, and are summarized in a Cumulative Effects section for each valued environmental component.

4.2 Assessment Methods

The assessment of the potential environmental effects of the Project has been done using a rigorous methodological framework developed on the basis of current, accepted practice and professional experience of the study team. The assessment has been focused on those environmental components determined to be of key interest to regulators and stakeholders, as determined from discussions with regulators, public meetings and the ToR for the EIA.

Figure 4.2-1 shows the standard sequence followed in the assessment for each environmental component. Each of these steps is described in more detail in the following sections.


Establish Boundaries

Describe Existing Conditions

Identify Potential Interactions and Issues

Establish Residual Environmental Effects1 Rating

Criteria

Effects Analysis

Determine Whether Environmental Effects are Adverse

Determine Whether Adverse Environmental Effects are Significant

Determine Whether Significant Adverse Environmental Effects are

Likely to Occur

Determine Follow-Up and Monitoring Requirements

Summarize Effects Analysis and Residual Environmental Effects

Prediction*

Issues Scoping and Selection of Environmental

Components

Figure 4.2-1: Effects Assessment Methodology Note: *Residual environmental effects are those remaining after all mitigation has been implemented.


4.2.1 Issues Scoping and Selection of Environmental Components

Issues scoping is the critical first step in the assessment process. Issues scoping is done to support the selection of specific environmental components for assessment. In standard practice, an environmental assessment is focused on specific environmental components, often called valued environmental components (VECs) that are of particular value or interest to regulators and other stakeholders. Environmental components are typically selected for assessment based on regulatory issues and guidelines, consultation with regulators and stakeholders, field reconnaissance and the professional judgement of the study team.

4.2.1.1 Regulatory Agency Consultation

Regulatory agency representatives were contacted to clarify specific issues and concerns pertaining to the proposed development. Their concerns were incorporated into the EIA ToR (Appendix A). Section 6, Public, Stakeholder and Aboriginal Consultation, includes further discussion on regulatory agency consultation.

4.2.1.2 Public Consultation

Glacier Power, in keeping with its policy of public consultation for all projects, initiated an extensive public involvement and consultation process for the Project in 1999 which has continued through to 2006 and the present application. Details on the Public Consultation Program are presented in Section 6.

4.2.1.3 Issues and Concerns

Environmental issues and environmental components that are valued by the public and that may be affected by the Project have been identified through consultation with the regulators and public, review of literature and the professional judgement of the consultant team. These issues and concerns are summarized in Section 6. 4.2.1.4 Identification of Valued Environmental Components

Table 4.2-1 lists the VECs for the project EIA and the rationale for their choice. The order in which they are listed does not indicate importance.


Table 4.2-1: Rationale for Valued Environmental Component Selection

Rationale

VEC Regulators Public Consultation Professional

Judgement

1 Geotechnical conditions x x x

2 Climate, air quality and noise x x x

3 Water quality x x x

4 Surface water hydrology and groundwater

x x x

5 Ice formation and break-up x x x

6 Fish community x x x

7 Soil, vegetation and forest resources x x x

8 Wildlife x x x

9 Transportation x x x

10 Land and water use x x x

11 Visual resources x x x

12 Heritage resources x x x

13 Health and safety x x x

14 Socio-economic factors x x x

4.2.2 Identification of Past, Present and Likely Future Projects

The assessment scenarios for the project EIA include a baseline case, an application case, and a cumulative effects assessment (CEA) case. The baseline case includes the existing environmental conditions, existing and approved but not yet constructed projects and activities. The application case includes the baseline case and the Project. The CEA case includes the baseline case, the application case and anticipated future projects and activities. The CEA case assesses the contribution of the Project to the cumulative effects of all projects in the area.

There are no known approved (approved by any federal, provincial or municipal regulatory authority) projects that will affect environmental conditions in the project area, therefore the baseline case in this instance refers only to existing projects. Planned projects or activities include any that have been publicly disclosed before the issuance of the ToR or up to six months before the submission of the project application and EIA report, whichever is sooner. Table 4.2-2 summarizes the developments included in the three cases.


Table 4.2-2: Assessment Scenarios

Baseline Case Application Case Cumulative Effects Assessment Case Description

Existing and Approved

Developments


Developments and the Project


Developments, the Project and

Potential Developments

Cattle grazing Cattle grazing Cattle grazing Has altered riparian vegetation and introduced weed species

Agricultural land clearing



Approximately 33 ha of river terrace and erosion slope ecosection have been altered by land clearing for agricultural purposes within the LSA

Water-based recreation



Has had no perceptive effect on the river or riparian habitat

Canfor forest management area



Contributes non-point source sediment supply

Devon Energy Corporation oil and gas lease



Contributes non-point source sediment supply

Bennett Dam Bennett Dam Bennett Dam

Has reduced or altered approximately 1400 km of riparian and erosion type ecosection. Reduction in peak flows has reduced riparian sediment deposition, reduced bed load transport, and increased downstream erosional process.

Dunvegan Bridge Dunvegan Bridge Dunvegan Bridge 2 km downstream from the Project Devon Energy Corporation and Pembina Pipeline Corporation pipeline crossing Peace River at Dunvegan

Devon Energy Corporation and Pembina Pipeline Corporation Pipeline crossing Peace River at Dunvegan

Devon Energy Corporation and Pembina Pipeline Corporation pipeline crossing Peace River at Dunvegan

Two natural gas pipelines in the same trench

Water intake pipe at Fairview



Has had no perceptible effect on river but the shore facility has removed riparian habitat

Dunvegan West Wildland Park



Designated under Special Places 2000, on south side of Peace River

Borrow pits Borrow pits Borrow pits Sand and gravel pits are present along Peace River, including near the Project

Dunvegan Historic Site



The existing facility is immediately downstream from the Dunvegan Bridge on the north side of the river.

EXIS

TIN

G A

ND

APP

RO

VED

Transportation and utilities corridors



Approximately 20 km of roads (3 km paved, 17 km unpaved); no seismic lines bisect LSA

The Project

Glacier Power’s Dunvegan Hydroelectric Project

Glacier Power’s Dunvegan Hydroelectric Project

The Project


Table 4.2-2: Assessment Scenarios Baseline Case Application Case Cumulative Effects

Assessment Case Description

Borrow pits Probable future opening of new pits


Proposed future expansion - a proposal has been made to expand the facility approximately 700 m upstream from the bridge

BC Hydro Site C at Taylor

Proposed new hydroelectric dam at Taylor would include a reservoir upstream and potential for further alteration in flow regime

Potential Future

Projects

Transportation and utilities corridors Potential future expansion of corridors

4.2.3 Boundaries

An important aspect of the effects assessment process is determining the boundaries of the environmental assessment. Boundaries focus the scope of work, allowing a meaningful analysis of potential environmental effects associated with a project, and most effective use of available study resources. Boundaries are of two distinct types:

• The first type of boundary is defined by the temporal and spatial characteristics of the Project and various environmental components. They consist of temporal and spatial boundaries encompassing those periods and areas during and within which the environmental components are likely to interact with, or be influenced by, the Project. These boundaries may extend well beyond the limits of direct disturbance, particularly in the case of migratory species or regional or provincial socio-cultural and economic systems.

• The second type of boundary addresses the limitations on the scope of, or approach to, work possible during the assessment of environmental effects. These boundaries are referred to as administrative and technical boundaries to the assessment, and are imposed by such factors as finite resources of data, time, cost and labour, as well as technical, political or administrative reasons or jurisdictions.

For the purposes of assessing potential project effects on VECs, the spatial boundaries consist of a local study area (LSA) and a regional study area (RSA). Figures 4.2-2 and 4.2-3 summarize the spatial relationship between the LSA and RSA defined in each VEC and the project components.

Variations to the study areas were made depending on the specific EIA component. The VEC study areas are addressed under the spatial boundaries section of the individual VEC assessments.

Figure 3.1-1 identifies the location of proposed development activities in relation to existing topographic features, township grids, watercourses and waterbodies.

Table 4.2-3 indicates the boundaries for each of the VECs.


Dawson Creek

BRITI

SH C

OLUM

BIA

ALBE

RTA

Grimshaw

Fairview

Peace River

Pouce Coupe

Spirit River

Falher

McLennan

Fairview Natural Area

Sand LakeNatural Area

Silver ValleyEcological Reserve

Dunvegan WestWildland Park

Moonshine LakeProvincial Park

Peace RiverWildland Park

Queen ElizabethProvincial Park

Green ValleyProvincial Park

Peace RiverWildland Park


Dunvegan Natural Area


Duncans I.R. 151a

P e a ce

R

iv

er

Sm

o ky

R

iv

er

2

2

2

49

64

GLACIER POWER LTD.DUNVEGAN PROJECTGENERALLOCAL STUDY AREA FOR VALUED ENVIRONMENTAL COMPONENTS

PROJECT NUMBER

CADD NUMBER

DRAWING NUMBER

BC50541XX

4.2-2AREV Y M D

06 01 03REVISION DESCRIPTION DES DWN CHKFOR E.I.ATH

IS DR

AWIN

G SH

ALL N

OT BE

REP

RODU

CED

IN AN

Y MAN

NER

OR FO

R ANY

PURP

OSE E

XCEP

T BY W

RITT

EN PE

RMISS

ION

OF C

ANAD

IAN

PROJ

ECTS

LIMI

TED A

ND IS

PRO

TECT

ED BY

COP

YRIG

HT LA

W. ©

2006

THI

S DRA

WING

MUS

T BE S

TAMP

ED, S

IGNE

D AND

DAT

ED TO

BE AP

PROV

ED FO

R CO

NSTR

UCTIO

N. V

OID A

LL D

RAWI

NGS B

EARI

NG AN

EARL

IER D

ATE O

R RE

VISIO

N NU

MBER

.

0 7 14 21 283.5Kilometers

To W.A.CBennett Dam

To Fort Vermillion & Vermillion Chutes

FISHERIES

WILDLIFESOIL, VEGETATION AND FOREST RESOURCESCLIMATE, AIR QUALITY AND NOISEHERITAGE RESOURCESHEALTH & SAFETY

VISUAL RESOURCES

HYDROLOGY

ICE FORMATION & BREAK-UP

LAND & WATER USE

TRANSPORTATION

SOCIOECONOMIC

Dawson Creek

BRITI

SH C

OLUM

BIA

ALBE

RTA

Manning

Grimshaw

Fairview

Peace River

Pouce Coupe

Spirit River

High Prairie

Sexsmith

Falher

McLennan

Kobes

Peejay

Murdale

Montney

Pineview

Attachie

Bear Flat

Cab Creek

Mile 62 1/2North Pine

Lexau Ranch

Rose Prairie

Butler Ridge

Charlie Lake

Wagner RanchMcLean Ranch

Fort St. John

Williston Lake Farrell Creek

Simpson Ranch

Federal Ranch

Mount Gething

Beryl Prairie

Tower Lake

Blue Grave Creek

Portage Mountain

Bullhead Mountain

HALFWAY RIVER

EAST MOBERLY

LAKE

WEST MOBERLY

LAKE

DOIG RIVER

BLUEBERRY RIVER

BEATON RIVER

Woodland Creek I.R.Clear Hills I.R.

William McKenzie I.R.

Head Pond

The Project

W.A.CBennett Dam

PeaceCanyon Dam 2

2

2

49

64

GLACIER POWER LTD.DUNVEGAN PROJECTGENERALREGIONAL STUDY AREAS FOR VALUED ENVIRONMENTAL COMPONENTS

PROJECT NUMBER

CADD NUMBER

DRAWING NUMBER

BC50541XX

4.2-3AREV Y M D

06 01 03REVISION DESCRIPTION DES DWN CHKFOR E.I.ATH

IS DR

AWIN

G SH

ALL N

OT BE

REP

RODU

CED

IN AN

Y MAN

NER

OR FO

R ANY

PURP

OSE E

XCEP

T BY W

RITT

EN PE

RMISS

ION

OF C

ANAD

IAN

PROJ

ECTS

LIMI

TED A

ND IS

PRO

TECT

ED BY

COP

YRIG

HT LA

W. ©

2006

THI

S DRA

WING

MUS

T BE S

TAMP

ED, S

IGNE

D AND

DAT

ED TO

BE AP

PROV

ED FO

R CO

NSTR

UCTIO

N. V

OID A

LL D

RAWI

NGS B

EARI

NG AN

EARL

IER D

ATE O

R RE

VISIO

N NU

MBER

.

LeducQuesnel

EdmontonSpruce Grove Lloydminster

Dawson Creek

Fort McMurray

Prince George

Fort St. John

Grande Prairie

North Battleford1:10,000,000

Hydrometric_Stations

0 8 16 24 324Kilometers

To Fort Vermillion, Vermillion Chutes and Slave Lake

Peace/SlaveRiver Basin

SOCIOECONOMIC

HYDROLOGY

LAND AND WATER USEICE FORMATION AND BREAKUP

HEALTH AND SAFETY

WILDLIFESOIL, VEGETATION AND FOREST RESOURCES

FISHERIES

CLIMATE, AIR QUALITY AND NOISE

ARCHEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL RESOURCES

GEOTECHNICAL

Table 4.2-3: Boundaries for Assessment of Valued Environmental Components

Boundaries

VEC LSA RSA

1 Geotechnical conditions Valley walls and the bottom of the Peace River Valley from the headworks to the upstream headpond

Same as LSA

2 Climate, air quality and noise The headworks structure and headpond as well as road access and the transmission line

Upstream as far as the Alberta–British Columbia border and downstream from the project site to the Town of Peace River

3 Water quality

• 36 km of the mainstem Peace River from 10 km downstream from the headworks to the upstream extent of the headpond (26 km)

• the lowermost 1000 m of Ksituan River (i.e., the section that may be inundated by the headpond)

• the lowermost 300 m of Hines Creek (i.e., the section that encompasses the road crossing downstream to the confluence with the Peace River)

• the lowermost 300 m of Dunvegan Creek (i.e., the section that encompasses the road and transmission line crossing downstream to the confluence with the Peace River)

The mainstem Peace River from the Peace Canyon Dam to Vermilion Chutes (865 km) and all major tributaries entering the Peace River within this zone

4 Surface water hydrology and groundwater

Extends from the Town of Peace River upstream to the Bennett Dam at Hudson’s Hope

Encompasses the entire Peace River drainage basin from the Rocky Mountains of northeast British Columbia across the Alberta Plateau to the confluence with the Slave River north of Lake Athabasca (Figure 4.6-1), an area of approximately 168,000 km2

5 Ice formation and breakup

The area along the Peace River from Bennett Dam in northeastern British Columbia to Fort Vermilion in northern Alberta, a distance of approximately 860 km

Same as LSA


Table 4.2-3: Boundaries for Assessment of Valued Environmental Components Boundaries

VEC LSA RSA

6 Fish community

• 36 km of the mainstem Peace River from 10 km downstream from the headworks to the upstream extent of the headpond (26 km)

• the lowermost 1000 m of Ksituan River (section that will be inundated by the headpond)

• the lowermost 300 m of Hines Creek (section that encompasses the road crossing downstream to the confluence with Peace River)

• the lowermost 300 m of Dunvegan Creek (section that encompasses the road and transmission line crossing downstream to the confluence with Peace River)

The mainstem Peace River from the Peace Canyon Dam to Vermilion Chutes (865 km) and all major tributaries entering the Peace River within this zone

7 Soil, vegetation and forest resources

• Extends from east of the headworks to the upper end of the headpond at the Fourth Creek tributary (26 km) as well as proposed north and south access roads, transmission line rights-of-way adjacent to the project site

• includes a vegetation buffer of 500 m on either side of the alignments, from the easternmost LSA boundary to an area immediately downstream from the headworks

• vertically, extends across the Peace River valley from top of valley wall break to top of valley wall break

• cultivation of upland plains along the river often extends right up to the valley break, thus a buffer zone back from the rim was not included in the boundary design

• near major tributaries expected to be affected by inundation, an arbitrary set-back distance of 500 m beyond expected inundation levels was chosen

• on smaller tributaries, or on steeply sloping creek drainages, a line was drawn from valley break to valley break across each drainage

The stretch of the Peace River valley from valley bottom to valley break, from the Bennett Dam, 258 km upstream from the Project, to approximately 275 km downstream from the Project



VEC LSA RSA

8 Wildlife

Encompasses the riparian and aquatic habitats from the proposed headworks site to a point approximately 26 km upstream, which coincided with the approximate upstream limit of the anticipated inundation by the project headpond

Includes the Peace River valley and associated WMUs (359, 520, 522, 523, 526, 527, 528) upstream from the LSA approximately 275 km to the Bennett Dam and downstream an equivalent distance

9 Transportation

• Includes the access roads to the Project on the north and south sides of the Peace River to the west of Highway 2, which link the project site to the highway.

• All project traffic traveling from the access road on the south side of the project site to the access road on the north side will cross the Peace River by Highway 2 and the Dunvegan Bridge.

• The access roads are in the MD of Fairview and the counties of Saddle Hills and Birch Hills.

Same as LSA

10 Land and water use

• Extends from the project headworks to the upper limits of the headpond, 26 km upstream from the headworks and downstream to the Town of Peace River.

• The boundaries for land use activities also include 2 km on either side of both banks of Peace River.

• The boundaries for water use include the Peace River from the Alberta–British Columbia border, east to the Town of Peace River, and south to the City of Grande Prairie.

Same as LSA



VEC LSA RSA

11 Visual resources

Includes all areas where project infrastructure is visible, including project headworks, the upper limits of the headpond, access roads north and south of the Peace River, the transmission line ROW south of the Peace River adjacent to the project site, and a vegetation buffer of 500 m on either side of the alignments

Same as LSA

12 Heritage resources

Concentrates on areas to be directly affected by project-related water levels, access roads, transmission lines and other associated facilities

Includes the Peace River valley from the confluence with Smoky River to Bennett Dam in central British Columbia

13 Health and safety Includes the headworks structure and headpond as well as road access and the transmission line

Reaches upstream as far as the Alberta–British Columbia border and downstream from the project site to the confluence of the Slave River

14 Socio-economic factors

Includes the MDs of Fairview, Spirit River, Smoky River and Peace River; the Counties of Grande Prairie, Birch Hills and Saddle Hills; the urban municipalities within these rural municipalities, including the city of Grande Prairie, and the towns of Fairview, Spirit River, Sexsmith, Fahler, Grimshaw and Peace River

• Encompasses a distance of about 100 km or a 1-hour commute from the Project, to reflect possible commuting distance, and most likely supply relationships

• infrastructure and service providers affected by the Project will be those serving the project site and the communities from which construction workers and contractors working on the Project will be drawn

4.2.4 Description of Existing Conditions

The existing condition section defines the baseline case for each VEC. In this section, the existing environmental conditions (including status, trends, and context, as appropriate) are described. This description may be based on available data for the regional and local study areas, review of literature and site reconnaissance, as appropriate, and is focused on the characteristics of the environmental component within the assessment boundaries established for it.


4.2.5 Potential Interactions, Issues and Concerns

Potential interactions between the Project (based on the project description in Section 3) and the VEC are described. Information from relevant literature and other environmental assessments may be used to establish the current state of understanding regarding the potential effects of the anticipated interactions. Where existing knowledge indicates that an interaction is not likely to result in an effect, certain issues may not warrant further analysis. The discussion of potential interactions, issues and concerns may be based on project phases or on issues.

4.2.6 Residual Environmental Effects Evaluation Criteria

For each VEC, the criteria against which significance is evaluated are clearly defined to support the prediction of residual environmental effects (i.e., those that are predicted to occur after all mitigation has been considered). As appropriate, these criteria may incorporate regulated objectives or thresholds, policies, or professional judgement.

The definition of significance varies with each VEC. The significance of effects on biological or human (land and water uses, health and safety, transportation and socio-economic factors in this EIA) VECs are usually associated with changes to populations or habitat. The significance of effects on a historical resource VEC is associated with damage or destruction of the resource. The significance of effects on physical VECs such as climate, hydrology, ice and geotechnical conditions are usually associated with how these effects are felt by biological, human and historical resources VECs. For example, the effect of soil erosion can only have significance if the erosion and subsequent deposition has an effect on human health or safety, or on fish or wildlife habitat.

4.2.7 Effects Analysis, Mitigation and Residual Effects Prediction

The assessment focuses on the evaluation of potential interactions between the various project components and activities described in the project description (Section 3), and the VECs. A standard evaluation system has been developed to ensure that potential effects are clearly and completely evaluated. The prediction of residual environmental effects follows three general steps (CEAA 1994):

• determining whether the environmental effects are adverse • determining whether the adverse environmental effects are significant • determining whether the significant adverse environmental effects are likely to occur

Table 4.2-4 shows an example of the environmental effects assessment matrix that will be used to summarize the effects by project activity, and to describe the mitigation and analysis for each activity.

4.2.7.1 Determining Whether Environmental Effects Are Adverse

The environmental assessment considers project activities (during construction, operations and decommissioning, as well as possible malfunctions and accidents) that could result in project–environment interactions that may have a positive or adverse environmental effect.

In determining whether there are adverse residual environmental effects, a number of factors, including those recommended in the Responsible Authority’s Guide (CEAA 1994), are considered:


• negative effects on the health of biota • loss of rare or endangered species • reductions in biological diversity • loss of critical and productive wildlife habitat • fragmentation of habitat or interruption of movement corridors and migration routes • transformation of natural landscapes (e.g., modification of terrain features, habitat, visual

landscapes, alteration of drainage and soil capability) • discharge of persistent and or toxic chemicals to atmosphere, waterbodies and land; • toxicity effects on human health • loss of or detrimental change in current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes by

Aboriginal persons • change in current use of lands by other users • foreclosure of future resource use or production • negative effects on human health or well-being • decreased aesthetic appeal or changes in visual amenities Table 4.2-4: Environmental Effects Assessment Matrix Template

Evaluation Criteria for Assessing Environmental Effects

Project Activity Potential Positive (P)

or Adverse (A) Environmental Effect

Mitigation

Mag

nitu

de

Geo

grap

hic

Exte

nt

Dur

atio

n/Fr

eque

ncy

Rev

ersi

bilit

y

Ecol

ogic

al, S

ocio

-C

ultu

ral a

nd E

cono

mic

C

onte

xt

e.g., Construction

e.g., Operations

e.g., Accidental events

e.g., Contribution to cumulative effects

KEY: Magnitude: 1 = Low: e.g., a few individuals. Species and

or habitats affected occasionally. 2 = Medium: e.g., a moderate

percentage/number of individuals, species and or habitats affected within the LSA for a period of more than one month.

3 = High: e.g., a large percentage/ number of

individuals, species and or habitats within LSA affected for a period of more than one month.

4 = Very High e.g., long-term regional effects

on wildlife abundance distribution and biodiversity (e.g., impact to an endangered species).

Geographic Extent: 1 = <1 km² 2 = 1-10 km² 3 = 11-100 km² 4 = 101-1000 km² 5 = 1001-10,000 km² 6 = >10,000 km² Duration: 1 = < 1 month 2 = 1-12 months 3 = 13-36 months 4 = 37-72 months 5 = > 72 months

Frequency: 1 = < 11 events/year 2 = 11-50 events/year 3 = 51-100 events/year 4 = 101-200 events/year 5 = >200 events/year 6 = continuous Reversibility: R = Reversible I = Irreversible

Ecological/Socio-cultural and Economic Context: 1 = Relatively pristine area or

area not adversely affected by human activity.

2 = Evidence of adverse

effects. N/A = Not Applicable


4.2.7.2 Mitigation

The analysis and prediction of residual environmental effects is based on the Project as described in Section 3 with specific reference to the measures that have been incorporated into project design, that are technically and economically feasible, and that would mitigate any significant adverse environmental effects of the Project. As outlined in the project description (Section 3) various environmental management strategies and mitigation measures have been proposed or will be implemented during project planning. Environmental design, environmental management strategies and mitigation specific to the minimization or control of potential adverse environmental effects are described for each environmental component. These are summarized in point form for each environmental effect in the residual environmental effects assessment matrix.

4.2.7.3 Application of Evaluation Criteria for Assessing Environmental Effects

In the analysis, several criteria are taken into account in deciding whether the residual adverse environmental effects are significant. These criteria include, among other things:

• magnitude • geographic extent • duration • frequency • reversibility • context

Each criterion has a numeric descriptor in the key of the residual environmental effects assessment matrix (Table 4.2-4) to simplify the presentation of results of the environmental assessment. Some of these descriptors may vary by VEC, to more accurately represent the characteristics of that VEC (e.g., magnitude ratings for historical resources would differ from those for a biological environmental component). Supporting discussion in the text highlights particularly important relationships, data or assessment analysis, but does not necessarily address all items noted in the matrix. 4.2.7.4 Cumulative Environmental Effects

The Project’s contribution to cumulative environmental effects is an integral component of the assessment. The concept of cumulative environmental effects recognizes that the environmental effects of individual human activities and natural processes can combine and interact with each other to cause aggregate effects (additive or synergistic) that may be different in nature or extent from the effects of individual activities. Cumulative environmental effects can occur when environmental effects on the natural, socio-cultural, and economic environments take place so frequently in time or so densely in space that the results of individual environmental effects cannot be assimilated. They can also occur when the effects of one activity combine with those of another in a cumulative or synergistic manner.

For the purposes of this assessment, cumulative environmental effects are defined as the likely effects on the environment which result from effects of the Project when combined with those of other past, existing, and likely future projects and activities that will be carried out over a certain period of time and distance (CEAA 1994). They are considered in conjunction with other project-related adverse or


positive environmental effects, and the residual environmental effects determination considers cumulative environmental effects for each project activity. Important cumulative environmental effects are also highlighted in the text discussion. The overall assessment of cumulative environmental effects is based on an integrated consideration of all potential effects of all activities on the affected environmental component, including cumulative environmental effects associated with other projects. The contribution of the Project to the cumulative effects on each VEC is summarized separately in each VEC section.

4.2.8 Overall Residual Environmental Effects Rating

Adverse environmental effects that remain after mitigation are called residual effects. These residual effects together with any positive effects that have been identified form the basis for the environmental assessment. The residual effects are assessed as to their significance for each project phase and for accidental or unplanned events in the residual environmental effects summary matrix (Table 4.2-5). This summary matrix addresses the Project’s contribution to the cumulative effects (i.e., the CEA case) as well. This overall rating considers all adverse residual environmental effects. If any project component has a significant effect, the overall project effect on that VEC is considered significant. Table 4.2-5: Residual Environmental Effects Summary Matrix

Likelihood of Significant Effects

Phase Residual Environmental Effects

Rating, Including Cumulative Environmental Effects*

Level of Confidence Probability of

Occurrence Scientific Certainty

Construction

Operations

Decommissioning

Malfunctions, accidents and unplanned events

Project overall Key: Residual environmental Effect Rating: S = Significant Adverse Environmental Effect NS = Not-significant Adverse Environmental Effect P = Positive Environmental Effect Level of Confidence 1 = Low Level of Confidence 2 = Medium Level of Confidence 3 = High Level of Confidence

Probability of Occurrence: based on professional judgement 1 = Low Probability of Occurrence 2 = Medium Probability of Occurrence 3 = High Probability of Occurrence Scientific Certainty: based on scientific information and statistical analysis or professional judgement 1 = Low Level of Confidence 2 = Medium Level of Confidence 3 = High Level of Confidence N/A = Not Applicable

Note: *As determined in consideration of established residual environmental effects rating criteria for each VEC.


4.2.8.1 Determining Whether Environmental Effects are Significant

This analysis evaluates the interactions between project activities and the VEC to determine the significance of any residual adverse environmental effects.

For each potential environmental effect, the study team considers the mitigation measures included in design or required to avoid, eliminate, or minimize the effect. The study team also considers the significance criteria listed previously. Based on scientific knowledge, existing literature, previous studies and professional judgement, the study team then evaluates whether the residual effect will exceed a pre-defined threshold (see Section 4.2.6) beyond which the effect is considered significant. A rating of significant or not significant is assigned using the defined residual environmental effects rating criteria, and a rationale for this determination provided. Positive effects are also described.

4.2.8.2 Level of Confidence

The significance of the residual environmental effects of the Project is evaluated based on a review of relevant literature, consultation with experts and professional judgement. In some instances, making predictions of potential residual environmental effects is difficult due to the limitations of available data. Ratings are therefore provided to indicate the level of confidence with which the study team has made each prediction.

4.2.8.3 Determining Whether the Significant Environmental Effects are Likely to Occur

Consideration of the likelihood of significant adverse residual environmental effects is important. Criteria for the determination of likelihood include probability of occurrence and scientific uncertainty (CEAA 1994). Where possible, the assessment can apply statistical methods to determine the likelihood of significant residual adverse environmental effects. Where such methods are not feasible or practical, a qualitative approach based on non-statistical analyses or professional judgement is used.

4.2.9 Monitoring

For each VEC, the need for and requirements of any follow-up studies or monitoring are considered. Such studies are linked to the sensitivity of a VEC to project and cumulative effects. The likelihood and importance of potential effects, as well as the level of confidence associated with the residual effects rating, are also taken into consideration.

4.2.10 Summary

For each VEC, the predicted residual environmental effects (Application Case), including contribution to cumulative effects (CEA Case) are summarized.


4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 4-1 · 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 4.1 Assessment Approach 4.1.1...

Documents

Transcript of 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 4-1 · 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 4.1 Assessment Approach 4.1.1...