Roberts Bank Terminal 2 EIS Executive Summary March 20151
Roberts Bank Terminal 2 EIS Executive Summary March 20151
Roberts Bank Terminal 2 EIS Executive Summary March 20151
Existing
Roberts Bank
Terminals
March 2015
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART 1: OVERVIEW OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. The Environmental Assessment Process. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3. Port Metro Vancouver (The Proponent). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4. Rationale for the Project. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5. Project Procurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
6. Project Setting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
7. Project Components and Activities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
8. Alternative Means of Carrying Out the Project. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
9. Project Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
10. Engagement and Consultation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
11. Conclusions of the Environmental Impact Statement . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 1
MARCH 2015
1 INTRODUCTION
The Roberts Bank Terminal 2 Project
(the Project) is a proposed new threeberth container terminal at Roberts Bank
in Delta, B.C., on Canadas west coast.
The Project would provide 2.4 million
twenty-foot equivalent units (TEUs) of
container capacity.
The Project would meet forecasted
growth in container capacity demand.
It is a key component of Port Metro
Vancouvers Container Capacity
Improvement Program (CCIP), a longterm strategy to deliver projects in
support of Canadas trade objectives.
DELTA
Existing
Roberts Bank
Terminals
MARCH 2015
The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) has been prepared according to the Guidelines for
the Preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement for the Roberts Bank Terminal 2 Project
(EIS Guidelines), issued by the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency in January 2014.
The EIS Guidelines define the scope of the Project to be assessed and identify the factors to be
considered within the EIS.
The purpose of the EIS is to provide information about the Project, to identify potential effects and
benefits of the Project, and to describe mitigation measures to reduce potential Project effects.
The EIS consists of the following volumes:
Volume 1 Introduction and Project Information (Sections 1.07.0)
Volume 1 provides an introduction to the Roberts Bank Terminal 2 Project including its context,
purpose and objectives. It contains a project overview, a discussion of the geographical setting
and a project description. It also introduces Port Metro Vancouver as the project proponent, a
summary of alternative means of carrying out the Project, the environmental assessment and
permitting process for the Project, and the extensive engagement and consultation process that
Port Metro Vancouver has undertaken with regulators, Aboriginal groups, local government and
the public.
Volume 2 Effects Assessment Methods and Physical Setting (Sections 8.09.0)
Volume 2 describes the methods used in the environmental assessment of the Project, including
the approach and key steps in selecting valued components, identifying mitigation measures,
and assessing potential Project-related changes and effects and cumulative effects. It includes
an overview of the physical setting of the Project, describing climate, coastal conditions and
geotechnical considerations in the vicinity of the Project. The volume contains assessments of
physical intermediate components: air quality, noise and vibration, light, coastal geomorphology,
surficial geology and marine sediment, marine water quality, and underwater noise.
Volume 3 Biophysical Effects Assessments (Sections 10.017.0)
Volume 3 includes an overview of the Projects marine and terrestrial setting, and effects
assessments for the marine biophysical valued components: marine vegetation, marine
invertebrates, marine fish, marine mammals, coastal birds, and ongoing productivity of
commercial, recreational and Aboriginal fisheries. The volume also includes the approach to
mitigating potential Project-related effects to these valued components.
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 1
MARCH 2015
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 1
FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT
WE ARE HERE
Project Description
Review
Project Description
submitted by Port
Metro Vancouver to
the CEA Agency
(Sept. 12, 2013)
CEA Agency-led
public comment
period regarding
Project Description
(Sept. 25Oct.15, 2013)
Determination of
Environmental
Assessment
Public comment
period regarding draft
Environmental Impact
Statement Guidelines
(Nov. 9Dec. 8, 2013)
Project referred to
Independent Panel
Review (Jan. 7, 2014)
Environmental Impact
Statement Guidelines
issued by CEA Agency
Development of
Environmental
Impact Statement
(EIS)
Port Metro Vancouver
develops EIS
Public comment
period regarding
Draft Panel Terms
of Reference
Environmental
Impact Statement
Completeness
Review
(5 months)
Submit EIS to CEA
Agency
Public comment
period regarding
completeness of Port
Metro Vancouvers
EIS submission
Independent Review
Panel
(14 months)
Panel-led environmental
assessment
Independent Review
Panel Report to
Minister of the
Environment
Environmental
Assessment
Decision
(5 months)
Minister of the
Environment issues
decision
2015
(Jan. 7, 2014)
2013
20132014
20142015
20152016
20162017
Federal environmental assessment process for the proposed Roberts Bank Terminal 2 Project
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 1
MARCH 2015
PROVINCIAL ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT
GUIDING PRINCIPLES
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 1
Port Metro
Vancouver is
Canadas largest
port, enabling
Canadian
businesses to
deliver their goods
and products to
markets around
the world while
providing Canadian
consumers and
manufacturers with
access to goods
and products
from the global
marketplace.
98,800 jobs;
$6.1 billion in wages; and
$9.7 billion in direct gross
domestic product across
Canada.
Each day, the port handles approximately
a half billion dollars of cargo ($187 billion
a year, based on 2014 cargo volumes),
which represents one-fifth of Canadas
total foreign trade in goods by volume. In
addition, Port Metro Vancouver supports
Canadian trade by facilitating the building
of port-related infrastructure necessary
to connect Canadas markets to trading
economies around the world, particularly
those in the Asia-Pacific region.
Strait of Georgia
LEGEND
Port
Metro
jurisdiction
contributors,
and theVancouvers
GIS User Community
8
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 1
MARCH 2015
CENTERM
VANTERM
Roberts Bank
DELTAPORT TERMINAL
WESTSHORE TERMINALS
Boundary Bay
BC FERRIES TERMINAL
increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), swisstopo, MapmyIndia, OpenStreetMap
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 1
10
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 1
MARCH 2015
While improvements
to existing
infrastructure
will help alleviate
capacity constraints
in the short term,
the Roberts
Bank Terminal 2
Project is required
to meet longer
term forecasted
container demand.
Canadian
Container
Traffic:
Forecast
and Actual Traffic Throughput
Throughput
Actual(2001)
vs.
Forecast
Container
OSC Coast
2001 West
3.5
3.0
Millions of TEUs
2.5
1.5
1
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
YEAR
Note: Based on source data presented by Ocean Shipping Consultants, 2013. The Fairview Container Terminal (Port of Prince Rupert) opened in 2007.
From 2007 onwards, the dotted line showing West Coast Actual Throughput includes Port Metro Vancouver and Port of Prince Rupert.
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 1
11
Millions of TEUs
Actual Throughput
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030
YEAR
Source:
Ocean
Shipping
Consultants,
Source: Ocean
Shipping
Consultants,
2014 2014
12
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 1
MARCH 2015
ALTERNATIVE
Increase capacity and
efficiency at existing
container terminals within
Port Metro Vancouvers
jurisdiction
MARCH 2015
LOCATIONS CONSIDERED
Increase capacity at
Deltaport Terminal
Increase capacity at
Centerm
CONCLUSIONS
Incremental capacity and
efficiency increases are
planned or underway at
Deltaport Terminal and
Centerm. These projects
will help meet short-term
container demand to the
early 2020s, but will not
meet forecasted longer term
requirements.
A new terminal at
Roberts Bank is the
only technically and
financially feasible
option to provide
the necessary
long-term container
capacity on the
west coast of
Canada.
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 1
13
ALTERNATIVE
Convert existing terminals or
properties within Port Metro
Vancouvers jurisdiction to
handle containers
CONCLUSIONS
Roberts Bank is an
established trade corridor
that is well positioned to
accommodate future growth
in containerized trade, as
it provides connections to
an existing road and rail
network and deep water
capable of handling large
container ships.
14
LOCATIONS CONSIDERED
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 1
MARCH 2015
Canadian West Coast Container Traffic: Forecast (2014) and Planned Capacity Increases
Roberts Bank
Terminal 2
Prince
Rupert
Stage 2
10
Maximum Capacity
Centerm
Millions of TEUs
Prince
Rupert
Stage 1
Deltaport
Actual Throughput
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030
YEAR
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 1
15
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 1
MARCH 2015
5 PROJECT PROCUREMENT
Port Metro Vancouver has initiated
Project procurement, in parallel with the
environmental assessment process, to
ensure that the capacity provided by
the Project can be available when it is
required in the mid-2020s. This approach,
consistent with large infrastructure
projects across Canada, would allow Port
Metro Vancouver to have the necessary
contracts and funding in place shortly
after the conclusion of the environmental
assessment process. Subject to
environmental permits and approvals and
a final investment decision, construction
of the Project could begin in 2018 and
would take approximately five-and-a-half
years to complete.
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 1
17
18
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 1
N
Boundary Bay
Airport
Delta
Existing Deltaport
Overpass
Widened Causeway
Tsawwassen
First Nation
Roberts Bank
Causeway
Marine Terminal
Expanded Tug Basin
Existing Landmark
Project Component
Project Rail
Additions/Modifications
Existing Roberts
Bank Terminals
Project Road
Additions/Modifications
Highway 17 (SFPR)
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 1
19
1. MARINE TERMINAL
The threeberth marine
terminal would
accommodate three
fully laden container
ships and provide
connections for
shore power.
20
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 1
MARCH 2015
2. WIDENED CAUSEWAY
The extent of
widening along the
causeway would
vary to minimize the
Project footprint
while meeting
the infrastructure
requirements of the
Project.
The expanded
Roberts Bank
tug basin would
accommodate
additional tugboats
to efficiently and
safely assist in
the arrival and
departure of ships
calling at the
existing and new
terminals.
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 1
21
Construction
activities would
take about
five-and-a-half
years and would
accommodate
fisheries closure
periods.
CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES
TERMINAL OPERATION
22
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 1
MARCH 2015
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 1
23
24
24
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 1
MARCH 2015
9 PROJECT BENEFITS
The Project would provide benefits to Canada, B.C. and Metro Vancouver as a
result of accommodating increased demand for trade, supporting economic growth,
providing employment opportunities during the Projects construction and operation
phases, and providing legacy benefits to neighbouring communities.
BENEFITS DURING CONSTRUCTION
Project construction
would generate
a total of 12,719
person-years of
direct, indirect
and induced
employment.
British Columbia
(Outside of Metro
Vancouver)
Total
Direct
4,150
4,150
Indirect
3,942
2,322
6,264
Induced
1,632
673
2,305
Total
9,724
2,995
12,719
British Columbia
(Outside of Metro
Vancouver)
Total
LABOUR INCOME
Direct
494
494
Indirect
247
127
374
Induced
83
46
129
824
173
997
Total
GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT
Direct
496
496
Indirect
418
198
616
Induced
149
76
225
1,063
274
1,337
Total
ECONOMIC OUTPUT
1,945
1,945
Indirect
Direct
837
507
1,344
Induced
238
123
361
3,020
630
3,650
Total
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 1
25
127.4
B.C. Government
154.3
Local Government
19.6
Total
301.3
During the operation phase, on-terminal activities would generate an annual total of
1,553 person-years of direct, indirect and induced employment.
EMPLOYMENT DURING OPERATION1 (PERSON-YEARS PER YEAR)
Metro Vancouver
British Columbia
(Outside of Metro
Vancouver)
Total
Direct
835
93
928
Indirect
109
114
Induced
468
43
511
1,412
141
1,553
Total
On-terminal and off-terminal (outside of the Project scope) activities associated with increased demand for approximately 2 million TEUs per
year of containerized trade would support approximately 12,400 direct, indirect and induced person-years of employment and $813 million
in wages annually. Off-terminal activities include services provided by truck drivers, harbour pilots, tugboat operators, the Canada Border
Services Agency, railways, transload and distribution facility operations, and container storage yards, and would generate an estimated
6,700 person-years of direct, 3,100 person-years of indirect and 1,050 person-years of induced employment annually, an estimated total of
10,850 person-years.
26
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 1
MARCH 2015
On-terminal activities during operation would account for approximately $186 million
in wages, $212 million in provincial GDP and about $291 million in total economic
output each year.2
ECONOMIC OUTPUT DEVELOPMENT BENEFITS DURING OPERATION
($ MILLIONS PER YEAR)
Metro Vancouver
British Columbia
(Outside of Metro
Vancouver)
Total
LABOUR INCOME
Direct
138.1
15.3
153.4
Indirect
5.6
0.4
6.0
Induced
25.8
0.4
26.2
169.5
16.1
185.6
139.8
15.5
155.3
Indirect
9.2
1.5
10.7
Induced
44.8
0.9
45.7
193.8
17.9
211.7
Direct
184.1
184.1
Indirect
31.2
2.2
33.4
Induced
71.3
2.0
73.3
286.6
4.2
290.8
Total
GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT
Direct
Total
ECONOMIC OUTPUT
Total
Annual average tax payments to the three levels of government by the terminal
operator, infrastructure developer, suppliers and Project-associated workers would be
approximately $42 million.
GOVERNMENT REVENUE DURING OPERATION ($ MILLIONS PER YEAR)
Federal Government
22.4
B.C. Government
12.8
Local Government
6.9
Total
42.1
On-terminal and off-terminal activities would generate an estimated annual average of $1.22 billion in GDP and $2.36 billion in total
economic output. Off-terminal activities associated with increased demand for approximately 2 million TEUs per year of containerized trade
would generate an estimated annual average of $1.01 billion in GDP and $2.07 billion in total economic output.
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 1
27
BENEFITS TO ABORIGINAL
PEOPLES
28
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 1
MARCH 2015
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 1
29
30
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 1
MARCH 2015
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 1
31
32
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 1
MARCH 2015
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 1
33
34
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 1
MARCH 2015
11 CONCLUSIONS OF THE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
Port Metro Vancouver proposes to build
the Roberts Bank Terminal 2 Project,
a new three-berth container terminal at
Roberts Bank in Delta, British Columbia.
The development of the Project is
intended to meet forecasted growth
in container capacity demand and is
consistent with Port Metro Vancouvers
mandate under the Canada Marine
Act to facilitate international trade to
support the growth of the Canadian
economy while providing a high level of
environmental protection. The Project
would be privately funded.
Demand for containerized trade through
Canadas west coast is growing,
primarily as a result of Canadian
resource exports, and consumer goods
and manufacturing inputs imported
from Asia. Even with recent, current
and planned improvements to existing
infrastructure undertaken by Port Metro
Vancouver and its tenants and terminals,
and planned capacity increases in Prince
Rupert, independent forecasts show that
more container capacity will be required
by the early to mid-2020s. Following
an extensive analysis of alternative
locations and means of providing
additional container capacity, both within
and outside its jurisdiction, Port Metro
Vancouver concludes the Project is the
only technically and financially feasible
option to serve the long-term growth of
Canadas import and export markets.
The 2.4 million twenty-foot equivalent
units of container capacity the Project
would provide would ensure Canadian
exporters are able to get their products
to markets around the world, and that
Canadian consumers and businesses
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 1
35
36
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 1
MARCH 2015
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 1
37
DELTA
Existing
Roberts Bank
Terminals
March 2015
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART 2: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
12. Environmental Assessment Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
13. Biophysical Setting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
14. Summary of Results: Intermediate Components. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Air Quality (EIS Section 9.2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Noise and Vibration (EIS Section 9.3) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
Light (EIS Section 9.4). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
Coastal Geomorphology (EIS Section 9.5). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
Surficial Geology and Marine Sediment (EIS Section 9.6). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
Marine Water Quality (EIS Section 9.7). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
Underwater Noise (EIS Section 9.8). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
Population (EIS Section18.4). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
15. Summary of Results: Valued Components. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
Marine Vegetation (EIS Section11.0). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
Marine Invertebrates (EIS Section12.0). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
Marine Fish (EIS Section13.0). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
Marine Mammals (EIS Section14.0). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
Coastal Birds (EIS Section15.0). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
Ongoing Productivity of Commercial, Recreational and Aboriginal Fisheries (EIS Section16.0). . . . 80
Mitigation Framework for Marine Biophysical Valued Components (EIS Section17.0). . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
Labour Market (EIS Section19.0) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
Economic Development (EIS Section 20.0). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
Local Government Finances (EIS Section 22.0). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
Services and Infrastructure (EIS Section 23.0). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
Marine Commercial Use (EIS Section 21.0). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
Outdoor Recreation (EIS Section 24.0). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
Land and Water Use (EIS Section 26.0). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
Visual Resources (EIS Section 25.0) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
Human Health (EIS Section 27.0). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
Archaeological and Heritage Resources (EIS Section 28.0). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
16. Other Effects Assessments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
Potential Accidents or Malfunctions (EIS Section 30.0). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
Effects of the Environment on the Project (EIS Section 31.0) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
Effects of the Project on Potential or Established Aboriginal and Treaty Rights and Related
Interests, Including the Current Use of Land and Resources by Aboriginal People for
Traditional Purposes (EIS Section 32.0) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
17. Environmental Management Plans and Follow-Up Program (EIS Section 33.0). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
40
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
ISSUES SCOPING
PROJECT
ACTIVITIES
PROJECT
CHANGE
INTERMEDIATE
COMPONENTS
Outdoor
Recreation
(Fishing)
Marine Water
Quality
Dredging
Sediment
Re-suspension
Dyke
Construction
Commercial,
Recreational and
Aboriginal Fisheries
(Fishing)
Surficial
Geology
and Marine
Sediment
Marine
Fish
Marine
Commerical Use
(Fishing)
Human
Health
Coastal Birds
(Predator)
Marine
Mammals
(Predator)
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
41
Intermediate Components
Intermediate components are components of the physical or human environment that can be changed by the
Project and then subsequently potentially result in an effect on a valued component.
The eight intermediate components identified for the Project are:
Air Quality
Light
Underwater Noise
Coastal Geomorphology
Population
Marine Invertebrates
Marine Fish
Marine Mammals
Coastal Birds
42
Sub-Components
Eelgrass
Intertidal Marsh
Macroalgae
Biomat
Biofilm
Pacific Salmon
Reef Fish
Forage Fish
Flatfish
Demersal Fish
Toothed Whales
Baleen Whales
Seals and Sea Lions
Shorebirds
Waterfowl
Herons
Diving Birds
Raptors
Gulls and Terns
Passerines
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
Valued Component
Sub-Components
Pacific salmon
Groundfish
Forage Fish
Crabs
Labour Market
None
Economic Development
None
None
Housing
Emergency and Health Services
Municipal Infrastructure
Seafood Harvesting
Marine Fish Harvesting
Guided Sport Fishing
Marine-Based Tourism
None
Visual Resources
None
Outdoor Recreation
Human Health
Accidents or Malfunctions
Effects of the Environment on the Project
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
43
Once intermediate components and valued components were identified, assessment boundaries were
established or identified for each component.
The two primary assessment boundaries3 are:
Temporal assessment boundaries encompass the periods during which the Project is expected
to interact with intermediate and valued components via effects pathways. These boundaries were
determined based on the timing and duration of the Project, including the major phases of construction
and operation (including maintenance activities). Temporal characteristics, such as species-specific life
cycle characteristics (e.g., breeding, nesting, rearing, overwintering), were also considered to understand
when and for how long each valued component may interact with and potentially be affected by theProject.
Spatial assessment boundaries include both local and regional assessment areas:
The local assessment area includes the area within which the Project components and activities
would interact with and potentially have an effect on a valued component or intermediate component.
The regional assessment area provides the regional context for the assessment of potential Projectrelated effects within the local assessment area, and, for most valued components, encompasses the
area within which cumulative effects are expected to occur.
The map below identifies locations that are referenced in the descriptions of spatial boundaries throughout the
assessment summaries.
44
In addition to temporal and spatial boundaries, the assessment includes the consideration of administrative and technical boundaries that may
apply to some valued components.
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
RESIDUAL EFFECTS
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
45
13 BIOPHYSICAL SETTING
This section of the Executive Summary provides an overview of the biophysical setting in the
vicinity of the Project.
46
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
INTERTIDAL ZONE
SUBTIDAL ZONE
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
47
48
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
Air quality will improve in the future, with or without the Project, as a result of improvements in
engine technologies and the use of cleaner fuels.
Project construction activities are predicted to cause a small increase in air contaminant concentrations.
Levels of criteria air contaminants (i.e., carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, sulphur dioxide,
particulate matter, and ground-level ozone) and trace organic contaminants (i.e., formaldehyde and
other contaminants related to fuel combustion) are predicted to be below air quality criteria on land
during both Project construction and operation, with limited exceptions.
Project activities are expected to have a negligible effect on future ozone levels.
Project activities are expected to increase greenhouse gas emissions (i.e., carbon dioxide,
methane, and nitrous oxide), as would expected increases in activity levels at the existing Roberts
Bank terminals.
Although Project activities would emit black carbon, black carbon is expected to decrease in the
future with the Project due to equipment fleet turnover at existing Roberts Bank terminals to newer
engines that meet more stringent emission standards for particulate matter.
The implementation of shore power is expected to decrease predicted future emissions during
Project operation.
Cumulative changes in air quality resulting from Project activities and operation of other certain and
reasonably foreseeable projects and activities are predicted to be small, relative to expected future
ambient air quality levels without these inputs.
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
49
AIR QUALITY
50
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
AIR QUALITY
Key Findings
Generally, air quality is expected to improve in the
future, either with or without the Project, as a result
of improvements in engine technologies and the use
of cleaner fuels.
Greenhouse Gases
MARCH 2015
Roberts Bank
Terminal 2 Project
BC Ferries Terminal
Westshore Terminals
150
Deltaport Terminal
Annual Emissions
(tonnes per year)
100
50
ist
in
co
nd
iti
on
s
ct
ed
(w fu
ith tu
ou re
t t co
he nd
Pr itio
oj ns
ec
t)
Fu
(w tur
ith e c
th on
e di
Pr tio
oj ns
ec
t)
Ex
pe
Ex
200
Black Carbon
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
51
Project-related changes in annual average noise levels in communities near the Project are
expected to be minor and, for the most part, not perceptible.
Some changes in noise conditions that could be perceptible include:
Increased noise during periods of peak construction activity.
The number of intermittent noises related to cargo handling and train shunting during
operation would increase, but the noise levels perceived from shore would be the same
or lower than noise levels from the existing Roberts Bank terminals, since the new marine
terminal would be located further from shore.
Increased noise in marine areas is expected to be perceptible close to the terminal.
The Project in combination with other certain and reasonably foreseeable projects and activities is
expected to result in minimal incremental cumulative changes to noise in areas close to road and
rail corridors.
The construction and operation of the marine terminal and causeway is not expected to result in
perceptible increases in levels of ground-borne vibration.
52
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
Existing Conditions
Key Findings
Farming activities;
Aircraft;
Marine vessels;
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
53
Overall, the Project is not expected to change the general light environment of the Lower Mainland
and the Gulf Islands, and no measurable incremental cumulative changes related to light are
expected.
Project-related lighting is expected to result in a minimal increase in light trespass levels.
Increases in sky glow levels are expected, but are not anticipated to result in a noticeable change
from existing conditions.
Existing Conditions
54
Key Findings
Overall, the Project is not expected to change the
light environment in terms of light trespass, except in
areas immediately adjacent to the terminal.
Minimal changes in sky glow are also expected,
resulting in a change in the light environment at
one location on Galiano Island. These changes are
not expected to result in a noticeable change in the
visibility of stars.
No measurable incremental cumulative changes
related to changes in light are anticipated to result
from the Project in combination with other projects
and activities.
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
Changes to coastal geomorphology are not expected from Project activities, but are related to the
terminal footprint itself, which would interact with tidal currents and wind-generated waves.
The Project layout and configuration has been modified to minimize the potential for a number of
adverse changes to geomorphology during construction and operation. An example is locating the
terminal almost entirely within the subtidal zone of Roberts Bank.
The Project is expected to result in localized changes to coastal geomorphology resulting from the
terminal footprint.
The Project is not expected to result in incremental cumulative changes to coastal geomorphology.
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
55
COASTAL GEOMORPHOLOGY
Key Findings
The Project layout and configuration have been
modified to minimize the potential for a number of
adverse changes to geomorphology during Project
construction and operation. An example is locating
the terminal almost entirely within the subtidal zone at
Roberts Bank.
Changes to coastal geomorphology are not expected
from terminal development activities, but are related
to the terminal footprint itself. The footprint would
interact with tidal currents and wind-generated waves,
resulting in localized alterations to sediment transport,
sediment erosion and deposition, and freshwater and
marine water flow exchange in the construction and
operation phases.
During causeway construction, drainage channels
are expected to form on the intertidal flats adjacent
to the causeway. This change would occur during
construction only, and it is temporary and reversible.
Port Metro Vancouver would ensure the study and
management of potential channel formation during
the construction phase, and changes would be
incorporated in detail design as required.
Changes from the expansion of the tug basin include
the conversion of local tidal flats to subtidal waters.
Although the formation of additional tidal channels
is not anticipated, a small increase in the size of an
existing channel is likely.
No incremental cumulative changes in coastal
geomorphology are anticipated to result from the
Project in combination with other projects and
activities.
56
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
There are no Project-related inputs of contaminants, and changes in sediment contaminant levels
through sediment re-suspension or disposal are not expected.
Construction activities are expected to cause minimal or no changes relative to natural variability.
The Project is expected to result in changes to surficial geology and marine sediment. As a result of
the terminal footprint, localized changes in sediment erosion and deposition are predicted, and are
expected to be minimal relative to existing natural variability.
The Project is not expected to result in incremental cumulative changes to surficial geology and
marine sediment.
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
57
Key Findings
Changes to surficial geology and marine sediment
during Project construction activities are expected
to be minimal or undetectable relative to natural
variability. Changes in sediment contaminant levels
are not expected.
The terminal footprint is predicted to alter tidal
currents and interactions with Fraser River waters.
Initially, it is predicted to cause seabed erosion and
sediment deposition near the terminal. Subsequently,
it is predicted to increase fine sediment deposition on
portions of the tidal flat within the range of existing
natural variability.
No incremental cumulative changes in surficial
geology and marine sediment quality are anticipated
to result from the Project in combination with other
projects and activities.
58
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
Construction activities are not expected to alter water contaminant or nutrient levels, pH, dissolved
oxygen, or temperature.
Increases in total suspended solids levels from construction activities are expected to be temporary
and minimal relative to existing natural variability.
The Project is expected to result in changes to marine water quality. As a result of the terminal
footprint, localized changes in salinity and turbidity are predicted in the intertidal zone, but within the
natural ranges currently experienced.
The Project is not expected to result in incremental cumulative changes to marine water quality.
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
59
Key Findings
Project construction and operation activities are not
expected to alter water contaminant or nutrient levels,
pH, dissolved oxygen, or temperature.
Increases in total suspended solids levels from
activities associated with terminal development,
causeway widening and expansion of the tug basin
are expected to be temporary and negligible or
minimal, relative to existing natural variability.
As a result of the terminal footprint and anticipated
changes in the distribution of fresh water from the
Fraser River and marine water from the Strait of
Georgia, localized changes in salinity and turbidity
are predicted. These changes are anticipated to be
within the natural range currently experienced on the
intertidal flats.
Stormwater and treated wastewater effluent and
discharge during Project operation would be
managed according to standard management
practices and regulations. Operation activities are not
expected to adversely affect marine water quality.
No incremental cumulative changes in marine water
quality are anticipated to result from the Project in
combination with other projects and activities.
60
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
61
UNDERWATER NOISE
Existing Conditions
Key Findings
62
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
Key Findings
Scope of Assessment
The population assessment examined the existing
labour force in Metro Vancouver and other parts of the
Lower Mainland to determine whether sufficient and
qualified local labour was available to meet Project
needs during the construction and operation phases.
The study area and existing conditions encompassed
the population of Metro Vancouver, with a focus
on potential changes to the populations of the
Corporation of Delta and Tsawwassen First Nation.
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
63
64
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
Overall, net productivity of marine vegetation is expected to increase with the Project, without
mitigation, and would be further increased with the implementation of environmental management
plans and the creation of habitat.
Predicted decreases in productivity for macroalgae (seaweed) resulting from direct mortality during
Project construction can be mitigated through the incorporation of rocky shoreline in the terminal
and causeway perimeter and through the creation of subtidal rock reef habitat.
The composition of the species within the biofilm community varies between seasons under
existing conditions. With the Project, biofilm composition is expected to change temporarily during
freshet in response to decreases in salinity, and return to existing conditions outside of the annual
freshet period.
The Project is not expected to result in any significant adverse residual effects to marine vegetation.
The Project is not expected to result in any incremental adverse cumulative effects to marine
vegetation.
Valued Component Overview
Marine vegetation provides habitat and food for
invertebrates, fish and birds, and is an indicator of
ecosystem health. An assessment was undertaken to
determine the potential effects of the Project on the
productivity of marine vegetation.
The results of the marine vegetation assessment
were considered in the assessments of marine
invertebrates, marine fish, marine mammals, coastal
birds, human health, and current use of land and
resources for traditional purposes.
Scope of Assessment
The assessment of marine vegetation focused on five
sub-components:
Eelgrass, including native and non-native species;
Intertidal marsh, such as bulrush and
pickleweed species;
Macroalgae, commonly known as seaweed;
Biomat, a mat-type layer consisting of bluegreen algae and diatoms; and
Biofilm, a thin dense layer of microscopic
photosynthetic algae and bacteria that is an
important source of food for western sandpiper
and other shorebirds during migration.
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
65
MARINE VEGETATION
Potential Effects
Interactions between Project components and
activities and marine vegetation were considered and
the following effects were identified:
Existing Conditions
Mitigation Measures
66
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
MARINE VEGETATION
Key Findings
Overall, net productivity of marine vegetation is expected
to increase with the Project, without mitigation, and
would be further increased with the implementation
of environmental management plans and the creation
of habitat. The overall productivity increase is due to
sheltering of the intertidal zone shoreward of the
terminal, which would optimize physical conditions
for marine vegetation.
During Project construction and operation, changes in
productivity of eelgrass, biofilm and biomat are predicted
to be negligible (i.e., not measurable or detectable), while
increases in productivity of intertidal marsh are expected.
Productivity of rockweed, a macroalgae, is predicted to
decrease during construction and operation. This decrease
can be mitigated through the creation of on-site subtidal
rock reef habitat.
The Project is expected to temporarily influence
community composition of biofilm during freshet from
terminal footprint-related changes in salinity, but is
expected to return to existing conditions outside of the
annual freshet period.
The assessment concludes there are no significant
adverse residual effects from the Project to marine
vegetation, as it would continue to maintain its existing
ecological functions. The Project is not expected to
result in any incremental adverse cumulative effects to
marine vegetation.
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
67
Overall, a minor decrease in the net productivity of marine invertebrates (animals that lack a spinal
column) is expected.
A productivity increase of infaunal and epifaunal invertebrates (e.g., marine worms and small
crustaceans) is expected.
Productivity decreases for bivalve shellfish (e.g., clams and cockles), Dungeness crabs, and
orange sea pens (a soft coral) as a result of permanent loss of subtidal sand habitat associated
with the terminal footprint can be partially mitigated through the implementation of environmental
management plans (including salvaging and transplanting) and the creation of on-site habitat.
The Project is not expected to result in any significant adverse residual effects to marine
invertebrates.
The Project is not expected to result in any incremental adverse cumulative effects to marine
invertebrates.
68
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
MARINE INVERTEBRATES
Existing Conditions
Existing conditions were characterized for
representative species for each of infaunal and
epifaunal invertebrates, bivalve shellfish, Dungeness
crabs and orange sea pens. Marine invertebrate
communities are highly variable, both spatially
and temporally, primarily due to naturally ranging
environmental factors.
Infaunal and epifaunal invertebrates at Roberts Bank
are diverse, healthy and well-established. Several
groups of bivalves at Roberts Bank, including clams,
cockles, oysters and mussels, are commercially
valuable or culturally important to Aboriginal peoples,
but shellfish harvesting is prohibited by Biotoxin and
Sanitary Closures imposed by Fisheries and Oceans
Canada. Predation by a variety of marine invertebrate,
marine fish and bird species is a major source of
adult bivalve shellfish mortality. Dungeness crabs are
widely distributed at Roberts Bank; the major source
of mortality of juveniles is predation by numerous
marine bird and fish species, while the major source
of adult mortality is due to fisheries, which harvest
over 90 per cent of legal-sized male crabs in the
Fraser River estuary. Orange sea pens are densely
aggregated within the terminal footprint.
Potential Effects
Interactions between Project components and
activities and marine invertebrates were considered
and the following adverse effect was identified:
Mitigation Measures
Measures to avoid, reduce or offset the potential
effect include:
MARCH 2015
Key Findings
During construction and operation, the Project
is expected to result in a net decrease in marine
invertebrate productivity, both before and after
mitigation is implemented. Increases in productivity
of infaunal and epifaunal invertebrate communities
and decreases in productivity for bivalve shellfish,
Dungeness crab and orange sea pens are predicted.
Short-term productivity losses are due to direct
mortality and losses of available habitat within the
Project footprint.
Productivity decreases can be partially mitigated
through the implementation of environmental
management plans, including crab salvages and
transplanting of orange sea pens, and through the
creation of eelgrass, intertidal marsh, mudflat and
sandy gravel beach habitats.
While the Project is predicted to cause losses of
productivity of bivalve shellfish, Dungeness crabs
and orange sea pens, the scale of change is minor
in the context of natural variability and would not
compromise the population integrity or ecological
function. The assessment concludes there are no
significant adverse residual effects from the Project
to marine invertebrates. The Project is not expected
to result in any incremental adverse cumulative
effects to marine invertebrates.
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
69
Overall, marine fish are expected to experience a minor decrease in productivity with the Project.
Minor decreases in productivity resulting from direct mortality and disturbance from underwater
noise during Project construction, and permanent loss of subtidal sand habitat associated with
the terminal footprint, can be partially mitigated through the implementation of environmental
management plans and the creation of habitat.
Residual effects are anticipated for flatfish and forage fish as a result of subtidal sand habitat loss
and underwater noise.
The Project is not expected to result in any significant adverse residual effects to marine fish.
The Project is not expected to result in measurable incremental adverse cumulative effects to
marine fish.
Valued Component Overview
Marine fish influence the structure and function of
ecosystems, contribute to overall ecosystem health
and are of high social, cultural and commercial
value. An assessment was undertaken to determine
the effects of the Project on the productivity of
marine fish.
The results of the marine fish assessment were
considered in the assessments of marine mammals,
coastal birds, marine commercial use, outdoor
recreation, human health, current use of land
and resources for traditional purposes, and the
ongoing productivity of commercial, recreational and
Aboriginal fisheries.
Scope of Assessment
The assessment of marine fish focused on five subcomponents:
Pacific salmon, represented by chinook
and chum;
Reef fish, represented by lingcod and
rockfish species;
Forage fish, represented by Pacific sand lance,
surf smelt, Pacific herring and shiner perch;
Flatfish, represented by English sole and starry
flounder; and
Demersal fish (fish living near or on the seabed),
represented by threespine stickleback and
Pacific staghorn sculpin.
70
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
MARINE FISH
Potential Effects
Interactions between Project components and
activities and marine fish were considered and the
following adverse effect was identified:
Existing Conditions
Existing conditions were characterized for each of
the five sub-components. Existing conditions for
marine fish are influenced by previous developments
and current activities at Roberts Bank, including the
development of the Roberts Bank and BC Ferries
terminals, fishing pressure on species such as Pacific
salmon, the dynamic natural environment, availability
and quality of habitat, and availability of prey.
Chinook, chum and pink salmon are typically the
most abundant species found at Roberts Bank.
Roberts Bank provides refuge habitats for juvenile
salmon, particularly during ebbing tides. Fraser River
stream-type chinook stocks are declining.
At Roberts Bank, artificial reefs offer habitat
for lingcod, and copper and quillback rockfish.
Populations are low and fisheries restrictions have
been implemented and marine reserves created to
allow for recovery of rockfish populations.
Numerous forage fish species use nearshore
shallow habitats in the inter-causeway area,
particularly in the summer, although some species
are found year-round at Roberts Bank. Many flatfish
species have been documented in the intertidal and
subtidal areas at Roberts Bank, mainly as juveniles,
suggesting that Roberts Bank is important for rearing
for these species.
Mitigation Measures
Measures to avoid, reduce or offset the potential
effect include:
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
71
MARINE FISH
Key Findings
Overall, marine fish are expected to experience a
minor decrease in productivity in the future with
the Project.
Minor decreases in productivity are anticipated
during the construction and operation phases for all
marine fish sub-components, with the exceptions
of negligible changes in productivity for certain
species including adult chinook and chum salmon
(representative species for sockeye and other
Pacific salmon species) and lingcod, and an
increase in productivity for shiner perch during
the operation phase.
Productivity decreases can be partially mitigated
through the implementation of environmental
management plans and the creation of habitat.
Residual effects are anticipated for flatfish and forage
fish as a result of permanent loss of subtidal sand
habitat associated with the terminal footprint and
disturbance from underwater noise.
The assessment concludes there are no significant
adverse effects from the Project, as marine fish
productivity or long-term integrity would not be
compromised. The Project is not expected to result
in measurable incremental adverse cumulative effects
to marine fish.
72
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
With the implementation of proposed mitigation measures, potential Project-related adverse effects
on marine mammals from Project construction and operation activities and terminal footprintrelated changes will be avoided or reduced, except for potential adverse effects from underwater
noise produced during operations.
Project-related adverse residual effects from underwater noise during operations to marine
mammals are expected to be not significant.
The Project is not anticipated to adversely affect the features of southern resident killer whale
critical habitat when needed for their life functions.
The Project will not limit the survival or population recovery of southern resident killer whales.
Cumulative effects to baleen whales, seals and sea lions, and toothed whales other than southern
resident killer whales, are expected to be not significant.
Due to their Endangered status and lack of recovery of the population, southern resident killer
whales are assumed to be already significantly adversely affected; therefore, cumulative effects to
southern resident killer whales are expected to remain significant.
Valued Component Overview
Marine mammals are top predators in the Strait of
Georgia marine ecosystem, the focus of a substantial
wildlife viewing and ecotourism industry, and
culturally valued by the public and Aboriginal groups.
An assessment was undertaken to determine the
potential effects of the Project on marine mammals.
The results of the marine mammal assessment were
considered in the assessments of marine commercial
use, human health, and current use of land and
resources for traditional purposes.
Scope of Assessment
The assessment of marine mammals focused on
three sub-components:
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
73
MARINE MAMMALS
Potential Effects
Interactions between Project components and
activities and marine mammals were considered and
the following potential adverse effects were identified:
Vessel strikes.
74
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
MARINE MAMMALS
Key Findings
Project-related adverse residual effects to marine
mammals are expected to be not significant, based on
the following:
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
75
76
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
Potential Project-related effects to coastal birds include acoustic and visual disturbances during
construction, loss of subtidal habitat for diving birds, and mortality of barn owl from vehicle
collisions near the rail tie-ins and emergency access road at the east end of the causeway.
Project-related effects can be fully mitigated through the implementation of environmental
management plans and the creation of habitat, except for residual productivity loss associated with
loss of subtidal habitat for diving birds.
The Project is not expected to result in any significant adverse residual effects to coastal birds.
The Project is not expected to result in measurable incremental adverse cumulative effects to
coastal birds.
Valued Component Overview
The Fraser River estuary is an important ecosystem
for overwintering and migrating birds, supporting
large numbers of numerous species. An assessment
was undertaken to determine the effects of the
Project on coastal birds.
The results of the coastal birds assessment were
considered in the assessments of marine commercial
use, outdoor recreation, human health, and current
use of land and resources for traditional purposes.
Scope of Assessment
The assessment of coastal birds focused on seven
sub-components:
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
77
COASTAL BIRDS
Existing Conditions
Potential Effects
Existing conditions were characterized for the subcomponents of shorebirds, waterfowl, herons, diving
birds, raptors, gulls and terns, and passerines.
Existing conditions for coastal birds are influenced
by previous developments and activities at Roberts
Bank including the development of the Roberts
Bank and BC Ferries terminals, the dynamic natural
environment, availability and quality of habitat, and
availability and quality of food resources.
78
Mitigation Measures
Measures to avoid, reduce or offset the potential
effect include:
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
COASTAL BIRDS
Key Findings
Changes in the productive potential of shorebirds,
herons, raptors, gulls and terns, and passerines
are not anticipated, as changes to key habitats are
minimal and primary food sources are predicted
to increase.
Decreases to the productivity potential for waterfowl
and diving birds are expected to be minor. Effects
to waterfowl can be mitigated through the creation
of eelgrass, mudflat and intertidal marsh habitats.
Effects to diving birds can be partially offset through
the creation of on-site eelgrass and subtidal rock reef
habitats, which would create habitat for their prey,
which include mussels and other invertebrates.
Vehicle collision-related mortalities are anticipated
to be very low compared to population size, and
are not expected to affect the short- and long-term
population viability of coastal birds, with the exception
of barn owls. Port Metro Vancouver would work with
transportation authorities and the Canadian Wildlife
Service to develop and implement measures to
mitigate potential effects to barn owls from vehicle
collisions.
Overall, the Project is not expected to compromise
the productive potential of the local area to support
coastal bird productivity, or change to species
viability. The assessment concludes there are no
significant adverse residual effects from the Project
to coastal birds. The Project is not expected to result
in measurable incremental adverse cumulative effects
to coastal birds.
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
79
All Project-related effects to the ongoing productivity of commercial, recreational and Aboriginal
fisheries are expected to be unmeasurable compared to natural variability at the population level for
species relevant to these fisheries.
The Project is not expected to result in any significant adverse residual effects to the ongoing
productivity of these fisheries.
The Project is not expected to contribute to cumulative effects on these fisheries.
Valued Component Overview
Commercial, recreational and Aboriginal fisheries
occur in and around Roberts Bank, and target a
variety of marine species and are protected under
the Fisheries Act. An assessment was undertaken
to determine the effects of the Project on the
ongoing productivity of commercial, recreational and
Aboriginal fisheries. These fisheries, and the fish and
fish habitats that support them, provide economic,
environmental and cultural value to local and
regional communities.
The assessment of the ongoing productivity of
commercial, recreational and Aboriginal fisheries
focuses on Project-related effects on the productivity
of species and habitats that support these fisheries.
Results of this assessment were considered in the
assessments of marine commercial use, outdoor
recreation, human health and current use of land and
resources for traditional purposes.
Scope of Assessment
The assessment of commercial, recreational and
Aboriginal fisheries focused on four sub-components:
80
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
Key Findings
All Project construction and operation activities are
expected to interact at an undetectable level with the
ongoing productivity of commercial, recreational and
Aboriginal fisheries.
While decreases in productive potential are
anticipated for some species that support commercial,
recreational and Aboriginal fisheries based on
ecosystem modelling, these decreases represent
only a small percentage of average species returns,
and are not expected to be measurable compared to
natural variability at the population level for species
relevant to these fisheries.
Project-related effects, therefore, are not anticipated
to compromise the ongoing productivity of
commercial, recreational or Aboriginal fisheries, and
are expected to be negligible. Therefore, the Project
is not expected to contribute to cumulative effects on
these fisheries.
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
81
82
Avoidance Measures
Measures have been incorporated into Project design
and construction scheduling to avoid potential effects
to valued components. As examples, the terminal has
been located in subtidal waters to avoid overlap with
sensitive intertidal habitats, designed with a rounded
corner on the northwest side to reduce effects of
sediment scour and deposition, and designed with
fish refuge habitat in the concrete caissons that
would form the berth face.
Reduction Measures
Not all effects on valued components can be
addressed through avoidance measures; therefore,
measures are planned to reduce Projectrelated effects. These approaches include the
implementation of standard management practices
that have been demonstrated to be effective to
address similar effects. Examples of reduction
measures include salvages or transplants of
marine species to reduce direct mortality and the
implementation of environmental management plans.
Offsetting Measures
Offsetting provides a third approach to mitigating
adverse effects on marine valued components and
is proposed after steps have been taken to avoid
and reduce effects. A detailed offsetting plan would
be developed through discussions with regulatory
agencies as part of the environmental assessment
and permitting process.
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
Mudflat:
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
83
KELP
LINGCOD
DUNGENESS CRAB
84
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
RED ALGAE
GREEN ALGAE
MARCH 2015
Eelgrass:
Monitoring Program
A monitoring program would be implemented to
confirm that offsetting measures meet intended
objectives and that they function as designed. For
on-site offsetting projects, monitoring would be
undertaken to ensure compliance with regulatory
requirements and evaluate the performance of each
on-site habitat concept.
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
85
The Project is expected to result in the following positive effects on the labour market in Metro
Vancouver:
During the 5.5-year construction phase:
4,150 person-years of direct employment, worth $494 million in wages
9,724 person-years of total direct, indirect and induced employment, worth approximately
$824 million in wages
During operation:
835 person-years of annual direct employment connected to terminal operations, worth
approximately $138 million in wages annually
1,412 person-years of annual total direct, indirect, and induced employment, worth
$169 million in wages annually
A slight lowering of the unemployment rate in Metro Vancouver;
A positive effect on the participation rate; and
A small boost to median incomes in Delta and Metro Vancouver.
Training opportunities associated with construction and operation are anticipated to generate
positive effects for the Projects direct workforce.
Positive changes in employment and labour income are anticipated for the Aboriginal population in
Metro Vancouver during Project construction and operation.
The Project is not expected to result in measurable adverse residual effects to the labour market.
The Project is not expected to result in incremental cumulative effects to the labour market.
Valued Component Overview
Labour market is defined as the exchange of the
supply of labour by workers with the demand for
labour by employers. Project labour would be
supplied by workers with the relevant skills and
associated occupational training.
The results of the labour market assessment were
considered in the assessments of population,
economic development, services and infrastructure
and human health.
Scope of Assessment
The labour market assessment considered Project
effects on direct, indirect and induced employment.
86
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
LABOUR MARKET
Existing Conditions
Existing conditions considered labour force
occupational structure, availability, growth and
median income levels in Metro Vancouver and British
Columbia. Existing conditions were also determined
for Aboriginal populations in Metro Vancouver and
British Columbia. Metro Vancouvers growing labour
market is the largest in the province. The median
employment income level in Metro Vancouver in
2010 was slightly above the provincial average.
Aboriginal workers represent approximately
2 per cent of the Metro Vancouver and Delta
labour force.
Potential Effects
Potential Project effects on the labour market
include:
Mitigation Measures
The Project would have positive effects on the labour
market. Therefore, no mitigation is necessary.
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
87
LABOUR MARKET
Key Findings
Positive effects on the Metro Vancouver and British Columbia labour markets are outlined in the tables below.
EMPLOYMENT DURING FIVE-AND-A-HALF YEAR CONSTRUCTION PERIOD (PERSON-YEARS)
Metro Vancouver
British Columbia
(Outside of Metro Vancouver)
Total
Direct
4,150
4,150
Indirect
3,942
2,322
6,264
Induced
1,632
673
2,305
Total
9,724
2,995
12,719
$494
$494
Indirect
$247
$127
$374
Induced
$83
$46
$129
$824
$173
$997
Total
British Columbia
(Outside of Metro Vancouver)
Total
Direct
835
93
928
Indirect
109
114
Induced
468
43
511
1,412
141
1,553
$138.1
$15.3
$153.4
Indirect
$5.6
$0.4
$6.0
Induced
$25.8
$0.4
$26.2
$169.5
$16.1
$185.6
Total
Total
88
Outside of the boundaries of the Project area (or off-terminal), there would be activities conducted by others in connection with increased
demand for approximately 2 million TEUs per year of containerized trade that would generate employment. See page 26 in Part 1 of the
Executive Summary for more information.
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
Intertidal marsh;
Mudflat;
Eelgrass.
VANCOUVER
RICHMOND
DELTA
EXISTING
ROBERTS BANK
TERMINALS
CANADA
USA
EXISTING ROBERTS
BANK TERMINALS
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
89
The Project is expected to result in the following positive effects on economic development in
Metro Vancouver:
During the 5.5-year construction phase:
$837 million in additional gross revenues to businesses in Metro Vancouver
$238 million in induced household spending in Metro Vancouver
During operation:
$31 million annually in materials, good and services contracting revenue to the economy of
Metro Vancouver
$71 million of annual induced household spending in Metro Vancouver
The Project is expected to have a negligible effect on sand availability and prices in
Metro Vancouver.
The Project is consistent with economic development strategies in Metro Vancouvers Regional
Growth Strategy, the economic development objectives of the Corporation of Delta, and the
general directions set out in the Tsawwassen Land Use Plan of the Tsawwassen First Nation.
The Project is not expected to result in measurable adverse residual effects to economic
development.
The Project is not expected to result in incremental cumulative effects to economic development.
Valued Component Overview
Scope of Assessment
90
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Mitigation Measures
The Project would have positive effects on economic
development. Therefore, no mitigation is necessary.
Key Findings
Positive effects on economic development in Metro
Vancouver and British Columbia are outlined in the
tables below.
British Columbia
(Outside of Metro
Vancouver)
Total
$837
$507
$1,344
$238
$123
$361
British Columbia
(Outside of Metro
Vancouver)
Total
$31.2
$2.2
$33.4
$71.3
$2.0
$73.3
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
91
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
92
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
The Project is estimated to result in the following positive effects on local government finances in
Metro Vancouver:
During the 5.5-year construction phase:
$11.3 million in incremental local government property taxes and fees
$350,000 per year in payments in lieu of taxes by Port Metro Vancouver
During operation:
$6.8 million annually in incremental property taxes and fees
The majority of payments are expected to go to the Corporation of Delta during operation.
Any potential effect related to local government expenditures is expected to be negligible.
The Project is not expected to result in measurable adverse residual effects to local
government finances.
The Project is not expected to result in incremental cumulative effects to local government finances.
Valued Component Overview
Local government finances refer to the collective
expenditures made, and revenues raised, by
municipal and regional district governments. An
assessment was undertaken to determine potential
Project effects on local government finances.
Scope of Assessment
The local government finances assessment
focused on:
Port Metro Vancouver makes payments in lieu of taxes (PILT) to municipalities on unoccupied lands, while tenants pay property taxes on
properties leased from Port Metro Vancouver.
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
93
Key Findings
Project construction and operation would contribute
to local government revenues through property taxes,
fees and PILT. During operation, the majority of
payments would go to the Corporation of Delta.
A total of $19.6 million in PILT, property taxes and
fees is expected to be paid to municipal and regional
governments throughout British Columbia (including
Metro Vancouver) during construction, with
$11.3 million paid to local governments in Metro
Vancouver. Port Metro Vancouver estimates that it
would pay approximately $350,000 in PILT each year
of construction to the Corporation of Delta.
During Project operation, it is anticipated a total of
$6.9 million in incremental property taxes and fee
payments would be paid annually throughout British
Columbia (including Metro Vancouver), with $6.8
million within Metro Vancouver and the majority
going to the Corporation of Delta. Payments to local
governments outside of Metro Vancouver during
operation are anticipated to be small, since the major
portion of incremental local taxes is attached to the
new terminal.
Any effect related to local government expenditures is
expected to be negligible, as emergency services and
solid waste needs of the Project are projected to be
low and within the existing capacities of local services
and infrastructure.
The Project is expected to result in positive effects
on local government finances; therefore, the Project
is not expected to result in measurable adverse
residual effects. The Project is not expected to result
in incremental cumulative effects to local government
finances.
94
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
With mitigation, residual Project effects on health care services, emergency services, and municipal
services and infrastructure are expected to be negligible.
The Project is not expected to result in measurable adverse residual effects to services and
infrastructure.
The Project is not expected to result in any incremental cumulative effects to services and
infrastructure.
Valued Component Overview
An assessment was conducted to determine Project
effects on community services and infrastructure,
including housing, emergency and health services,
and municipal infrastructure.
Scope of Assessment
The assessment of services and infrastructure
focused on three sub-components:
Existing Conditions
Existing service and infrastructure conditions
considered housing availability and affordability,
supply and demand, health care services and
facilities, emergency services, and municipal water
and solid waste infrastructure.
Housing supply in Delta is characterized by higher
percentages of private owner-occupied households
and single-detached housing units than in Metro
Vancouver. Based on the 10-year average vacancy
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
95
Mitigation Measures
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce potential
effects include:
Key Findings
An anticipated small change in population during
construction would result in a negligible demand
on housing, emergency services and municipal
infrastructure. Project-induced population change
during operation is not anticipated. Project demand
on health care, emergency and municipal services
due to direct service utilization is expected to be low
relative to historical reported service usage in the
local study area.
With mitigation, residual effects are expected to
be negligible.
The Project would not use Tsawwassen First
Nation emergency or health services, or municipal
infrastructure.
The Project is not expected to result in measurable
adverse residual effects to services and infrastructure.
The Project is not expected to result in any
incremental cumulative effects to services
and infrastructure.
96
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
The Project footprint and the proposed expansion of the area closed to commercial crabbing are
expected to result in displacement of commercial crab harvesting.
The Project is not anticipated to result in significant adverse residual effects to marine
commercial use.
The Project is not expected to result in significant adverse incremental cumulative effects to marine
commercial use.
Valued Component Overview
Existing Conditions
Scope of Assessment
The assessment of marine commercial use focused
on four sub-components:
Seafood harvesting;
Marine-based tourism.
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
97
Potential Effects
Key Findings
Mitigation Measures
Measures to reduce effects include:
98
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
The Project footprint and the proposed expansion of the area closed to recreational crabbing are
expected to result in displacement of recreational crab harvesting. After mitigation, the residual
effect is expected to be negligible.
The Project is not expected to result in measurable adverse residual effects to outdoor recreation.
The Project is not expected to result in any incremental cumulative effects to outdoor recreation.
Valued Component Overview
Outdoor recreation refers to any activity undertaken
for pleasure or enjoyment on land or water that does
not include a commercial aspect. An assessment of
potential Project effects on outdoor recreation was
undertaken.
The results of the outdoor recreation assessment
were considered in the assessment of human health.
Scope of Assessment
The assessment of outdoor recreation focused on
four sub-components undertaken in the vicinity of the
Project:
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
99
OUTDOOR RECREATION
Potential Effects
Key Findings
Mitigation Measures
Measures to reduce effects include:
100
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
Potential effects on the consistency of land use planning designations, marine industrial use, and
uses of adjacent protected areas are expected to be fully mitigated, and these uses would be able
to continue during construction and operation.
An effect on access to Tsawwassen First Nation waterlots (community lease lands) is expected to
be partially mitigated, and the residual effect is determined to be not significant.
The Project is not expected to result in significant residual adverse effects to land and water use.
The Project is not expected to result in any incremental cumulative effects to land and water use.
Valued Component Overview
The land and water use assessment examines
potential Project effects on land and water uses
within and adjacent to the Project area, as well as
opportunities for future land and water use.
Scope of Assessment
The land and water use assessment considers land
ownership, land use planning, and general land and
water uses within the vicinity of the Project.
The local assessment area for land use consisted
of a 1-kilometre radius from the eastern end of
the Roberts Bank causeway, and the regional
assessment area included land within the Corporation
of Delta and Tsawwassen First Nation.
The local assessment area for water use included the
marine area within the Corporation of Delta, from the
Canada-U.S.A. border to Canoe Passage, including
the BC Ferries terminal. The regional assessment
area included water within the Corporation of Delta
and Tsawwassen First Nation.
Existing Conditions
Existing conditions considered current land and water
uses including port and marine-related industrial use,
protected areas, Tsawwassen First Nation waterlots
(community lease lands), agricultural use and other
tenured uses.
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
101
Mitigation Measures
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce the potential
effects include:
Key Findings
The Project would operate within the same general
land use context as the existing container terminal
uses. There are no anticipated residual effects
related to consistency with planning designations.
The presence of construction-related vessels may
require other vessels to change course or result in
delays or changes in access to water use activities.
This effect is temporary during construction.
The Project has the potential to result in changes
in access to Tsawwassen First Nation waterlots
(community lease lands) during construction. The
presence and activities of construction vessels near
the lease lots may result in temporary displacement
of activities within the waterlots. It is anticipated that
following mitigation, this effect would be reduced
but not fully eliminated, and a residual effect is
anticipated. However, these uses would be able to
continue during construction and operation, and the
residual effect is considered to be not significant.
The Project is not expected to result in significant
residual adverse effects to land and water use. The
Project is not expected to result in any incremental
cumulative effects to land and water use.
102
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
The Project would result in changes to the daytime visual resources, primarily due to new physical
structures such as cranes.
Changes in nighttime visual resources are anticipated to result from additional lighting.
Mitigation related to lighting design and operation is expected to reduce adverse effects on
nighttime visual resources, although the visibility of increased lighting would result in a residual
adverse effect for sites in the southern Gulf Islands.
The Project is not expected to result in any significant adverse residual effects on visual resources.
The Project is not expected to result in any significant adverse incremental cumulative effects to
visual resources.
Valued Component Overview
Visual resources are natural and cultural aspects of
the landscape that have the potential to negatively
or positively affect viewers. Potential Project-related
effects on visual resources were assessed.
The results of the visual resources assessment were
considered in the assessments of marine commercial
use, outdoor recreation, human health, and current
use of land and resources for traditional purposes.
Scope of Assessment
The assessment of visual resources focused on two
sub-components:
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
103
VISUAL RESOURCES
Mitigation Measures
Proposed measures to reduce the potential effects
include:
Key Findings
While the prominence of port-related structures is
expected to increase from several viewscapes, the
Project is not expected to result in a change in the
overall quality of daytime visual resources, as the
expected changes are consistent with the character
of existing views of port facilities.
Mitigation related to lighting design and operation,
such as directing light only to where it is required
and the use of a centralized light control system, is
expected to reduce adverse effects on nighttime
visual resources. However, the visibility of more light
sources at night would not be fully mitigated, and
would be a residual adverse effect for sites in the
southern Gulf Islands.
In consideration of the similarity of the Project to
the existing viewscape, the residual effect of the
Project alone on visual resources is determined to
be not significant.
The Project is not expected to result in any
significant residual adverse effects on visual
resources. The Project is not expected to result in
measurable incremental residual cumulative effects
to visual resources.
104
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
Health of communities in the local assessment area is generally good and comparable to provincial
and national averages.
Seven potential mechanisms for human health effects were assessed: air emissions, noise and
vibration, shellfish contamination, stress and annoyance, employment and income, food security,
and health inequity.
Potential Project-related effects on human health are expected to be fully or partially
mitigated through the implementation of environmental management plans and additional
mitigation measures.
The Project is not expected to result in any significant adverse effects on human health.
The Project is not expected to result in measurable incremental residual cumulative effects to
human health.
Valued Component Overview
An assessment was conducted to determine potential
Project-related effects on human health.
The results of the human health assessment were
considered in the assessments of marine commercial
use, outdoor recreation, and current use of land and
resources for traditional purposes
Potential Effects
Scope of Assessment
The human health assessment was carried out using
both a quantitative human health risk assessment
and a qualitative health impact assessment. The
assessment focused on factors contributing to health
and community well-being.
The assessment of human health focused on seven
sub-components:
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
105
HUMAN HEALTH
Mitigation Measures
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce potential
effects include:
Key Findings
The Project is expected to result in measurable
residual effects on human health related to exposure
to air emissions during construction, and exposure to
noise during construction and operation. Mitigation
is expected to reduce all other residual effects to a
negligible (i.e., not measurable) level.
Several air emissions scenarios during construction
and operation were assessed. A residual effect is
associated with only one scenario related to dust
generated during construction over water between
the Project marine terminal and Westshore Terminals.
Adverse health effects from air emissions are
considered not significant, as predicted exposure
levels do not exceed health thresholds.
A minority of households would experience small
increases in noise during construction or operation.
The increase would generally be below the range of
human perception, and adverse health effects related
to noise are considered not significant, as predicted
exposure levels do not exceed health thresholds.
Confidence in the assessment is high because
models used conservative assumptions and have
been validated against studies or monitoring data.
The Project is not expected to result in any significant
adverse effects on human health. The Project is not
expected to result in measurable incremental residual
cumulative effects to human health.
106
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
The Project has the potential to affect archaeological resources, namely fish trap stakes, if present
in the Project area.
Through mitigation, including excavation of test trenches prior to construction activities and the
implementation of an Archaeological Monitoring and Management Plan, potential damage to
archaeological resources would be avoided and the opportunity for future archaeological study
would be protected.
The Project is not expected to result in significant residual adverse effects to archaeological and
heritage resources.
The Project is not expected to result in any incremental cumulative effects to archaeological and
heritage resources.
Valued Component Overview
Existing Conditions
Scope of Assessment
The assessment was supported by an Archaeology
Overview Assessment, which included an
ethnographic overview of the area and a review of the
potential for undocumented heritage sites to exist in
the local assessment area.
Potential Effects
Potential Project effects on archaeological and
heritage resources include:
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
107
Mitigation Measures
Proposed measures to reduce the potential effects
include:
Key Findings
The Project may affect archaeological resources,
namely fish trap stakes, if present in the Project
area. Direct effects could result from Project-related
construction activities, and indirect effects could
result from changes to sediment deposition or
erosion.
Following mitigation, residual effects would remain,
as there is still the potential for stakes to be exposed
or crushed. However, the opportunity for future
archaeological study would be protected through
mitigation, and the assessment concludes these
residual effects are not significant.
The Project is not expected to result in significant
residual adverse effects to archaeological and
heritage resources. The Project is not expected
to result in any incremental cumulative effects to
archaeological and heritage resources.
108
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
109
Assessment Overview
Project Considerations
The assessment focuses on three plausible worstcase scenarios, including a marine-based incident, a
rail-related incident and a road-related incident. The
probability of each scenario occurring was estimated,
and the potential consequences to the biophysical
and human environment were identified.
The assessment related to marine-based accidents
or malfunctions relied on two independent studies:
a quantitative risk assessment that estimated
probabilities for different types of marine vessel
accidents in the Strait of Georgia, and a qualitative
evaluation of the consequences of potential spill
incidents associated with Project vessel traffic in Port
Metro Vancouvers jurisdiction.
In characterizing potential effects of each plausible
worst case scenario, the assessment considered
the effectiveness of standard proven and Projectspecific management and mitigation measures,
including contingency plans and emergency response
procedures that would be used to avoid or minimize
the environmental consequences of the particular
scenario.
110
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
MARCH 2015
In the case of land-based activities, the two worstcase plausible road and rail scenarios were identified
as a fuel truck accident on Roberts Bank Way
North involving a diesel spill, and a yard locomotive
derailment on the widened causeway, also involving
a diesel spill. In both cases, due to Project-specific
conditions and existing and anticipated practices
and procedures, the probability of such an incident
is considered very low. As the spill associated with
each of the land-based scenarios would occur at
a distance away from the marine environment, no
potential interactions with marine biophysical valued
components were identified. Further, no residual
adverse effects were identified with respect to socioeconomic valued components, including services and
infrastructure, and human health.
As with any activity, the potential for unplanned
incidents during Project construction and operation
exists. Port Metro Vancouver would draw on its
many years of safe and successful experience in
the oversight of marine intermodal facilities during
detailed Project planning and design, construction
and operation. In order to minimize the potential for
unplanned incidents and to minimize the extent and
severity of environmental effects if an incident were
to occur, Port Metro Vancouver would implement
standard proven and Project-specific management
and mitigation measures and would rely on all
involved parties, including the infrastructure developer,
terminal operator, regulatory agencies, vessel owners
and operators, and railway and trucking companies,
to comply with applicable federal and provincial
legislation, regional risk mitigation measures and Port
Metro Vancouver requirements.
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
111
An assessment was undertaken to determine how local conditions and natural hazards, such as
extreme weather, earthquakes, tsunamis, and climate change, could adversely affect the Project,
and in turn could affect the environment.
Effects of the environment on the Project related to extreme weather and weather-related events,
and any subsequent effects on the environment, would be avoided or minimized through application
of design criteria and implementation of standard management practices, work procedures and
mitigation measures during construction and operation.
Effects of the environment on the Project related to low-probability events such as a large
earthquake, a submarine landslide in the immediate vicinity of the Project or a large tsunami could
result in irreparable damage to the Project.
Effects of a catastrophic natural event or sea level rise would be widespread in the Fraser River
delta and would not be unique to the Project.
Assessment Overview
The Port Metro Vancouver undertook an assessment
to determine how local conditions and natural hazards
could adversely affect the Project, and in turn could
affect the environment. Local conditions and natural
hazards that were considered included extreme
weather and weather-related events, seismic activity,
submarine landslides, tsunamis, subsidence (land
settlement) and climate change and related sea
level rise.
Project Considerations
Port Metro Vancouver has more than 40 years of
experience working at Roberts Bank, and is familiar
with local conditions and the range of natural hazards
that occur in the south coast of British Columbia. The
Project would be designed, constructed and operated
in a manner that satisfies applicable codes and
standards, Port Metro Vancouver requirements, and
the terms and conditions of Project approval.
On-site activities during both Project construction
and operation would be conducted in a safe,
environmentally sound manner, decreasing the
consequences of extreme weather-related incidents
and effects on the Project, and in turn, to the
environment. The infrastructure developer and
terminal operator would develop and implement
112
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
113
The assessment considered the current use of land and resources for traditional purposes by
Aboriginal peoples.
No measurable residual effects on current use are expected following the implementation of
measures to avoid, reduce or otherwise address potential adverse Project-related effects on
current use.
As the Project is not expected to result in measurable residual effects to current use, the Project is
not expected to contribute incrementally to adverse cumulative effects.
Scope of Assessment
The current use effects assessment considered the
results of effects assessments of potential Project
and cumulative effects on marine vegetation, marine
invertebrates, marine fish, marine mammals, coastal
birds, marine commercial use, outdoor recreation,
visual resources, land and water use, human health
and archaeology and heritage resources, the
ongoing productivity of commercial, recreational
and Aboriginal fisheries, as well the assessment of
potential changes to air quality, noise and vibration,
light and the assessment of potential accidents
or malfunctions.
The current use effects assessment considered
potential effects on:
114
Tsleil-Waututh Nation;
Cowichan Tribes;
Penelakut Tribe;
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
Assessment Area
The local assessment area, regional assessment
area and cumulative effects assessment area for the
current use effects assessment took into account
each Aboriginal groups asserted or established
traditional territory or otherwise defined area of
use, including rights established in the Tsawwassen
First Nation Final Agreement, as well as the local
assessment areas for the valued components linked
to current use.
MARCH 2015
Existing Conditions
Current use information was largely provided by each
Aboriginal group in the form of traditional use studies.
The current use assessment was primarily linked to
marine biophysical valued components. The existing
conditions of current use for each Aboriginal group
are described in the EIS and considered the following
factors, where supporting information was available:
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
115
Potential changes in
access to preferred
current use locations
Potential changes
in the availability of
preferred current use
resources
Potential changes in
the quality of preferred
current use resources
Potential changes
in the quality of the
current use experience
Key Findings
Following implementation of the mitigation summarized in the table above, adverse residual Project-related
effects are expected to be negligible. Therefore, the Project is not expected to contribute to cumulative effects.
116
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
The Project is not predicted to adversely impact the ability of Aboriginal groups to exercise most
asserted or established Aboriginal and treaty rights.
The Project will likely impact the ability of the Tsawwassen First Nation and Musqueam First Nation
to exercise the right to fish for crab because of potential changes in access to a primary crab
harvesting location.
This effect is expected to be accommodated by the measures identified to avoid, reduce or
otherwise address predicted effects on current use.
Measures to avoid, reduce or otherwise address predicted effects on current use were considered
effective at also addressing expected impacts to the exercise of Aboriginal and treaty rights, and no
additional measures have been determined to be required for predicted impacts.
Scope of Assessment
The Tsawwassen First Nation Final Agreement sets
out the treaty rights of the Tsawwassen First Nation,
which include the right to harvest natural resources,
including fish, intertidal bivalves, aquatic plants,
migratory birds, wildlife and plants.
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
117
118
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
Environment Policy;
Sustainability Reporting;
Planning Exercises.
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
119
120
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
Underwater Noise
Management Plan
Marine Mammal Observation
Plan
Land and Marine Traffic
Management Plan
Dredging and Sediment
Discharge Plan
Sediment and Erosion Control
Plan
Communications Plan
MARCH 2015
Human Health
Visual Resources
Outdoor Recreation
Economic Development
Labour Market
Coastal Birds
Marine Mammals
Marine Fish
Marine Invertebrates
Underwater Noise
Marine Vegetation
Population
Coastal Geomorphology
Light
Construction Compliance
Monitoring Plan
Air Quality
Sub-plans
Valued Components
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
121
122
Human Health
Visual Resources
Outdoor Recreation
Economic Development
Labour Market
Coastal Birds
Marine Mammals
Marine Fish
Marine Invertebrates
Marine Vegetation
Underwater Noise
Population
Coastal Geomorphology
Light
Operation Compliance
Monitoring Plan
Air Quality
Sub-plans
Valued Components
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
MARCH 2015
A methodological approach for using fieldcollected data to measure and verify the
accuracy of the effects predicted in the EIS;
MARCH 2015
ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART 2
123