From: Panel RBT2 / Commission RBT2 (CEAA/ACEE)To:Cc: Sabo,Samantha [CEAA]; Lim,Julian [CEAA]; Belland,Brenna [CEAA]; Myles,Debra [CEAA]; Panel RBT2 /

Commission RBT2 (CEAA/ACEE)Subject: Appendix C: Guidance for Disposal Site SelectionDate: February 8, 2017 11:37:27 AMAttachments: Environment and Climate Change Canada - Pollution and Waste - Appendix C_ Guidance for Disposal Site

Selection.pdf

Hello Panel Members, As per your request, please find attached the document entitled “Appendix C: Guidance for DisposalSite Selection” from Environment and Climate Change Canada’s “Applicant’s Guide to applying for aDisposal at Sea permit”. The document will be posted to the CEAA Registry shortly. Brenna Belland Review Panel Secretariat, Roberts Bank Terminal 2 Project | Secrétariat de la commissiond'examen, Projet du Terminal 2 à Roberts Bankc/o Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency | a/s de l’Agence canadienne d'évaluationenvironnementale22nd Floor, 160 Elgin St. Ottawa ON K1A 0H3 | 160, rue Elgin, 22ième étage, Ottawa ON K1A 0H3Panel.RBT2@ceaa.gc.ca / Commission.RBT2@acee.gc.caTel: 613-957-0626 / toll free 1-866-582-1884 | Tél. : 613-957-0626 / sans frais: 1-866-582-1884

Jocelyne Beaudet; David Levy

Home Pollution and Waste Managing and Reducing Waste Disposal at SeaApplicant’s Guide to applying for a Disposal at Sea permitAppendix C: Guidance for Disposal Site Selection

Environment and Climate Change Canada (/default.asp?lang=en&n=FD9B0E51-1)

Booklet Layout (default.asp?lang=En&n=8E789D01-1)

Introduction

Preface

Scientific/Technical Assessments for Selection of Disposal at Sea Sites

Important Notes

Appendix C.1: References

Appendix C.2: Quick Reference Guide

Appendix C.3: Disposal Site Monitoring and Management Plan

Appendix C.4: Disposal at Sea Minimum Sample Analytical Requirements

Appendix C.5: Site Selection Glossary

1 of 32

November 2013

Front cover photo: Dredged material disposal at a designated ocean disposal site off the PacificCoast of British Columbia.

Marine Protection Programs© Environment Canada.

Environment Canada strives to minimize the number of active disposal at sea sites so that potentialimpacts associated with disposal at sea activity are spatially limited and monitoring efforts arefocused and effective. Existing sites should always be considered first when preparing a disposalat sea permit application.

However, in those cases where use of an existing site is not operationally feasible or other issuesmay preclude its selection as the most appropriate disposal at sea site, new candidate disposal sitesmay be identified and characterized. Alterations to the physical environment, risks to human health,devaluation of marine resources and interference with other legitimate uses of the sea are primaryconcerns that will need to be addressed when applying for a new disposal site. In general, theDisposal at Sea permitting program at EC (Environment Canada) is designed to protect and preservethe marine environment from all sources of pollution.

Specified in this guidance is the information and data needed to demonstrate that disposal activities

2 of 32

at a newly proposed site will not cause unacceptable impacts to the marine environment, humanhealth, or other uses of the sea. Comprehensive information is needed on physical, chemical, andbiological characteristics of the seafloor and of the water column, along with an evaluation of thepotential impacts of the proposed disposal action upon other uses of the sea.

This guidance was developed following review of similar guidance documents in Australia, UnitedKingdom, United States, and the Netherlands. It is consistent with Canada’s obligations to implementthe London Protocol, an international treaty on the prevention of marine pollution from dumping.Although this guidance was primarily written for inert, inorganic geological matter (excavated material)and dredged material, portions of it may also be applicable to other waste types (e.g. (for example),fish waste or organic material).

The information and assessment requirements specified in this guidance document should befollowed closely; however, there may be exceptions in some cases, dependent upon the degree ofrisk involved and the size and complexity of the project.

Top of Page

Canada strives to prevent pollution and protect the marine environment by controlling the disposal ofwastes into the sea through the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA 1999). Arigorous permitting process for evaluation and management of wastes proposed for disposal at sea isimplemented through Environment Canada’s Marine Protection Programs. The primary obligation ofthe Applicant is to reduce the amount of waste generated for disposal. An assessment of alternativesthat includes considerations of feasible management options for the waste material must also beundertaken, and should include alternatives to disposal (e.g. (for example), re-use), and variousdisposal scenarios (e.g., upland or at sea).

If disposal at sea is found to be the appropriate management option, potential disposal sites must beidentified and characterized to understand the potential impacts on the receiving environment.Alterations to the physical environment, risks to human health, devaluation of marine resources andinterference with other legitimate uses of the sea are viewed as primary concerns. EnvironmentCanada strives to minimize the number of active disposal at sea sites so that potential impactsassociated with disposal at sea activity are spatially limited and monitoring efforts are focused andeffective. Existing sites should always be considered first when preparing a disposal at seapermit application.

However, in those cases where use of an existing site is not operationally feasible or other issuesmay preclude its selection as the most appropriate disposal at sea site, new candidate disposal sitesmust be identified and characterized. Disposal sites should be selected to minimize the impact on themarine environment, including interference with other uses of the sea. The five steps of disposal siteselection are shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Disposal at Sea Site Selection Process

Identification of Candidate Sites

3 of 32

What is the zone of operational feasibility?

Constraint Mapping:Where are environmentally sensitive areas?

Where are areas of incompatible uses?Where are areas potentially suitable for disposal (candidate sites)?

Characterization of the Candidate Sites

Physical, chemical, and biological environmentOther uses of the sites and nearby areas

Assessment of potential impacts at Candidate Sites

What are the near and far-field effects?What are the short and long-term effects?

Comparison of Candidate Sites

Compare potential adverse effects at each siteEvaluate compatibility with other uses

Assess acceptability of potential adverse impacts at the sitesIdentify applicable management and monitoring techniques

Preparation of the Site Management Plan

Identify compliance monitoring and field monitoring requirementsIdentify management measures to manage potential impacts

Top of Page

Step 1: Identification of Candidate SitesWhat is the zone of operational feasibility?

Constraint Mapping:Where are environmentally sensitive areas?

Where are areas of incompatible uses?

Step 1

Step 2

Step 3

Step 4

Step 5

4 of 32

Where are areas potentially suitable for disposal (candidate sites)?

Zone of Siting Feasibility

Sites for disposal at sea must be located in areas where disposal will not cause unacceptable impactsto the environment or to other uses of the sea. In order to effectively locate sites within potentiallyacceptable areas, the initial consideration should be of factors affecting the operational feasibility ofusing a site.

The zone of siting feasibility is the area within a feasible radius from the point of loading onto thevessel, and is determined by consideration of such factors as:

Seasonal weather restrictions and the type of disposal vessel, or equipment that will be utilizedNavigation restrictionsOperational and transport costs to the sitePolitical boundariesFeasibility of surveillance and monitoring

However, these considerations can be overridden by environmental or other practical concerns if allcandidate disposal site locations within the zone of siting feasibility would result in unacceptableimpacts. Alternate sites at greater distances should be considered when they offer environmentalbenefits at reasonable increases in costs.

When seasonal conditions limit the dredging schedule, practical considerations may also limitdistances between the dredging site and the disposal site so that transit times do not unduly prolongthe dredging cycle. Some seagoing barges and hopper dredges have a limited range of operation,defined primarily by safety considerations.

Once the zone of siting feasibility is established, a constraint mapping exercise can be undertaken inconsultation with EC, other federal/provincial/municipal government departments, First Nations andstakeholders as appropriate. Constraint mapping entails the identification of environmentally sensitiveareas and potentially incompatible uses within the zone of siting feasibility.

Constraint Mapping: Where are Environmentally Sensitive Areas within the Zone of SitingFeasibility?

Sensitive areas are those areas where natural resources could be adversely affected by disposal atsea, including, but not limited to:

Commercial, recreational, or aboriginal fish or shellfish habitatSpawning grounds/habitat of important species and their food organismsMigration routes of finfish or whales and other marine mammalsHabitat for species at riskAreas supporting nesting marine-associated avifauna, including seabird coloniesAreas supporting moulting, over-wintering, and staging marine-associated avifaunaProximity to areas of special scientific or biological importance, such as marine sanctuaries ormarine reserves

5 of 32

Concerns about the location of a disposal site will likely focus upon the species of local significanceand unique habitats or environmental features that ensure their continued viability. Sensitive habitatsnear the candidate site need to be identified, such as areas with abundant submerged aquaticvegetation or rocky outcrops. In addition, nearshore habitats should be identified including coastalmarshes, wetlands, kelp beds, and habitats that provide important habitat for juvenile and adultphases of sensitive species. These features should be identified and overlain on a map within thezone of siting feasibility.

Constraint Mapping: Where are Areas of Potentially Incompatible Uses?

Potentially incompatible uses should also be identified and overlain on the map within the zone ofsiting feasibility. Consultation with relevant federal /provincial/municipal government departments,First Nations, and stakeholders as appropriate should be conducted to determine the significance andpotential implications of “other uses” if a disposal site was situated within the same area. Potentiallyincompatible uses include, but are not limited to:

Proximity to Aboriginal/Traditional Uses in the vicinity of the candidate disposal sitesArcheological or other features in close proximity to natural or other features of historical orcultural importance, and areas of high aesthetic valueBeaches and water sportsEngineering uses of the sea floor, including mining, pipelines, water intake structures orundersea cablesNavigation and shipping lanesMilitary training and exclusion zones (e.g., given presence of unexploded ordinances)Mineral extractionAquaculture sitesPublic use of the shorelineProspective oil and gas exploration and developmentCommercial, recreational, and aboriginal fisheriesCommercial Diving sites

Some of the above uses may require the application of certain management measures to reducepossible impacts or possibly a buffer zone around them to ensure that they are adequately protected.

Constraint Mapping: Selection of Candidate Disposal Sites

Once the constraint mapping exercise is completed, and sensitive areas and areas of incompatibleuses are consolidated onto a map within the zone of siting feasibility, the available areas forcandidate disposal sites should become more apparent. See Figures 2 and 3. Existing sites shouldalways be considered first. Whenever possible, sites should be selected which have beenpreviously used for disposal of similar material.

If no potentially suitable disposal sites can be identified in the zone of siting feasibility, the geographicregion under consideration may be enlarged. If this is not feasible, the use of land-based alternativesmay need to be reconsidered for disposal.

The location and size of the disposal site are important issues to assess. Information is required todemonstrate that the candidate sites are:

a

6 of 32

Large enough that the bulk of the deposited material would remain either within the site limits orwithin a predicted area of impact after disposal while ensuring that the area impacted isnonetheless minimized (Note: this would not apply for sites selected for dispersivecharacteristics);Large enough in relation to anticipated disposal volumes that it would serve its function formany years; andSmall enough to ensure that environmental impacts can be predicted and effective monitoringcan be conducted in future.

During the selection of candidate sites, consultation should be occurring with the relevantfederal/provincial/territorial/municipal government departments, First Nations, and stakeholders asappropriate and necessary to confirm that candidate sites are feasible prior to further study or datacollection.

In the event that no constraints are identified, applicants should propose sites that are suitable for thematerial to be disposed. The following general characteristics have been found to minimize impacts tothe marine environment:

Deeper sites may be less dispersive and have less diverse biological communitiesLevel sites are generally more stableHigher energy sites are more suitable for disposal of material that may generate BiochemicalOxygen Demand (BOD; e.g., fisheries waste and organic matter)Stable sites are generally more suitable for excavated and dredged material

Top of Page

Figure 2: Example of constraint mapping within zone of siting feasibility to identify candidatedisposal sites (North and South)

The first map shows candidate sites and recreational fishing areas. The second map identifieshuman-powered recreation activities (i.e., kayaking, surfing, swimming, snorkeling, and Scuba

diving) in addition to sediment type (U.S. EPA 2012).

7 of 32

8 of 32

(U.S.EPA 2012)

Description of Figure 2

Top of Page

Figure 3: Map demonstrating the proposed disposal site in relation to potential shipwrecks,fishing and shellfishing areas in the vicinity (U.S. EPA 2008)

9 of 32

(U.S. EPA 2008)

Description of Figure 3

Top of Page

Step 2: Characterization of the Candidate SitesPhysical, chemical, and biological environment.

10 of 32

Other uses of the sites and nearby areas.

Description of the Characteristics of the Candidate Disposal Sites

Once constraint mapping is complete and candidate sites are identified in consultation withfederal/provincial/territorial/municipal government departments, First Nations and stakeholders, adetailed description of the characteristics of each site is needed. Information on historical uses of thesite and the surrounding area should be collected as part of this effort. Information needed includes:

1. General site characteristics

Latitude and longitude of the centrepoint of the candidate sites in decimal degrees to sixdecimal places, located on a map and should include proposed site boundaries (this may varyfor dispersive sites). Each candidate site should have a name.Historical disposal activities at or near the sitePresent and historical uses of, or events at or near the site that could impact sediment qualitySite characteristics or activities that could affect movement of sedimentsAny recent or historical spill events

2. Physical, chemical, and biological environment

Information regarding the physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of the water column andthe seabed are required for candidate sites as follows (see quick reference guide in Appendix C.2(default.asp?lang=En&n=8E789D01-1&offset=5&toc=show)):

Water ColumnPhysical Characteristics

Detailed bathymetry of the candidate sites and surrounding areasExpected water temperature and salinity at the time of disposal and any relevanttemporal/seasonal fluctuationsExpected background turbidity and natural fluctuations at the time of disposal and any relevanttemporal/seasonal fluctuationsAssessment of the seasonal current flow, tidal cycles, wave climate, and up-welling at thecandidate disposal sites, and identification of whether the disposal site is non-dispersive ordispersiveConsideration should be given to the following:

Short term measurements of current (i.e., during the disposal action) have little validity indetermining the transport of fines either in the water column or sediment on the sea floor.Long term measurements of currents (i.e., post-disposal, once the sediment has settled)may be necessary to refine the estimates of the dispersion of disposed materials.Other current and wave information may be required including:

Tidal period and orientation of the tidal ellipseMean direction and velocity of the surface and bottom driftsVelocities of storm-wave induced bottom currentsGeneral wind and wave characteristics

11 of 32

Average number of storm days per year

Biological Characteristics

Proximity to spawning, feeding, nursery, recruitment, migration, and other important habitatsA description of fisheries resources including known sensitive species, such as at risk species(e.g., those listed on the Species at Risk Act [SARA]), or habitat at or near the load site(s); aswell as communities and migratory species in the vicinity of the disposal site.Temporal/seasonal and spatial characteristics should be considered, to identify potentiallycritical times or circumstances when disposal should not take place including:

periods of migration from one part of an ecosystem to another, andgrowing, feeding, resting and breeding periods of sensitive or threatened species.

SedimentPhysical Characteristics

Particle size and TOC (Total organic carbon)% moistureOther parameters may be required based on site specific characteristics

Chemical characteristics (refer to Appendix C.4 (default.asp?lang=En&n=8E789D01-1&offset=7&toc=show)for Minimum Sample Analytical Requirements)

Hg, Cd, Pb, Cu, other heavy metalsHigh molecular weight hydrocarbonsPCB (Polychlorinated Biphenyl) and, PAHs (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons)Other contaminants of concern may need to be characterized based on site history (e.g.,PBDEs (polybrominated diphenyl ethers), dioxins and furans, chlorinated pesticides andnutrients)

BiotaBiological Characteristics

Marine habitats and the benthic community should be enumerated and characterized usingappropriate sampling techniques. Sampling plans are to be submitted to EC for review prior toconducting baseline studies.

Consideration of Other Uses of the Site or Surrounding Areas

Consideration should be given as to whether potentially incompatible uses at candidate sites could bemitigated by management measures. In addition, an assessment on the need for further consultationswith government, First Nations and stakeholders should be made once the initial physical, chemicaland biological data are available.

Top of Page

Step 3: Assessment of Potential Impacts at Candidate Sites

b

c

d

12 of 32

What are the near and far-field effects?

What are the short and long-term effects?

The candidate site or sites should be evaluated to determine potential adverse effects of the disposalactivity (see also the list of considerations below if there are any future predicted uses of a proposeddisposal site). Comprehensive testing of the waste material prior to evaluation of candidate disposalsites should provide details on its characteristics including the presence and mobility of contaminants.In addition, the quantities of material to be disposed should be specified along with information ondisposal management options. Information required includes:

Maximum quantity per disposal load in cubic metres or metric tonnes.Rate of disposal in cubic metres or metric tonnes per hour or per day.Frequency of disposal events per day, week, or month.Speed during disposal in knots or kilometres per hour.Time required for disposal event.Track followed during disposal event.Duration to complete all disposal activity for the project.

The evaluation of the potential effects of disposal of the waste material and its constituents mustconsider the near- and far-field fates (spatial effects) and also the short- and long-term effects(temporal effects) on marine resources and the environment. See the quick reference guide inAppendix C.2 (default.asp?lang=En&n=8E789D01-1&offset=5&toc=show).

The expected consequences of disposal should be described in terms of the habitats, processes,species, communities and uses that are expected to be affected. The precise nature of the predictedeffect (e.g., change, response, or interference) should be described. Assessment of the potentialeffects should lead to a concise statement of the expected consequences of the disposal activity i.e.,the ‘Impact Hypothesis.’ For sample impact hypotheses, see the quick reference guide in AppendixC.2 (default.asp?lang=En&n=8E789D01-1&offset=5&toc=show).

The impact hypotheses should integrate information on the type and characteristics of the material tobe disposed, the proposed disposal site conditions and pathways of concern including:

The nature of the sea bed: including its topography, geochemical and geological characteristics,data on benthic communities including fisheries resources and prior disposal activities in thearea.The physical nature of the water column: including depth, temperature, the possible existence ofa pycnocline/thermocline, currents (tidal, wave-induced, residual), and suspended matter wherethese characteristics may affect sediment transport at the site.The chemical and biological nature of the water column: including pH, salinity, dissolvedoxygen, nutrients, primary productivity, contaminant concentrations, e.g., trace metals.Biological and ecological effects of the disposal of dredged material: including toxicological andbioaccumulation effects, changes in community structure, disruption of ecological processes,degradation of water and sediment quality and alteration of sediment characteristics. Thesepossible effects must be considered within the disposal site and in the area that could be

13 of 32

influenced by the disposed material.

Quantitative analysis to address impacts of Total Suspended Solids (TSS) in sensitive environmentsincludes physical tests of basic sediment characteristics to predict the behavior of material afterloading and disposal. This would include full grain size analysis for prediction of turbidity plumecharacteristics during and after disposal, and to assess whether the material proposed for disposal isphysically different than the substrate at the disposal site. This analysis supports the prediction ofpost-disposal behaviour of the waste material. For the purpose of habitat protection, it isadvantageous to seek compatibility between the physical characteristics of the load site material andthe sediment type at the disposal site.

The method of loading (e.g. hydraulic or mechanical dredge) and disposal (e.g., hopper discharge ordischarge through marine-based pipes) can alter the characteristics of the material; therefore, it isimportant to determine physical, chemical, and biological characteristics as the material is releasedfrom the disposal vessel, in addition to the in situ characteristics. The most important physicalcharacteristics are grain size distribution and the cohesiveness/degree of consolidation.

Important considerations include:

Dispersion direction and distance of associated plumes: fine fractions associated with thedredged material may remain in suspension in the water column and be transported to threatensensitive areas or interfere with other uses.Erodability; once the material reaches the sea floor depending on its physical characteristics, itmay remain there or be eroded and moved by currents to affect sensitive areas.Shoaling; some material (e.g., consolidated clay or rocks) may not move from where it isdeposited and shoaling may occur; therefore, it must be determined whether the site canaccommodate this and future material without any adverse effects.

Cumulative effects also need to be taken into account when repeated or multiple dumping operationsoccur. It is also important to consider possible interactions with other disposal at sea activities in thearea, including historical, existing, and planned disposals. In some cases, disposal at sea canaugment existing effects attributable to inputs of contaminants to coastal waters through land runoffand waste water discharges, from the atmosphere, resource extraction, and other sources such asmaritime transport. These existing stresses on biological communities should be considered as partof the assessment of potential impacts caused by disposal at sea activities.

Where existing information is absent or inadequate, site-specific field work is required to address thegaps. Computer modeling may be needed to predict water and sediment movements .

At a non-dispersive site, the impact assessment will delineate the area that will be altered by thedisposed material and identify effects to the area. In most cases, the primary impact zone will beentirely smothered. The assessment should project the likely time scale of recovery or recolonizationafter disposal, as well as the nature of recolonization (i.e., whether the benthic community structurewill be altered). The assessment should also specify the likelihood, scale, and severity of residualimpacts outside this primary zone.

At a dispersive site, the impact assessment will define the area likely to be altered in the short andlong term and the severity of any changes. Applicants should also specify the likely extent of longterm transport of material from the disposal site, compare this flux with existing transport fluxes in the

e

14 of 32

area and assess the likely scale and severity of effects in the long term. In some cases, disposal offine-grained material at dispersive sites within, and close to, estuaries or in the littoral zone, along thecoastline, can have beneficial effects for habitats and species by maintaining sediment budgets.

Top of Page

Step 4: Comparison of Candidate SitesCompare potential residual adverse effects at each candidate site.

Evaluate compatibility with other uses.

Assess acceptability of potential adverse impacts at the sites.

Identify applicable management and monitoring techniques.

At this stage of the site selection process, a comparison of the potential adverse effects at eachcandidate site or sites needs to be undertaken. An analysis of each candidate site should beconsidered in light of a comparative assessment of human health risks, environmental impacts,hazards (including accidents), economics and exclusion of future uses. See the quick referenceguide in Appendix C.2 (default.asp?lang=En&n=8E789D01-1&offset=5&toc=show) for examples ofquestions to consider in comparing the potential impacts and conflicts to the other uses of the siteand surrounding areas. If this assessment reveals that adequate information is not available todetermine, with confidence, the likely effects of the proposed disposal at the candidate disposal sites,including potential long-term harmful consequences, then these candidate sites should not beconsidered until sufficient information is available.

If two or more candidate sites have been identified as acceptable, a comparison then needs to becarried out to evaluate the relative impacts of disposal activities at each site. This should includequantitative and qualitative evaluations of the perceived risks. For example:

Quantitative comparisons of predicted water-quality characteristics to established criteriaQuantitative comparisons of the sediment transport modeling results and predicted areas ofimpact resulting from disposalProximity to sensitive resources; timing limitations, operational feasibilityComparison of other site characteristics as appropriate for the site

Risk assessment models covering human health effects and environmental impacts and resourcedamages can also be used to compare sites .

Once the likelihood and consequences of potential impacts of disposal have been predicted,management measures should be evaluated to determine if the impacts can be controlled ormitigated. For candidate disposal sites where impacts to marine life are considered unacceptableduring certain times of the year, management provisions should be considered, identifying potentiallycritical times of the year (i.e., for marine life) when disposal operations should not take place. Thisconsideration should determine periods when it is expected that disposal operations will have less

f

g

15 of 32

impact than at other times. Managing the exposures and risks associated with disposal during criticaltimes can also be addressed through the use of engineering and operational controls. Biologicalconsiderations relative to the timing of disposal operations include:

Periods when marine organisms are migrating from one part of the ecosystem to another (e.g.,from an estuary to open sea or vice versa) and growing and breeding periods;Periods when marine organisms are hibernating on or are buried in the sediments; andPeriods when particularly sensitive and at risk species are exposed.

Candidate sites for which the assessment has shown that disposal would result in unacceptableimpacts, even with management measures applied, can be eliminated from the process. If no sitesare acceptable, then the parameters of acceptance need to be reconsidered or no site can beselected for disposal at sea in the zone of siting feasibility.

The final decision regarding the acceptability of a proposed disposal site is determined byEnvironment Canada during the permit application/regulatory review phase. If the proponent isseeking to dispose material at a site that already exists, and no major issues have been raised bygovernment departments, First Nations and stakeholders during the constraint mapping exercise, siteselection may be relatively straightforward. For projects where either there are no existing sites, orwhere the proponent proposes a new site rather than one that already exists within the zone of sitingfeasibility, the permit application/regulatory review phase may be more complex and requireadditional time in order to collect, interpret and assess the supporting information and consult withrelevant parties.

Top of Page

Step 5: Preparation of the Site Management PlanIdentify compliance monitoring and field monitoring requirements.

Identify management measures to manage potential impacts.

While the Applicant is responsible for preparation of a management plan for the selected disposal siteas part of the permit application, Environment Canada is responsible for implementation and deliveryof the post-disposal monitoring program, and any subsequent management actions required at a site(e.g., site closure).

Site management plans should set out the framework for management, mitigation, and monitoring ofimpacts during project implementation. They should detail the control strategies for the project,including environmental objectives, auditable performance criteria, and corrective actions. Sitemanagement plans should include:

Management objectives relating to possible adverse effects that could develop at the disposalsiteConsideration of the times, rates, quantities, and types of material disposed

16 of 32

Consideration of the various methodologies of monitoring the movement and characteristics ofthe disposed material during project activitiesImpact hypotheses and a tiered approach for monitoring disposal operationsTarget thresholds and associated response measures that may be applied should the projectimplementation monitoring indicate outcomes significantly different than expected.

Management measures may include:

Directed disposal within the disposal site – to avoid or reduce impacts on sensitive benthiccommunities. This depends upon the dredging equipment used and the ability to controldisposal in the disposal site.Altering the time of year of dredging and disposal – to avoid critical life-cycle phases of sensitivemarine organisms.Loading and disposal management – to reduce dispersal of turbid plumes in sensitiveenvironments. This depends upon the availability of suitable equipment.Thin layer disposal – to improve recolonization by benthic organisms.

See the quick reference guide in Appendix C.2 (default.asp?lang=En&n=8E789D01-1&offset=5&toc=show) for a summary of site management plan components and measures. The template outlinefor a Site Monitoring and Management Plan is also presented in Appendix C.3 (default.asp?lang=En&n=8E789D01-1&offset=6&toc=show), with main headings as follows:

Description of ProjectAnticipated Use of SiteGoals and Objectives of the Management PlanRegulatory RegimeRoles and ResponsibilitiesDescription of the Existing EnvironmentDescription of the Material for DisposalDescription of Potential ImpactConsultation and EngagementDisposal Site HistoryProject Implementation MonitoringManagement Measures/Conditions or PracticesTarget Thresholds and Associated Response MeasuresDisposal Site Management Plan Review and RevisionReferences

An evaluation of any of the potential impacts from the proposed disposal activities onAboriginal/Traditional Uses is needed. Any concerns raised by First Nations, AboriginalAffairs and Northern Development Canada or other Federal departments related topotential impacts on Aboriginal Traditional Use at the candidate sites should also beidentified.

a

Consultation with DFO (Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada) re: the assessmentof fisheries and potential constraints on disposal is strongly recommended.

b

17 of 32

Top of Page

Detailed application of these guidelines. The degree to which these guidelines are applied willdepend on the risk involved and the predictions made of potential impacts during the early stages ofthe site selection process.

Disposal Site used for multiple projects. Any future predicted uses of a proposed disposal siteshould be identified, as this will help inform the site selection review process and cumulative effectsassessment. If a proponent of a future project proposes to use an existing site, the followingquestions would assist framing issues and appropriate next steps:

Is the capacity of the site adequate?1. Will the new project impact other nearby uses?2. Are the physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of the material to be disposed at thesite appropriate to site conditions?

3.

What are the potential impacts upon the site and surrounding areas, including impacts uponbenthic organisms, the fish and shellfish, sensitive species, and important habitats associatedwith disposal?

4.

What management measures are needed to mitigate potential impacts?5. What additional information may be required to verify predictions in the analyses leading up topermit issuance?

6.

A review of the Species at Risk Act should be undertaken as it applies to the candidatesites including a list of species at risk in the area, potential impacts of the disposal ofmaterial at the proposed sites on any species at risk in the areas, and proximity of the siteto species at risk sensitive areas or critical habitat.

c

Consultation with DFO re: the assessment of fisheries and potential constraints ondisposal, is strongly recommended.

d

A model used by the U.S. EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency) and theU.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Automated Dredging and Disposal AlternativesManagement System (ADDAMS), can be used to evaluate initial mixing. The modelprovides an interactive computer-based design system that can be run on a personalcomputer. Guidance is provided in Appendix B of EPA 503/8-91/001 the Evaluation ofDredged Material Proposed for Ocean Disposal - Testing Manual (http://water.epa.gov/type/oceb/oceandumping/dredgedmaterial/gbook_index.cfm).

e

An alternatives assessment document that speaks to Sch. 6 considerations in generalterms (vs. full multiple accounts analysis) is in development.

f

e.g., Environmental Risk Assessment of Dredging and Disposal Operations. Report ofWorking Group 10 of the Environmental Commission. PIANC (Permanent InternationalAssociation of Navigation Congresses) 2006.

g

18 of 32

Quality control. Sampling plans should be submitted to Environment Canada for review. Allanalytical data collected from environmental baseline studies and sampling activities must be qualityassured to auditable standards as outlined in the Disposal at Sea Minimum Sample AnalyticalRequirements (Appendix C.4 (default.asp?lang=En&n=8E789D01-1&offset=7&toc=show)) andsubmitted to Environment Canada.

Top of Page

References cited in document:U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; Yaquina Bay, Oregon; OceanDredged Material Disposal Sites, Evaluation Study and Environmental Assessment, August 2012.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; Rogue River, Oregon; OceanDredged Material Disposal Sites, Evaluation Study and Environmental Assessment, September 2008.

PIANC (World Association for Waterborne Transport Infrastructure (Permanent InternationalAssociation of Navigation Congresses)) Report of Working Group 10 of the EnvironmentalCommission. Environmental Risk Assessment of Dredging and Disposal Operations. 2006.

Other Country Guidance Documents for Site Selection:Government of Australia; National Assessment Guidelines for Dredging; 2009.

United Kingdom, Cefas; Birchenough, A.C., Vivian, C.M.G.; Case Studies to Demonstrate theSelection of Dredged; undated.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; Ocean Dumping Site Designation Delegation Handbook forDredged Material, 30 September 1986.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 503/8-91/001 the Evaluation of Dredged Material Proposed forOcean Disposal - Testing Manual. 1991

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Revised Procedural Guide for Designation Surveys of Ocean DredgedMaterial Disposal Sites; April 1990

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; Guidance Document forDevelopment of Site Management Plans for Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Sites; February 1996.

Netherlands; Assessment Framework for Disposal at Sea of Dredged Material; March 2013.

Other Useful References for Site DesignationMacArthur, C., Rau, M.E., Griffin, P.M., Patterson, A.M., Lombardero, N.; Management of DredgedMaterial within an ODMDS (ocean dredged material disposal site) to Maximize Beneficial Use;Proceedings WEDA (Western Dredging Association), San Antonio, Texas; June 2012.

U.S. EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency), Final Environmental Impact Statementfor the Rhode Island Region Long-Term Dredged Material Disposal Site Evaluation Project; October2004.

Top of Page

19 of 32

Step 1: Identification of Candidate SitesZone of Siting Feasibility Considerations

Seasonal weather restrictions and type of disposal vesselNavigation restrictionsOperational and transport costs to the sitePolitical boundariesFeasibility of surveillance and monitoring

Environmentally Sensitive Areas May Include:

Commercial and recreational fishing and shellfishing groundsSpawning grounds/habitat of important species and their food organismsMigration routes of finfish or whales and other marine mammalsSpecies at risk and their habitatAquaculture sites

Potentially Incompatible Uses May Include:

Proximity to Aboriginal/Traditional Uses in the vicinity of the candidate disposal sitesArcheological features, such as close proximity to natural or features of historical orcultural importanceBeaches and water sportsEngineering uses of the sea floor, including mining, pipelines or undersea cablesNavigation and shipping lanesMilitary training and exclusion zonesMineral extractionProximity to areas of special scientific or biological importance, such as marinesanctuaries or marine reservesPublic use of the shorelineProspective oil and gas exploration and developmentCommercial and recreational fishing, andAreas of high aesthetic value or of significant cultural or historical importance

Top of Page

Step 2: Characterization of Candidate Disposal SitesWater Column Characteristics

*

20 of 32

Temperature/salinity/depthDissolved oxygenTurbidityCurrents and upwellingBathymetry

Sediment Characteristics

Grain sizeTotal organic carbonContaminants (see Minimum Sample Analytical Requirements - Appendix C.4(default.asp?lang=En&n=8E789D01-1&offset=7&toc=hide))CEPA (Canadian Environmental Protection Act) Regulated Requirements: Hg, Cd, PCBs(Polychlorinated Biphenyls) & PAHs (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons)Other potential contaminants (site specific):Pb, Cu and other heavy metalsHigh molecular weight hydrocarbonsPBDEs (polybrominated diphenyl ethers), dioxins and furansChlorinated pesticidesNutrients (the requirement will vary according to site and EC instructions)

Biota Characteristics

Requirements will vary according to site and EC (Environment Canada) instructions but mayinclude:

Macroinfauna--identification of species and abundanceMeiofauna--identification of species and abundanceMacroepifauna--identification of species and abundanceMacroepifauna--Bioaccumulation (tissues): 2 species for Hg, Cd, Pb, Cu, PCBs, other heavymetals, petroleum hydrocarbons, pesticides

**

Names of all contractors and laboratories performing collection and testing prior tocommencement of sediment sampling are to be provided to Environment Canada.Sampling plans are to be submitted to Environment Canada for review. Qualityassurance and control procedures should be clearly provided along with the results ofsampling from accredited laboratories (Appendix C.4 (default.asp?lang=En&n=8E789D01-1&offset=7&toc=hide)). EC will not accept the data unless it isaccompanied by its QA (Quality Assurance) procedures and data.

*

Contaminants of concern should be identified from testing of the material proposed tobe disposed and historical information regarding spills and other uses potentiallyimpacting the load site and candidate disposal sites.

**

21 of 32

Top of Page

Step 3: Assessment of Potential Impacts at Candidate SitesDirect Physical Impacts from disposal activity may include:

Reduction of light penetration, leading to sub-lethal effects or death of light sensitiveorganisms and habitatsChanges to benthic community structures and habitatsReduced vitality or death of sessile benthic fauna through clogging of feeding mechanismsor smothering (especially filter-feeding organisms and sensitive habitats)Alteration of current velocities and wave conditions affecting sediment regimes andleading to erosion of areas (such as seagrass beds), andReduction in dissolved oxygen levels due to an increase in nutrient concentrationspotentially resulting in anoxia/hypoxia.

Potential Biological Impacts from Disposal Activity May Include:

Disruption of the lifecycle (breeding, feeding, migration, resting) of a speciesAdversely affecting the spatial distribution of a speciesFragmentation of an important populationIntroduction of invasive species or disease that may impact the population, andPractices that interfere with the recovery of a species.

Examples of Impact Hypotheses

During initial deposition, the material will not be carried through the water column to anysensitive area in amounts that would be harmful to the value or amenity of such areas.The deposited material will not subsequently reach any sensitive areas (throughre-suspension and sediment transport) in amounts that would be harmful to the value oramenity of such areas.Disposal of material will not result in transport of contaminated material to any sensitivearea, contaminant increases in the sediments of such areas, contaminant uptake by biotain such areas or ensuing effects on such biota.The deposited material will not subsequently reach any sensitive area (through erosion,re-suspension and sediment transport) in amounts that would cause unacceptableshoaling in shipping lanes or affect other human uses.

Top of Page

Step 4: Comparison of Candidate Sites

22 of 32

Questions to consider include:

Do other government departments/agencies (e.g., Parks Canada, AANDC (AboriginalAffairs and Northern Development Canada), DFO (Department of Fisheries and OceansCanada), NRCAN (Natural Resources Canada) or TC (Transport Canada)) have concernsor regulatory requirements pertaining to selection of this particular site?

1.

Unusual Topography/Unique Bottom Features: Would disposal of material in thiscandidate site affect physical bottom feature that is unique within the local or regionalarea?

2.

Physical Sediment Compatibility: Does the candidate site have similar sedimentcharacteristics to anticipated dredged material?

3.

Chemical Sediment Compatibility: Does the candidate site have similar chemicalcharacteristics to anticipated dredged material?

4.

Influence of Past Disposal: Would disposal of material in this candidate site be affected byprevious disposal of dredge material?

5.

Living Resources of Limited Distribution: Would disposal of material in this candidate siteaffect any living resources that do not have a coast-wide distribution?

6.

Commercial Fisheries: Would disposal of material in this candidate site affect anycommercial fishing activity?

7.

Recreational Fisheries: Would disposal of material in this candidate site affect anyrecreational fishing activity?

8.

Breeding/Spawning Areas: Would disposal of material in this candidate site affectbreeding and spawning areas of any species?

9.

Nursery Areas: Would disposal of material in this candidate site affect nursery areas ofany species?

10.

Feeding Areas: Would disposal of material in this candidate site affect feeding areas ofany species?

11.

Migration Routes: Would disposal of material in this candidate site affect migration routesof species?

12.

Critical Habitat of Threatened or Endangered Species: Would disposal of material in thiscandidate site affect critical habitat of threatened or endangered species?

13.

Spatial Distribution of Benthos: Would disposal of material in this candidate site changethe benthic invertebrate community structure (e.g., fine-gain species to coarse-grainspecies, etc)?

14.

Marine Mammals: Would disposal of material in this candidate site affect marine mammalsor their habitat (e.g., gray whale feeding areas etc)?

15.

Human Health: Would disposal of material in this candidate site pose unacceptable risksto human health?

16.

Mineral Deposits: Would any known mineral deposits be affected by the disposal ofmaterial?

17.

Navigation Hazard: Would the disposal of material create a navigation hazard?18. Other Uses of Ocean: Would disposal of material impact other uses of the ocean notaddressed elsewhere, such as cables, pipelines, tow boat lanes, and pilot transfer points?

19.

Degraded Areas: Would disposal in this candidate site continue to affect or improve thedegraded area?

20.

Recreational Uses: Would disposal of material affect recreational uses?21.

h

23 of 32

Cultural/Historic Sites: Would disposal of material in this candidate site impact or protect acultural/historic site?

22.

Physical Oceanography, Waves/Circulation: Would disposal of material affectwave/circulation patterns?

23.

Direction of Transport/Potential for Settlement: Would disposal of material affect directionof sediment transport and/or potential for settlement?

24.

Monitoring: Would use of this candidate site affect either on-going monitoring or the abilityto monitor using conventional methods? Monitoring typically would include periodichydrographic surveys and could include sediment sampling or biological data collection.

25.

Shape/Size of Candidate Site: Is the candidate site suitable for the operation of a dredge?Maneuverability of the dredge? Is it orientated so the dredge can place material whileheading into the waves? Is the depth of water sufficient to open the hopper doors/dumpscow? Can the dredge operate safely?

26.

Is the size of the candidate site large enough for long-term use?27. Size of Buffer Zone: Is the candidate site a sufficient distance from important resources orfeatures to protect them from any effect of disposal?

28.

Potential for Cumulative Effects: Would disposal of material contribute to cumulativeeffects from other activities?

29.

Top of Page

Step 5: Preparation of Site Management PlanManagement Measures may include:

Directed disposal within the disposal site – to avoid or reduce impacts on sensitive benthiccommunities. This depends upon the dredging equipment used and the ability to controldisposal in the disposal site.Altering the time of year of dredging and disposal – to avoid critical life-cycle phases ofsensitive marine organisms.Loading and disposal management – to reduce dispersal of turbid plumes in sensitiveenvironments. This depends upon the availability of suitable equipment.Thin layer disposal – to improve recolonization by benthic organisms.

Site Management Plans Should Include:

Management objectives relating to possible adverse effects that could develop at thedisposal siteConsideration of the times, rates, quantities, and types of material disposedConsideration of the various methodologies of monitoring the movement andcharacteristics of disposed materialImpact hypotheses and a tiered approach for monitoring disposal operationsEffective monitoring programs for the material disposed

24 of 32

Target thresholds and associated response measures that may be applied should theproject implementation monitoring indicate outcomes significantly different than expected

Top of Page

IntroductionDescription of the project providing context for need of the sitea. Description and location of site (map and location coordinates, boundary of disposal area,boundary of release zone, bathymetry, etc. )

b.

Anticipated use of siteSite capacitya. Suitable materials to be disposed at the siteb. Summation of information utilized in determining the overall size of the site and its lifespan

c.

History of dredged material disposal at the sited. Consideration of anticipated closure date for site, if applicablee. Consideration of future uses of the sitef.

Goals and Objectives of the Management Plan. Where applicable, specific managementactivities designed to address concerns identified during the site selection process should beclearly stated.

Goals: e.g., Ensure sensitive resources are not affected, ensure dredged material remainswithin the site boundaries, etc.

a.

Objectives: e.g., Define site boundaries recognizing potentially dynamic nature ofsediment transport regime at a given site; define capacity of site recognizing sedimenttransport regime dynamics; provide economically/technically feasible site use conditionsnecessary for protection of marine environment; establish monitoring objectives; establishschedule for review/revision of the plan

b.

Regulatory Regime. Identify the statutory and regulatory authorities: international, federal, andprovincial.

Roles and Responsibilities. Identify the roles and responsibilities of site monitoring andmanagement actions. Identify responsible parties for conduct of the project implementationmonitoring and any required management measures. Identify government agencies withapproval authority.

Description of the Existing Environment. Summarize the characteristics of the dredging and

Information on human health risks should be coordinated with Health Canada.h

i

25 of 32

disposal sites and adjacent areas, including the water column, sediments, biota, resources andother uses (existing and potential) of the area.

Description of the Material for Disposal. Provide a summary of sediment types, their statusrelevant to the values in these Guidelines.

Description of Potential Impacts. Summarize both the potential short-term and long-termimpacts and any uncertainties regarding the predicted impacts.

Consultation and EngagementRecord of consultation/engagement activitiesa.

Disposal Site History. Activities at the site should be documented. For example:Known historical uses of disposal sitei. Transportation and disposal methods usedii.

Disposal Site Monitoring during project implementation.Monitoring requirements should be designed to provide the following:

Information documenting that disposal activities are occurring in compliance withpermit/site restrictions

i.

Information indicating the short-term fate of materials disposed of in the marineenvironment are consistent with predictions

ii.

a.

Should identify a tiered approach which links specific measured effects withpredetermined management actions

b.

Should be based upon development of realistic questions (null hypotheses) regardingpotential impacts at the site.

c.

Management Measures/Conditions or PracticesIdentification of disposal controls, conditions or requirementsa. Identification of critical amenities and site conditions warranting further consideration orcontinuing evaluation (e.g., unusual currents that could affect dispersal)

b.

May include:Disposal methods;i. Quantity restrictions;ii. Weather restrictions;iii. Sediment grain size restrictions;iv. Seasonal restrictions;v. Equipment restrictions;vi. Discharge point and allowable tolerances in position;vii. Provisions to address spillage, and leakage of dredged material;viii.

c.

Disposal Site Management Plan Review and RevisionFrequency of review/revision of plana.

References

A Site Monitoring and Management Plan is developed by the Applicant and included aspart of the permit application.

i

26 of 32

Top of Page

(updated January 2011)

Metals Digestion MethodAnalyticalMethod

Target DetectionLimit

(mg/kg dry weight)

ReferenceCriterion

(mg/kg dry weight)Cadmium EPA 3050B EPA 6020A 0.20 0.60Mercury EPA 3050B EPA 7471 0.05 0.75Arsenic EPA 3050B EPA 6020A 1.00 7.24Chromium EPA 3050B EPA 6020A 1.00 52.3Copper EPA 3050B EPA 6020A 1.00 18.7Lead EPA 3050B EPA 6020A 0.50 30.2Zinc EPA 3050B EPA 6020A 1.00 124Aluminium EPA 3050BLead EPA 3050B

OrganicsAnalyticalMethod

Target DetectionLimit

(mg/kg dryweight)

ReferenceCriterion(mg/kg dry

weight)Total polychlorinated biphenyls PCB pending pending pendingTotal polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH),[∑16]

EPA 8270C 0.05 2.50

Acenapthene EPA 8270C 0.05Naphthalene EPA 8270C 0.05Acenapthylene EPA 8270C 0.05Anthracene EPA 8270C 0.05Phenanthrene EPA 8270C 0.05Flourene EPA 8270C 0.05Fluoranthene EPA 8270C 0.05Benz[a]anthracene EPA 8270C 0.05Benzo[a]pyrene EPA 8270C 0.05Benzo[b]fluoranthene EPA 8270C 0.05Benzo[k]fluoranthene EPA 8270C 0.05Chrysene EPA 8270C 0.05Benzo[ghi]perylene EPA 8270C 0.05Dibenz[a,h]anthracene EPA 8270C 0.05Indeno[1,2,-cd]pyrene EPA 8270C 0.05Pyrene EPA 8270C 0.05

1

23

*

*

2

3

*

*

27 of 32

OrganicsAnalyticalMethod

Target DetectionLimit

(mg/kg dryweight)

ReferenceCriterion(mg/kg dry

weight)Physical Parameters Analytical

Method2Measurement

Total Organic Carbon EPA 9060A 0.01% dry weight

Physical Parameters Analytical Method MeasurementTotal Organic Carbon EPA 9060A 0.01% dry weightPercent Moisture ASTM D2794-00 1%Percent Grain Size Distribution ASTM D422-63 Sieve and pipette analysisGravel ASTM D422-63 16 mm – 2 mmSand ASTM D422-63 2 mm – 0.0625 mmSilt ASTM D422-63 0.0625 mm – 0.0039 mmClay ASTM D422-63 < 0.0039 mm

Top of Page

BathymetryThe measurement of the depths of a body of water.

BenthicA region at the bottom level of a body of water (including surface and sub-surface sediments) and/orthe organisms that reside within this region.

BenthosThe organisms and materials associated with or residing within the benthic region of a body of water.

2

3

2

Environment Canada may request testing for additional chemicals of concern on asite-specific basis.

1

Any equivalent method that can achieve the specified TDLs (Target Detection Limit) isacceptable provided the appropriate documentation of the method is provided as part ofthe dredging project's Sampling and Analysis Plan.

2

Suitable reference sediments must have chemical concentrations below these criteria.3

Indicates regulated required contaminants to be measured as per CEPA 1999 (CanadianEnvironmental Protection Act).

*

28 of 32

BioaccumulationThe accumulation of a substance from an environmental source within the tissue(s) of an exposedorganism.

Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD)A measurement of the oxygen required by aerobic microorganisms to decompose organic matterwithin a body of water.

ContaminantA substance, present within sediment, porewater, or tissues at levels that have the potential to harmthe marine environment. Substances are considered contaminants when they are present inconcentrations greater than naturally expected or contained in areas where they would not benaturally present.

DispersalThe spreading or movement of material from one area to another.

Disposal siteA site or area where aquatic disposal of a material is permitted in accordance with the terms andconditions of a valid disposal at sea permit. A disposal site is comprised of a release zone, and anyassociated footprint and area of influence.

Dissolved oxygenA measure of the level of oxygen that is available for use by organisms within a body of water, and anindicator of the ability of a body of water to support aquatic life.

ErodabilityThe tendency of a disposed material to be worn away by natural forces within the water body (versusits tendency to remain in place, despite the presence of natural forces that have the potential todisperse it).

EstuaryA coastal area, generally at the mouth of a river, where saltwater from the sea mixes with freshwaterflowing from river and their catchment areas.

High Molecular Weight HydrocarbonsHydrocarbons are a class of organic compounds that consist of carbon and hydrogen bonds only. A

29 of 32

hydrocarbon is considered to have a high molecular weight when it has five or more carbon rings.High molecular weight hydrocarbons are generally introduced into the environment as a result ofindustrial activities such as manufacturing, expending fossil fuels, or burning municipal and industrialwaste.

In situIn place or on site.

Littoral zoneRefers to the zone of water near or along the shoreline.

MacrofaunaFor the purposes of disposal at sea, macrofauna are benthic organisms that are larger than 0.5 mm .

MeiofaunaFor the purposes of disposal at sea, meiofauna are benthic organisms between 0.5 mm and 0.062mm in size.

MicrofaunaFor the purposes of disposal at sea, microfauna are benthic organisms that are smaller than 0.062mm .

NutrientsSubstances considered to promote the growth of organisms (e.g. nitrogen or phosphorus), but thatcan have adverse effects on the marine environment when present at elevated levels.

pHFor the purposes of disposal at sea, pH is a numeric value that measures the acidity or alkalinity ofthe sediment or water at the load or disposal site. pH values range on a scale of 0-14, with valuesless than 7 generally considered acidic and values greater than 7 generally considered alkaline orbasic. pH is one factor that affects the bioavailability of contaminants present in water or sediment.

PycnoclineRefers to the layer of water in the ocean where the water density increases rapidly with depth due tochanges in salinity and/or temperature. When the change in density is a result of temperature then itis referred to as the thermocline.

Quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC)

j

j

j

30 of 32

The management, procedures and techniques used to assess and ensure that reliable, accurate,and/or valid data are obtained.

Residual adverse effectsFor the purpose of this document, a residual adverse effect is a harmful effect caused by the disposalof material after the act of disposal has occurred.

SalinityA measure of the concentration of dissolved salts within a body of water.

SedimentSand, silt, clay, or other materials that have accumulated at the bottom of a water body or aresuspended within a water body.

ShoalingA change in wave behaviour due to a change in the morphology of the seabed, such as the creationof a mound on the sea floor following the dumping of dredged material, or the creation of adepression in the sea floor following the dredging of sediments.

SubstrateFor the purpose of disposal at sea, the substrate refers to the sediment layer at the bottom of a waterbody.

Suspended sedimentInorganic and organic particles that are suspended in water. Fine particles of sand, silt, and clay, aswell as other biological or other solid materials may be suspended in the water column.

ThermoclineSee Pycnocline.

Thin layer disposalA method of disposing of dredged material in a controlled manner, typically involving high-pressurespraying over open water, resulting in a layer of sediment 30 cm thick or less, once settled, and oftenconducted to minimize the physical effects of disposal on biological resources.

Tidal ellipseA visual representation of the direction and magnitude (vectors) of tidal currents throughout one ormore tidal cycles. The orientation of the tidal ellipse is measured in degrees, clockwise or counter-

k

31 of 32

clockwise with respect to one of the four cardinal directions.

Total Organic Carbon (TOC)A measurement of the total amount of organic material present within a body of sediment. TOC isoften used as an indicator of potential sediment contamination, because many types of contaminantswill bind preferentially to organic matter.

ToxicologyThe study of toxicity, involving an analysis of the potential or ability of a contaminant to cause adverseeffects in exposed organisms.

TurbidityTurbidity is a measure of the transparency of a body of water. Variations in the amount of sedimentthat is suspended within the water column is one factor that can affect turbidity levels.

Turbidity plumeIn the context of disposal at sea, a turbidity plume refers to a sudden visible increase in turbidity dueto an increase in suspended sediments during disposal.

Top of Page

Date modified:2014-11-21

Nybakken, J. W. 1993. Marine Biology: An Ecological Approach, Third Edition,HarperCollins College Publishers, New York.

Return to footnote j

Monitoring Environmental Impacts Associated with Open-water Thin-layer Disposal of NewWork Dredged Material at Gulport Harbor, Mississippi (http://www.dtic.mil/get-tr-doc/pdf?AD=ADA223136) (Final Report, in PDF (portable document format) Format 7814KB (kilobytes))

k

32 of 32

Home Pollution and Waste Managing and Reducing Waste Disposal at SeaApplicant’s Guide to applying for a Disposal at Sea permitAppendix C: Guidance for Disposal Site Selection

Environment and Climate Change Canada (/default.asp?lang=en&n=FD9B0E51-1)

Booklet Layout (default.asp?lang=En&n=8E789D01-1)

Introduction

Preface

Scientific/Technical Assessments for Selection of Disposal at Sea Sites

Important Notes

Appendix C.1: References

Appendix C.2: Quick Reference Guide

Appendix C.3: Disposal Site Monitoring and Management Plan

Appendix C.4: Disposal at Sea Minimum Sample Analytical Requirements

Appendix C.5: Site Selection Glossary

1 of 32

November 2013

Front cover photo: Dredged material disposal at a designated ocean disposal site off the PacificCoast of British Columbia.

Marine Protection Programs© Environment Canada.

Environment Canada strives to minimize the number of active disposal at sea sites so that potentialimpacts associated with disposal at sea activity are spatially limited and monitoring efforts arefocused and effective. Existing sites should always be considered first when preparing a disposalat sea permit application.

However, in those cases where use of an existing site is not operationally feasible or other issuesmay preclude its selection as the most appropriate disposal at sea site, new candidate disposal sitesmay be identified and characterized. Alterations to the physical environment, risks to human health,devaluation of marine resources and interference with other legitimate uses of the sea are primaryconcerns that will need to be addressed when applying for a new disposal site. In general, theDisposal at Sea permitting program at EC (Environment Canada) is designed to protect and preservethe marine environment from all sources of pollution.

Specified in this guidance is the information and data needed to demonstrate that disposal activities

2 of 32

at a newly proposed site will not cause unacceptable impacts to the marine environment, humanhealth, or other uses of the sea. Comprehensive information is needed on physical, chemical, andbiological characteristics of the seafloor and of the water column, along with an evaluation of thepotential impacts of the proposed disposal action upon other uses of the sea.

This guidance was developed following review of similar guidance documents in Australia, UnitedKingdom, United States, and the Netherlands. It is consistent with Canada’s obligations to implementthe London Protocol, an international treaty on the prevention of marine pollution from dumping.Although this guidance was primarily written for inert, inorganic geological matter (excavated material)and dredged material, portions of it may also be applicable to other waste types (e.g. (for example),fish waste or organic material).

The information and assessment requirements specified in this guidance document should befollowed closely; however, there may be exceptions in some cases, dependent upon the degree ofrisk involved and the size and complexity of the project.

Top of Page

Canada strives to prevent pollution and protect the marine environment by controlling the disposal ofwastes into the sea through the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA 1999). Arigorous permitting process for evaluation and management of wastes proposed for disposal at sea isimplemented through Environment Canada’s Marine Protection Programs. The primary obligation ofthe Applicant is to reduce the amount of waste generated for disposal. An assessment of alternativesthat includes considerations of feasible management options for the waste material must also beundertaken, and should include alternatives to disposal (e.g. (for example), re-use), and variousdisposal scenarios (e.g., upland or at sea).

If disposal at sea is found to be the appropriate management option, potential disposal sites must beidentified and characterized to understand the potential impacts on the receiving environment.Alterations to the physical environment, risks to human health, devaluation of marine resources andinterference with other legitimate uses of the sea are viewed as primary concerns. EnvironmentCanada strives to minimize the number of active disposal at sea sites so that potential impactsassociated with disposal at sea activity are spatially limited and monitoring efforts are focused andeffective. Existing sites should always be considered first when preparing a disposal at seapermit application.

However, in those cases where use of an existing site is not operationally feasible or other issuesmay preclude its selection as the most appropriate disposal at sea site, new candidate disposal sitesmust be identified and characterized. Disposal sites should be selected to minimize the impact on themarine environment, including interference with other uses of the sea. The five steps of disposal siteselection are shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Disposal at Sea Site Selection Process

Identification of Candidate Sites

3 of 32

What is the zone of operational feasibility?

Constraint Mapping:Where are environmentally sensitive areas?

Where are areas of incompatible uses?Where are areas potentially suitable for disposal (candidate sites)?

Characterization of the Candidate Sites

Physical, chemical, and biological environmentOther uses of the sites and nearby areas

Assessment of potential impacts at Candidate Sites

What are the near and far-field effects?What are the short and long-term effects?

Comparison of Candidate Sites

Compare potential adverse effects at each siteEvaluate compatibility with other uses

Assess acceptability of potential adverse impacts at the sitesIdentify applicable management and monitoring techniques

Preparation of the Site Management Plan

Identify compliance monitoring and field monitoring requirementsIdentify management measures to manage potential impacts

Top of Page

Step 1: Identification of Candidate SitesWhat is the zone of operational feasibility?

Constraint Mapping:Where are environmentally sensitive areas?

Where are areas of incompatible uses?

Step 1

Step 2

Step 3

Step 4

Step 5

4 of 32

Where are areas potentially suitable for disposal (candidate sites)?

Zone of Siting Feasibility

Sites for disposal at sea must be located in areas where disposal will not cause unacceptable impactsto the environment or to other uses of the sea. In order to effectively locate sites within potentiallyacceptable areas, the initial consideration should be of factors affecting the operational feasibility ofusing a site.

The zone of siting feasibility is the area within a feasible radius from the point of loading onto thevessel, and is determined by consideration of such factors as:

Seasonal weather restrictions and the type of disposal vessel, or equipment that will be utilizedNavigation restrictionsOperational and transport costs to the sitePolitical boundariesFeasibility of surveillance and monitoring

However, these considerations can be overridden by environmental or other practical concerns if allcandidate disposal site locations within the zone of siting feasibility would result in unacceptableimpacts. Alternate sites at greater distances should be considered when they offer environmentalbenefits at reasonable increases in costs.

When seasonal conditions limit the dredging schedule, practical considerations may also limitdistances between the dredging site and the disposal site so that transit times do not unduly prolongthe dredging cycle. Some seagoing barges and hopper dredges have a limited range of operation,defined primarily by safety considerations.

Once the zone of siting feasibility is established, a constraint mapping exercise can be undertaken inconsultation with EC, other federal/provincial/municipal government departments, First Nations andstakeholders as appropriate. Constraint mapping entails the identification of environmentally sensitiveareas and potentially incompatible uses within the zone of siting feasibility.

Constraint Mapping: Where are Environmentally Sensitive Areas within the Zone of SitingFeasibility?

Sensitive areas are those areas where natural resources could be adversely affected by disposal atsea, including, but not limited to:

Commercial, recreational, or aboriginal fish or shellfish habitatSpawning grounds/habitat of important species and their food organismsMigration routes of finfish or whales and other marine mammalsHabitat for species at riskAreas supporting nesting marine-associated avifauna, including seabird coloniesAreas supporting moulting, over-wintering, and staging marine-associated avifaunaProximity to areas of special scientific or biological importance, such as marine sanctuaries ormarine reserves

5 of 32

Concerns about the location of a disposal site will likely focus upon the species of local significanceand unique habitats or environmental features that ensure their continued viability. Sensitive habitatsnear the candidate site need to be identified, such as areas with abundant submerged aquaticvegetation or rocky outcrops. In addition, nearshore habitats should be identified including coastalmarshes, wetlands, kelp beds, and habitats that provide important habitat for juvenile and adultphases of sensitive species. These features should be identified and overlain on a map within thezone of siting feasibility.

Constraint Mapping: Where are Areas of Potentially Incompatible Uses?

Potentially incompatible uses should also be identified and overlain on the map within the zone ofsiting feasibility. Consultation with relevant federal /provincial/municipal government departments,First Nations, and stakeholders as appropriate should be conducted to determine the significance andpotential implications of “other uses” if a disposal site was situated within the same area. Potentiallyincompatible uses include, but are not limited to:

Proximity to Aboriginal/Traditional Uses in the vicinity of the candidate disposal sitesArcheological or other features in close proximity to natural or other features of historical orcultural importance, and areas of high aesthetic valueBeaches and water sportsEngineering uses of the sea floor, including mining, pipelines, water intake structures orundersea cablesNavigation and shipping lanesMilitary training and exclusion zones (e.g., given presence of unexploded ordinances)Mineral extractionAquaculture sitesPublic use of the shorelineProspective oil and gas exploration and developmentCommercial, recreational, and aboriginal fisheriesCommercial Diving sites

Some of the above uses may require the application of certain management measures to reducepossible impacts or possibly a buffer zone around them to ensure that they are adequately protected.

Constraint Mapping: Selection of Candidate Disposal Sites

Once the constraint mapping exercise is completed, and sensitive areas and areas of incompatibleuses are consolidated onto a map within the zone of siting feasibility, the available areas forcandidate disposal sites should become more apparent. See Figures 2 and 3. Existing sites shouldalways be considered first. Whenever possible, sites should be selected which have beenpreviously used for disposal of similar material.

If no potentially suitable disposal sites can be identified in the zone of siting feasibility, the geographicregion under consideration may be enlarged. If this is not feasible, the use of land-based alternativesmay need to be reconsidered for disposal.

The location and size of the disposal site are important issues to assess. Information is required todemonstrate that the candidate sites are:

a

6 of 32

Large enough that the bulk of the deposited material would remain either within the site limits orwithin a predicted area of impact after disposal while ensuring that the area impacted isnonetheless minimized (Note: this would not apply for sites selected for dispersivecharacteristics);Large enough in relation to anticipated disposal volumes that it would serve its function formany years; andSmall enough to ensure that environmental impacts can be predicted and effective monitoringcan be conducted in future.

During the selection of candidate sites, consultation should be occurring with the relevantfederal/provincial/territorial/municipal government departments, First Nations, and stakeholders asappropriate and necessary to confirm that candidate sites are feasible prior to further study or datacollection.

In the event that no constraints are identified, applicants should propose sites that are suitable for thematerial to be disposed. The following general characteristics have been found to minimize impacts tothe marine environment:

Deeper sites may be less dispersive and have less diverse biological communitiesLevel sites are generally more stableHigher energy sites are more suitable for disposal of material that may generate BiochemicalOxygen Demand (BOD; e.g., fisheries waste and organic matter)Stable sites are generally more suitable for excavated and dredged material

Top of Page

Figure 2: Example of constraint mapping within zone of siting feasibility to identify candidatedisposal sites (North and South)

The first map shows candidate sites and recreational fishing areas. The second map identifieshuman-powered recreation activities (i.e., kayaking, surfing, swimming, snorkeling, and Scuba

diving) in addition to sediment type (U.S. EPA 2012).

7 of 32

8 of 32

(U.S.EPA 2012)

Description of Figure 2

Top of Page

Figure 3: Map demonstrating the proposed disposal site in relation to potential shipwrecks,fishing and shellfishing areas in the vicinity (U.S. EPA 2008)

9 of 32

(U.S. EPA 2008)

Description of Figure 3

Top of Page

Step 2: Characterization of the Candidate SitesPhysical, chemical, and biological environment.

10 of 32

Other uses of the sites and nearby areas.

Description of the Characteristics of the Candidate Disposal Sites

Once constraint mapping is complete and candidate sites are identified in consultation withfederal/provincial/territorial/municipal government departments, First Nations and stakeholders, adetailed description of the characteristics of each site is needed. Information on historical uses of thesite and the surrounding area should be collected as part of this effort. Information needed includes:

1. General site characteristics

Latitude and longitude of the centrepoint of the candidate sites in decimal degrees to sixdecimal places, located on a map and should include proposed site boundaries (this may varyfor dispersive sites). Each candidate site should have a name.Historical disposal activities at or near the sitePresent and historical uses of, or events at or near the site that could impact sediment qualitySite characteristics or activities that could affect movement of sedimentsAny recent or historical spill events

2. Physical, chemical, and biological environment

Information regarding the physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of the water column andthe seabed are required for candidate sites as follows (see quick reference guide in Appendix C.2(default.asp?lang=En&n=8E789D01-1&offset=5&toc=show)):

Water ColumnPhysical Characteristics

Detailed bathymetry of the candidate sites and surrounding areasExpected water temperature and salinity at the time of disposal and any relevanttemporal/seasonal fluctuationsExpected background turbidity and natural fluctuations at the time of disposal and any relevanttemporal/seasonal fluctuationsAssessment of the seasonal current flow, tidal cycles, wave climate, and up-welling at thecandidate disposal sites, and identification of whether the disposal site is non-dispersive ordispersiveConsideration should be given to the following:

Short term measurements of current (i.e., during the disposal action) have little validity indetermining the transport of fines either in the water column or sediment on the sea floor.Long term measurements of currents (i.e., post-disposal, once the sediment has settled)may be necessary to refine the estimates of the dispersion of disposed materials.Other current and wave information may be required including:

Tidal period and orientation of the tidal ellipseMean direction and velocity of the surface and bottom driftsVelocities of storm-wave induced bottom currentsGeneral wind and wave characteristics

11 of 32

Average number of storm days per year

Biological Characteristics

Proximity to spawning, feeding, nursery, recruitment, migration, and other important habitatsA description of fisheries resources including known sensitive species, such as at risk species(e.g., those listed on the Species at Risk Act [SARA]), or habitat at or near the load site(s); aswell as communities and migratory species in the vicinity of the disposal site.Temporal/seasonal and spatial characteristics should be considered, to identify potentiallycritical times or circumstances when disposal should not take place including:

periods of migration from one part of an ecosystem to another, andgrowing, feeding, resting and breeding periods of sensitive or threatened species.

SedimentPhysical Characteristics

Particle size and TOC (Total organic carbon)% moistureOther parameters may be required based on site specific characteristics

Chemical characteristics (refer to Appendix C.4 (default.asp?lang=En&n=8E789D01-1&offset=7&toc=show)for Minimum Sample Analytical Requirements)

Hg, Cd, Pb, Cu, other heavy metalsHigh molecular weight hydrocarbonsPCB (Polychlorinated Biphenyl) and, PAHs (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons)Other contaminants of concern may need to be characterized based on site history (e.g.,PBDEs (polybrominated diphenyl ethers), dioxins and furans, chlorinated pesticides andnutrients)

BiotaBiological Characteristics

Marine habitats and the benthic community should be enumerated and characterized usingappropriate sampling techniques. Sampling plans are to be submitted to EC for review prior toconducting baseline studies.

Consideration of Other Uses of the Site or Surrounding Areas

Consideration should be given as to whether potentially incompatible uses at candidate sites could bemitigated by management measures. In addition, an assessment on the need for further consultationswith government, First Nations and stakeholders should be made once the initial physical, chemicaland biological data are available.

Top of Page

Step 3: Assessment of Potential Impacts at Candidate Sites

b

c

d

12 of 32

What are the near and far-field effects?

What are the short and long-term effects?

The candidate site or sites should be evaluated to determine potential adverse effects of the disposalactivity (see also the list of considerations below if there are any future predicted uses of a proposeddisposal site). Comprehensive testing of the waste material prior to evaluation of candidate disposalsites should provide details on its characteristics including the presence and mobility of contaminants.In addition, the quantities of material to be disposed should be specified along with information ondisposal management options. Information required includes:

Maximum quantity per disposal load in cubic metres or metric tonnes.Rate of disposal in cubic metres or metric tonnes per hour or per day.Frequency of disposal events per day, week, or month.Speed during disposal in knots or kilometres per hour.Time required for disposal event.Track followed during disposal event.Duration to complete all disposal activity for the project.

The evaluation of the potential effects of disposal of the waste material and its constituents mustconsider the near- and far-field fates (spatial effects) and also the short- and long-term effects(temporal effects) on marine resources and the environment. See the quick reference guide inAppendix C.2 (default.asp?lang=En&n=8E789D01-1&offset=5&toc=show).

The expected consequences of disposal should be described in terms of the habitats, processes,species, communities and uses that are expected to be affected. The precise nature of the predictedeffect (e.g., change, response, or interference) should be described. Assessment of the potentialeffects should lead to a concise statement of the expected consequences of the disposal activity i.e.,the ‘Impact Hypothesis.’ For sample impact hypotheses, see the quick reference guide in AppendixC.2 (default.asp?lang=En&n=8E789D01-1&offset=5&toc=show).

The impact hypotheses should integrate information on the type and characteristics of the material tobe disposed, the proposed disposal site conditions and pathways of concern including:

The nature of the sea bed: including its topography, geochemical and geological characteristics,data on benthic communities including fisheries resources and prior disposal activities in thearea.The physical nature of the water column: including depth, temperature, the possible existence ofa pycnocline/thermocline, currents (tidal, wave-induced, residual), and suspended matter wherethese characteristics may affect sediment transport at the site.The chemical and biological nature of the water column: including pH, salinity, dissolvedoxygen, nutrients, primary productivity, contaminant concentrations, e.g., trace metals.Biological and ecological effects of the disposal of dredged material: including toxicological andbioaccumulation effects, changes in community structure, disruption of ecological processes,degradation of water and sediment quality and alteration of sediment characteristics. Thesepossible effects must be considered within the disposal site and in the area that could be

13 of 32

influenced by the disposed material.

Quantitative analysis to address impacts of Total Suspended Solids (TSS) in sensitive environmentsincludes physical tests of basic sediment characteristics to predict the behavior of material afterloading and disposal. This would include full grain size analysis for prediction of turbidity plumecharacteristics during and after disposal, and to assess whether the material proposed for disposal isphysically different than the substrate at the disposal site. This analysis supports the prediction ofpost-disposal behaviour of the waste material. For the purpose of habitat protection, it isadvantageous to seek compatibility between the physical characteristics of the load site material andthe sediment type at the disposal site.

The method of loading (e.g. hydraulic or mechanical dredge) and disposal (e.g., hopper discharge ordischarge through marine-based pipes) can alter the characteristics of the material; therefore, it isimportant to determine physical, chemical, and biological characteristics as the material is releasedfrom the disposal vessel, in addition to the in situ characteristics. The most important physicalcharacteristics are grain size distribution and the cohesiveness/degree of consolidation.

Important considerations include:

Dispersion direction and distance of associated plumes: fine fractions associated with thedredged material may remain in suspension in t