Proposed Whitehorse Diesel – Natural Gas Conversion Project

YESAB Executive Committee Project Proposal

Volume 1: PROJECT PROPOSAL

August 2013

Submitted by: Yukon Energy Corporation

Whitehorse Diesel – Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER 1 1.0 PROJECT INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW 1-1 1.1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1-1 1.2 SUMMARY OF EFFECTS ASSESSMENT AND PROJECT ACTIVITIES TO DATE 1-4 1.3 PROPONENT INFORMATION 1-6 1.4 PROJECT BACKGROUND 1-7 1.5 PROJECT PURPOSE 1-8 1.6 REQUIRED AUTHORIZATIONS AND REGULATORY APPROVALS 1-9 1.7 SUBMISSION ORGANIZATION AND CONTENT 1-11

CHAPTER 2 2.0 PROJECT LOCATION 2-1 2.1 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION 2-1 2.2 PROJECT COMPONENTS 2-6 2.2.1 LEGAL LAND DESCRIPTION 2-9 2.3 LAND TENURE WITHIN THE PROJECT STUDY REGION 2-9 2.4 TRADITIONAL TERRITORY 2-12 2.5 YUKON LAND USE PLANNING REGION 2-13 2.6 CONSISTENCY WITH OTHER PLANS 2-15 2.6.1 CURRENT LAND USE & MANAGEMENT PLANS 2-15 2.6.2 PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH OTHER PLANS 2-16

CHAPTER 3 3.0 ASSESSMENT APPROACH 3-1 3.1 OVERVIEW OF APPROACH 3-1 3.2 ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK 3-2 3.2.1 SCOPING OF THE ASSESSMENT 3-3

Page i Table of Contents Whitehorse Diesel – Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

3.2.2 ANALYSIS OF EFFECTS & MITIGATION 3-5 3.2.3 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ASSESSMENT – YESAA REQUIREMENTS AND OVERALL APPROACH 3-6 3.2.4 RESIDUAL EFFECTS AND EVALUATION OF SIGNIFICANCE 3-7 3.2.5 FOLLOW-UP & MONITORING 3-8 3.3 DETERMINING SIGNIFICANCE OF RESIDUAL ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 3-8 3.3.1 SIGNIFICANCE DETERMINATION APPROACH 3-8 3.4 SOURCES OF INFORMATION 3-13

CHAPTER 4 4.0 FIRST NATIONS AND OTHER PUBLICS CONSULTATION 4-1 4.1 OVERVIEW 4-1 4.2 PRINCIPLES AND APPROACH TO CONSULTATION 4-2 4.2.1 GUIDING PRINCIPLES 4-2 4.2.2 OPPORTUNITIES PRIOR TO YESAA FILING 4-3 4.2.3 PUBLIC COMMUNICATION OF THE FILING WITH YESAB 4-5 4.3 METHODS 4-5 4.3.1 FACE-TO FACE INTERACTION 4-5 4.3.2 ELECTRONIC, PAPER, AND OTHER MEDIA COMMUNICATION 4-6 4.4 REVIEW OF PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ACTIVITIES TO DATE 4-7 4.4.1 ACTIVITIES INVOLVING KWANLIN DÜN FIRST NATION, TA’AN KWÄCH’ÄN COUNCIL 4-7 4.4.2 MUNICIPAL AND OTHER GOVERNMENTS 4-11 4.4.3 LOCAL STAKEHOLDERS AND OTHER PUBLICS 4-13 4.5 KEY INTERESTS & PERSPECTIVES HEARD TO DATE 4-14 4.6 FUTURE STEPS IN PUBLIC CONSULTATION 4-27

Page ii Table of Contents Whitehorse Diesel – Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

CHAPTER 5 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC SETTING 5-1 5.1 OVERVIEW 5-1 5.2 EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 5-2 5.2.1 GENERAL PHYSIOGRAPHY, SURFICIAL GEOLOGY AND SOIL CONDITIONS 5-2 5.2.2 CLIMATE 5-2 5.2.3 AIR QUALITY 5-5 5.2.4 NOISE LEVELS 5-10 5.2.5 SURFACE WATER, GROUNDWATER AND AQUATIC SPECIES 5-11 5.2.6 VEGETATION AND WILDLIFE COMMON TO THE REGION 5-16 5.3 EXISTING SOCIO-ECONOMIC SETTING 5-22 5.3.1 POPULATION 5-22 5.3.2 LAND USE 5-22 5.3.3 RESOURCE USE 5-24 5.3.4 RECREATION 5-24 5.3.5 LOCAL AND REGIONAL ECONOMY 5-26 5.3.6 THE SOCIAL AND CULTURAL CONTEXT 5-27 5.3.7 TRANSPORTATION, CITY SERVICES AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE 5-29 5.3.8 YUKON POWER GRID 5-33 5.4 EXISTING AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS 5-38 5.4.1 EXISTING WHITEHORSE DIESEL PLANT CONDITIONS 5-38 5.4.2 OTHER EXISTING AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS 5-43

CHAPTER 6 6.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 6-1 6.1 PROJECT IDENTIFICATION/SCOPE OF PROJECT 6-1 6.2 ALTERNATIVES & CHOSEN APPROACH 6-4 6.2.1 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROJECT 6-5 6.2.2 ALTERNATIVE MEANS OF CARRYING OUT THE PROJECT 6-8

Page i Table of Contents Whitehorse Diesel – Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

6.3 MAJOR PROJECT COMPONENTS 6-17 6.3.1 LNG FACILITIES 6-18 6.3.2 GAS-FIRED MODULAR GENERATING UNITS AND RELATED FACILITIES 6-26 6.3.3 UTILITY TRENCH 6-26 6.3.4 SUBSTATION & TRANSMISSION LINE 6-26 6.3.5 DECOMMISSIONING OF TWO MIRRLESS UNITS (WD1 AND WD2) 6-27 6.4 PROJECT PHASES AND SCHEDULING 6-27 6.4.1 PROJECT SCHEDULE 6-27 6.4.2 CONSTRUCTION PHASE 6-29 6.4.3 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PHASE 6-30 6.5 PROJECT COSTING 6-32 6.6 TECHNOLOGIES 6-32 6.7 GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC ELEMENTS OF THE PROJECT 6-34 6.7.1 FUEL & HAZARDOUS MATERIAL MANAGEMENT 6-34 6.7.2 OIL SPILL PREVENTION AND CONTAINMENT 6-34 6.7.3 SLOPE PROTECTION AND DRAINAGE 6-35 6.7.4 EMERGENCIES, ACCIDENTS & MALFUNCTIONS 6-35 6.7.5 AIR MONITORING PARAMETERS 6-35 6.7.6 WORK FORCE REQUIREMENTS 6-35 6.7.7 WORKER SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL BRIEFINGS 6-35

CHAPTER 7 7.0 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC EFFECTS ASSESSMENT 7-1 7.1 OVERVIEW OF APPROACH 7-1 7.2 IDENTIFICATION AND SELECTION OF VALUED COMPONENTS 7-3 7.3 ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 7-4 7.3.1 SELECTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL VALUED COMPONENTS 7-4 7.3.2 ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS ON ENVIRONMENTAL VALUED COMPONENTS 7-8

Page ii Table of Contents Whitehorse Diesel – Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

7.4 ASSESSMENT OF SOCIO-ECONOMIC EFFECTS 7-11 7.4.1 SELECTION OF SOCIO-ECONOMIC VALUED COMPONENTS 7-12 7.4.2 ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS ON SOCIO-ECONOMIC VALUED COMPONENTS 7-13 7.5 EFFECTS OF THE ENVIRONMENT ON THE PROJECT 7-32 7.6 ACCIDENTS AND MALFUNCTIONS 7-32

CHAPTER 8 8.0 MONITORING AND FOLLOW-UP PROGRAMS 8-1 8.1 PROPOSED MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAMS 8-1 8.1.1 PROPOSED MONITORING MEASURES 8-3 8.2 FOLLOW-UP PROGRAMS 8-3 8.2.1 FOLLOW-UP RELATED TO AIR EMISSIONS 8-4 8.2.2 NOTIFICATION AND PROJECT LIAISON 8-4

CHAPTER 9 9.0 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT & CERTIFICATION 9-1

CHAPTER 10 10.0 GLOSSARY & REFERENCES 10-1 10.1 GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS & TERMS 10-1 10.1.1 LIST OF ACRONYMS 10-1 10.1.2 LIST OF TERMS 10-4 10.2 REFERENCES 10-21 10.2.1 LIST OF REFERENCES 10-21

Page iii Table of Contents Whitehorse Diesel – Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

LIST OF TABLES

CHAPTER 1 TABLE 1-1: REGULATORY AUTHORIZATIONS REQUIRED FOR THE PROJECT 1-10

CHAPTER 2 TABLE 2-1: LOCATION OF PROJECT COMPONENTS 2-8 TABLE 2-2: WATER LICENCES WITHIN CLOSE VICINITY TO WHITEHORSE GENERATING STATION 2-11 TABLE 2-3: TA’AN KWÄCH’ÄN COUNCIL SETTLEMENT LANDS IN THE PROJECT STUDY REGION 2-13 TABLE 2-4: LAND USE AND MANAGEMENT PLANS 2-15

CHAPTER 3 TABLE 3-1: SIGNIFICANCE DETERMINATION CRITERIA AND RATINGS 3-10

CHAPTER 4 TABLE 4-1: SUMMARY OF ACTIVITIES INVOLVING KDFN AND TKC 4-8 TABLE 4-2: SUMMARY OF ACTIVITIES WITH MUNICIPAL & OTHER GOVERNMENTS 4-12 TABLE 4-3: SUMMARY OF ACTIVITIES WITH LOCAL STAKEHOLDERS & OTHER PUBLICS 4-14 TABLE 4- 4: INTERESTS AND CONCERNS RAISED BY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC AND AREAS WHERE FEEDBACK FROM PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ACTIVITIES WAS CONSIDERED IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT PROCESS 4-16

CHAPTER 5 TABLE 5-1: CLIMATE TRENDS FOR WHITEHORSE AREA 5-5 TABLE 5-2: EXCERPT OF KEY YUKON AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS 5-6 TABLE 5-3: AIR QUALITY MONITORING DATA SUMMARY FOR WHITEHORSE 5-7 TABLE 5-4: AVERAGE ANNUAL PARTICULATE MATTER (PM2.5) AND NUMBER OF DAYS THAT PARTICULATE MATTER LEVELS EXCEEDED THE NATIONAL STANDARD IN WHITEHORSE, 2002-2009 5-8

Page iv Table of Contents Whitehorse Diesel – Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

TABLE 5-5: DIESEL ENGINE CHARACTERISTICS 5-9 TABLE 5-6: MEASURED EMISSION RATES FOR YEC DIESEL ENGINES 5-10 TABLE 5-7: BASELINE NOISE MONITORING SUMMARY (AT MONITORING LOCATION IN PROXIMITY TO CLOSETS PERMANENT RESIDENCE TO PROJECT CONSTRUCTION FOOTPRINT) 5-10 TABLE 5-8: POTENTIAL WILDLIFE IN RIVER FLATS AREA 5-20 TABLE 5-9: SPECIES AT RISK WITH RANGES OVERLAPPING THE PROJECT STUDY AREA 5-21 TABLE 5-10: CURRENT POPULATION AND POPULATION PROJECTIONS FOR YUKON AND WHITEHORSE 5-22 TABLE 5-11: TOTAL YUKON EMPLOYMENT BY SECTOR 5-27 TABLE 5-12: AVERAGE DAILY YUKON TRAFFIC SUMMARY FOR KM 1341.5 ON THE ALASKA HIGHWAY AT JAKES CORNER, YUKON TERRITORY 5-30 TABLE 5-13: USAGE STATISTICS FOR WHITEHORSE GENERAL HOSPITAL 5-32 TABLE 5-14: FORECAST BASE CASE GRID DIESEL GENERATION REQUIREMENT (2013-2030)5-35 TABLE 5-15: FORECAST BASE CASE NEW GRID CAPACITY REQUIREMENT (2015-2030) 5-36 TABLE 5-16: EXISTING PROJECTS AND ACTIVITIES CONSIDERED IN THE CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ASSESSMENT 5-44 TABLE 5-17: PROJECTS CURRENTLY UNDERGOING ASSESSMENT 5-45

CHAPTER 7 TABLE 7-1: ENVIRONMENTAL INTERESTS INITIALLY CONSIDERED IN VC SELECTION PROCESS 7-5 TABLE 7-2: SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL PROJECT EFFECTS AND SIGNIFICANCE ASSESSMENT ON AQUATIC AND TERRESTRIAL VALUED COMPONENTS 7-11 TABLE 7-3: SOCIO-ECONOMIC INTERESTS INITIALLY CONSIDERED IN VC SELECTION PROCESS 7-12 TABLE 7-4: PROJECT AIR EMISSIONS (GE 4.375 MW) AS COMPARED TO ALTERNATIVES 7-17 TABLE 7-5: SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL PROJECT EFFECTS AND SIGNIFICANCE ASSESSMENT ON SOCIO-ECONOMIC VCS 7-31 LIST OF FIGURES

CHAPTER 2

Page v Table of Contents Whitehorse Diesel – Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

FIGURE 2-1: WHITEHORSE DIESEL-NATURAL GAS CONVERSION PROJECT CONSTRUCTION FOOTPRINT 2-3 FIGURE 2-2: WHITEHORSE DIESEL-NATURAL GAS CONVERSION PROJECT STUDY AREA 2-4 FIGURE 2-3: PROJECT AREA OVERVIEW 2-5 FIGURE 2-4: YUKON PLANNING REGIONS 2-14

CHAPTER 3 FIGURE 3-1: SIGNIFICANCE ASSESSMENT STEPS FOR PROJECT EFFECTS ON ENVIRONMENTAL OR SOCIO-ECONOMIC VCS 3-12

CHAPTER 5 FIGURE 5-1: MONTHLY MEAN PRECIPITATION AND TEMPERATURE AT THE WHITEHORSE STATION A, FROM 1970 TO 2010 5-3 FIGURE 5-2: WIND ROSE DIAGRAM, EC WHITEHORSE SURFACE STATION 2010 5-4 FIGURE 5-3: WILDLIFE VALUES AND ENVIRONMENTAL SENSITIVITY OF YUKON RIVER FLATS AREA 5-19 FIGURE 5-4: CITY OF WHITEHORSE MAP DEPICTING THE MILLENNIUM TRAIL AND YUKON RIVER LOOP TRAIL 5-25 FIGURE 5-5: YUKON AND CANADIAN UNEMPLOYMENT RATES 5-26 FIGURE 5-6: RATIO OF BRENT CRUDE OIL PRICE TO HENRY HUB SPOT NATURAL GAS PRICE IN ENERGY EQUIVALENT TERMS, 1990-2040 5-42

CHAPTER 6 FIGURE 6-1: PROJECT CONSTRUCTION FOOTPRINT 6-3 FIGURE 6-2: PROPOSED 11 AXLE A-TRAIN TANKER CONFIGURATION 6-16 FIGURE 6-3: ELEVATION DROP AND DRAINAGE FROM TANK CONTAINMENT AREA TO LNG MAIN IMPOUNDMENT AREA 6-21 FIGURE 6-4: LNG STORAGE TANK CONTAINMENT AREA 6-21 FIGURE 6-5: LNG TRUCK UNLOADING AREA 6-22

Page vi Table of Contents Whitehorse Diesel – Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

LIST OF PLATES

CHAPTER 5 PLATE 5-1: VIEW STANDING FROM SE CORNER LOOKING ALONG SOUTHERN PROPERTY LINE 5-12 PLATE 5-2: VIEW FROM SOUTH PROPERTY LINE LOOKING NORTH UP THE GRASSED AREA BETWEEN VEGETATION ZONES 5-13 PLATE 5-3: DRY INFILTRATION GALLERY AT THE NORTH END OF THE GRASSED AREA BETWEEN VEGETATION ZONES (LOOKING SOUTH) 5-14 PLATE 5-4: VIEW FROM RAILWAY LOOKING INTO THE MIXED PINE STAND WITH KINNIKINNICK AND SOAPBERRY IN THE UNDERSTORY 5-17 PLATE 5-5: VIEW FROM RAILWAY LOOKING INTO THE MIXED PINE STAND WITH KINNIKINNICK AND SOAPBERRY IN THE UNDERSTORY 5-17 PLATE 5-6: VIEW FROM THE SOUTHWEST LOOKING AT ROBERT SERVICE WAY AND THE SHRUB WILLOW STAND 5-18

Page vii Table of Contents Whitehorse Diesel – Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

LIST OF APPENDICES

CHAPTER 2 APPENDIX 2A – LAND TENURE WITHIN PROJECT STUDY REGION TABLES APPENDIX 2B – EXISTING PERMITS FOR THE WHITEHORSE THERMAL GENERATING STATION

CHAPTER 4 APPENDIX 4A – LIST OF POTENTIALLY AFFECTED OR INTERESTED PUBLICS APPENDIX 4B – ELECTRONIC, PAPER AND OTHER MEDIA COMMUNICATION APPENDIX 4C – ACTIVITIES INVOLVING KWANLIN DÜN FIRST NATION & TA’AN KWÄCH’ÄN COUNCIL APPENDIX 4D – ACTIVITIES INVOLVING MUNICIPAL AND OTHER GOVERNMENTS APPENDIX 4E – ACTIVITIES INVOLVING LOCAL STAKEHOLDERS AND OTHER PUBLICS

CHAPTER 5 APPENDIX 5A – MAPS APPENDIX 5B – UPDATED NEAR-TERM GRID LOAD SCENARIOS APPENDIX 5C – AIR QUALITY ASSESSMENT UPDATE IN SUPPORT OF PERMIT RENEWAL FOR DIESEL GENERATOR OPERATIONS (SENSES 2011) APPENDIX 5D – WHITEHORSE INVENTORY ACTIVITY AND EMISSION FACTORS (YUKON ENERGY AIR EMISSIONS PERMIT RENEWAL 2008)

CHAPTER 6 APPENDIX 6A – LNG CAPACITY REQUIREMENT ASSESSMENTS APPENDIX 6B – WHITEHORSE SPILL CONTINGENCY PLAN

Page viii Table of Contents Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

1.0 PROJECT INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW

1.1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project (the Project) will modernize Yukon Energy’s Whitehorse Thermal Generating Station (WTGS) to meet growing requirements for reliable and flexible thermal generation on the Yukon grid, with partial conversion of the WTGS from diesel fuel to cheaper and cleaner burning natural gas fuel supplied by liquefied natural gas (LNG) delivered by truck from Alberta or British Columbia. The Project is projected to achieve near term cost savings for Yukon ratepayers of approximately $3 million to $4 million per year (compared to Project alternatives).

To accommodate the Project, Yukon Energy Corporation (Yukon Energy) will acquire approximately 0.9 ha of Public Utility zoned Yukon Government lands and 0.6 ha of a railway right-of-way adjacent to the south of the existing WTGS site (the “Expanded Site Area” – see Figure 2-2). The Project scope will involve the installation of LNG truck offloading, storage, vapourization and related infrastructure on the Expanded Site Area and replace two diesel generating units scheduled for retirement in the existing WTGS by 2015 (9.1 MW total capacity) with three new modular natural gas-fired generating units (13.1 MW total capacity) to be located on the Expanded Site Area. Two natural gas-fired units (8.8 MW) are anticipated to be in-service in the fourth quarter of 2014 to provide capacity and fuel cost savings during the winter of 2014/15. Projected in service for the third natural gas-fired unit (4.4 MW) will occur as required to meet grid capacity planning requirements, and is anticipated to be within a few years after the first two units are in-service.

The Project lies within the Traditional Territory of the Kwanlin Dün First Nation (KDFN) and the Ta’an Kwäch’än Council (TKC).

The precise location of each component of the Project will be finalized upon completion of detailed engineering design and permitting by regulators following assessment under the Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Act (YESAA).

The existing Whitehorse Rapids Generating Station was built to supply electricity to the Whitehorse area beginning in 1958 and includes the following components:

 Whitehorse hydro plants (P125 and P127) – Located on the Yukon River, the plants combined have four generating units with a combined nameplate capacity of 40 MW.

 Whitehorse diesel plant – Located adjacent to the Yukon River, the plant has seven generating units with a nameplate capacity of 25 MW, with current diesel storage capacity on site of 162,000 litres.

 Substation – The main substation for the Whitehorse Rapids Generating Station (S150) is located within the existing site.

 Administration offices – Within the Whitehorse Rapids Generating Station compound there are also the main administrative offices for the Yukon Energy Corporation.

Chapter 1 Page 1-1 Project Introduction and Overview Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

The Project components to be located at the expanded WTGS site are as follows (see Figure 2-1):

1. Expanded Site Area Acquisition: Purchase of Crown land and lease of private land to expand the WTGS for the purposes of siting the proposed facilities.

2. Components on Expanded Site Area: Construction and operation of the following components on the Expanded Site Area:

a. LNG truck offloading, storage, and vapourization facilities and related infrastructure, including up to four 166.5 m3 storage tanks, a short all weather access road from Miles Canyon Road for truck offloading and access to the components on the Expanded Site Area, fencing and other facilities required for safe operation. The Expanded Site Area will be designed to accommodate up to six 166.5 m3 LNG storage tanks, if needed as part of potential future projects.

b. Three new 4.4 MW natural gas-fired modular reciprocating generating units and related facilities, including a separate switchgear module, a fluid transfer station, and a small substation to receive power from the generating units. Planned in service for the first two natural gas-fired units (8.8 MW) is in fourth quarter 2014 and projected in service for the third natural gas-fired unit (4.4 MW) is currently expected to occur within a few years of the installation of the first two units. The Expanded Site Area will be designed to accommodate additional natural gas fired units, if needed as part of potential future projects.

c. Other Site Infrastructure:

i. New property fence and gate constructed to limit access to the new facility to authorized personnel;

ii. Improvement of drainage infrastructure currently in place to manage surface water runoff from Robert Service Way within the City of Whitehorse easement. The drainage infrastructure will be expanded to manage surface water runoff during construction and operation of the new facilities;

iii. Blackstart Power capability for the natural gas-fired generating units and to provide back up generation for the LNG Facility and a blackstart heater for vapourization of LNG; and

iv. Other related facilities, including: natural gas, fire suppression water and glycol/water piping, communications and electric service needed to connect the components; hydrants, streetlights, security systems and other infrastructure, and complete site landscaping as per City of Whitehorse zoning bylaws.

3. Distribution Line and Communication Line on the WTGS to bring power from the new generating units at 35 kV from the new small substation on the Expanded Site Area to the

Chapter 1 Page 1-2 Project Introduction and Overview Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

existing S150 substation that supplies power to the Yukon grid (and to provide power to the Expanded Site Area when the new geneating units are not operating).

4. Utility Trench on the WTGS for an underground pipe system between the existing WTGS diesel plant and the facilities on the Expanded Site Area for:

a. Water supply to the Expanded Site Area for fire suppression;

b. Glycol/ water heating system to make use of the heat produced by the engines located in the existing WTGS facility; and

c. Natural gas supply for conversion of the WTGS existing oil boiler to natural gas, future conversion of existing diesel engines to fuel blend (diesel and natural gas), and/or potential future installation of new gas or dual fuel engines at the existing WTGS service- bays previously used by diesel engines that have been removed.

5. Decommissioning of two Mirrlees Diesel Units (WD1 and WD2) in the existing WTGS, including ancillary equipment and disconnection from the electrical grid.

The Project will replace two diesel thermal units scheduled for retirement in 2014 and 2015, respectively with newer, more efficient natural-gas fired engines and related infrastructure which will result in reduced fuel costs, reduced greenhouse gas and particulate emissions, and increased capacity and reliability. New natural gas-fired engines are assumed to have an economic life of 40 years, based on expected average annual utilization of these assets. Assuming that the facilities will continue to be required for established backup capacity for the Yukon grid, it is expected that individual components will be replaced as they reach end of life and the Project facilities will not be decommissioned.

The infrastructure design and Project activities will be conducted in accordance with CSA Standard Z276- 11 Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG): Production, Storage and Handling, which establishes essential requirements and minimum standards for the design, installation and safe operation and maintenance of LNG facilities. Yukon Energy will also be subject to requirements under the Yukon Oil and Gas Act, and Gas Processing Plant Regulation.

Yukon Energy has secured an LNG supply of up to 250 cubic metres per day for a minimum of five years from Shell Canada’s Jumping Pound LNG plant being developed near Calgary and scheduled to start operation in third quarter 2014. There is also the potential in future to source LNG from the Fort Nelson area in northern British Columbia should additional liquefaction facilities come into service in this area, and/or Shell Canada arranges to make LNG supplies available in this area.

Truck delivery of LNG to the WTGS will use a double trailer (A-Train) combination with a 95,000 litre capacity, although currently available Tridem units with a 54,000 litre capacity may be used initially if there are delays in the licensing and fabrication of the new A-Train units.

Yukon Energy is undertaking all required planning, consultation, environmental and socio-economic studies, engineering and other related activities to obtain authorizations and approvals necessary to allow construction of the Project to commence in May 2014 to meet in-service target of late 2014 for the first

Chapter 1 Page 1-3 Project Introduction and Overview Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013 two natural gas-fired units. This schedule is driven by forecast thermal generation requirements for the winter of 2014/15, both to provide new thermal generation capacity for reliable service during that winter and to save in excess of $4 million of the thermal fuel generation costs1 as compared to delaying the Project implementation to late-2015. Due to Yukon’s rate equalization policies, cost savings resulting from the Project will benefit all of Yukon’s electricity customers.

1.2 SUMMARY OF EFFECTS ASSESSMENT AND PROJECT ACTIVITIES TO DATE

Numerous regulatory approvals and decisions are required before construction activities can be initiated; however, these approvals and decisions may only be made after the required effects assessment for the Project is completed by the Executive Committee under YESAA.

Yukon Energy began engaging Yukoners in discussions about upcoming electrical planning requirements with the review of the 2006 20-Year Resource Plan: 2006-2025 (2006 Resource Plan) by the Yukon Utilities Board (YUB). In that document, the need to replace or significantly refurbish aging diesel thermal generation units was examined. Discussions about energy choices, including the need for back-up thermal generation capacity given the nature of a hydro-based system, continued as part of a three day public energy Charrette held in March 2011 in Whitehorse leading up to the draft 2011 20-Year Resource Plan: 2011-2030 (2011 Resource Plan). As part of the 2011 Resource Plan process, four criteria for evaluation and decision-making regarding energy technology choices were developed: reliability, affordability, flexibility and environmental responsibility. Following up on the Charrette, Yukon Energy continued to host technology-specific workshops including a public workshop in Whitehorse in January 2012 on the potential use of LNG for electrical generation. Subsequent to this extensive public engagement process the draft 2011 Resource Plan was made publically available for review in July 2012.

During 2012, Yukon Energy began to explore specific opportunities at its Whitehorse site to install new natural gas generators (supplied by LNG) to replace aging diesel generators that must be retired. Both KDFN and TKC were invited in May of 2012 to initiate discussions regarding potential economic opportunities with respect to such a project. A partnership committee was developed including the signing of Confidentiality Agreements and Terms of Reference in July 2012. Numerous briefings have also been provided to both Chiefs and Councils and First Nation citizens, including elders, by Yukon Energy

1 During the period late 2014 to early 2015 there are effectively only two options for providing the necessary supply – the proposed Project (which replaces WD1 and WD2 with gas-fired generation supplied by LNG trucked from Alberta) or continued use of existing diesel generating units (and deferral of decommissioning of WD1 and WD2 until 2015 at the latest). During the key nine month period from October 1, 2014 to June 30, 2015, on a long-term average basis (as applicable for rate setting purposes and annual Yukon Energy costs) 30.7 GW.h of thermal generation is forecast ot be required. Forecast fuel costs for this generation total:  With Existing Diesel Units - $8.81 million (based on Yukon Energy’s 2012/13 GRA Compliance Filing average diesel fuel generation cost of 28.7 c/kW.h).  With New LNG - $4.38 million (based on LNG fuel cost at 13.5 c/kW.h with 95% diesel displacement, and assuming A- train LNG transportation is established and an AECO gas price of $4.5 per MMBtu).

Chapter 1 Page 1-4 Project Introduction and Overview Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013 officials and First Nation representatives. Additional meetings were conducted during the first week of July 2013.

During the past year Yukon Energy has briefed the Whitehorse City Council and City Planning officials with respect to potential plans for the Project. Additional stakeholder meetings and a public open house in the first two weeks of July 2013 provided another round of public engagement on the potential use of natural gas and more detailed information about the proposed Project. These events also provided an opportunity to discuss proposed value components with the various stakeholder groups and solicit additional feedback.

Yukon Energy has also been in ongoing formal and informal contact with various regulatory authorities to address potential areas of interest with regard to the Project, including safety, emissions and land tenure, and will maintain dialogue with these parties throughout the review processes.

The Project is proposed to occur within an existing environmental and socio-economic setting that has seen substantial commercial and industrial development and activities over a sustained period of time. Of particular note, dominant features of the existing conditions arise from the presence and influence of the existing Whitehorse Rapids Generating Station, the Whitehorse airport, the Schwatka Lake Aerodrome, Ear Lake Quarry, and nearby concrete and asphalt plants.

Yukon Energy focused the initial assessment of effects of the Project from a Valued Components (VCs) perspective. VCs are elements of the Project Study Area that are valued for environmental, scientific, social, aesthetic, or cultural reasons. Final VCs for the Project were determined based on whether there was an existing pathway of effect from the Project to the VC or environmental value and, in part, based on the results of consultation activities with stakeholders. The following environmental and socio- economic VCs were included in the effects assessment:

 Environmental VCs

o Vegetation Diversity

o Wildlife Diversity and Habitat

 Socio-economic VCs

o Recreation

o Human Health (dust, emissions, noise)

o Aesthetic Quality

o Transportation

o Economy (business and employment)

o Utility Ratepayers

Chapter 1 Page 1-5 Project Introduction and Overview Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Cumulative effects have been fully considered as an integral part of the effects assessment process. The assessment process was completed based on data previously available, as well as Project-specific studies, existing literature and available local knowledge and Traditional Knowledge collected during the study process.

The Project, including mitigation measures set out in the Project proposal, is not expected to cause any likely significant adverse environmental or socio-economic effects. This conclusion reflects careful consideration of the Project design as well as the consideration of mitigation measures that reduce or eliminate potential adverse effects. Some residual effects are anticipated (e.g., the physical presence of the facilities result in an altered landscape and other changes for as long as the facilities are in place), but these are not expected to be significant given the developed and industrial nature of the immediate surroundings that have been persistent on the landscape for the last 55 years or more.

The Project will also have positive environmental and socio-economic effects in a variety of areas. Notably, the Project is expected to provide for reduced greenhouse gas and particulate emissions in the Project Study Area resulting from the displacement of diesel generation emissions. This is consistent with The Yukon Government Climate Change Action Plan (Yukon Government 2009a) and the Energy Strategy for Yukon (Yukon Government 2009b). Both the plan and strategy set reduction of greenhouse gas emissions as a priority. Other positive effects include the potential for local jobs and business activity during the construction period (including opportunities for KDFN and TKC), savings for Yukon ratepayers compared to what would be required with continued reliance on increasing diesel generation, and potential business and employment opportunities for KDFN and TKC.

1.3 PROPONENT INFORMATION

Yukon Energy is the Project Proponent.

Yukon Energy (a public utility) is owned by the Yukon Government through the Yukon Development Corporation (a Crown Corporation), and is subject to rate regulation by the Yukon Utilities Board (YUB), under the Public Utilities Act. Yukon Energy owns and operates the Yukon’s integrated transmission system (consisting of a 138 kV line between Whitehorse, Aishihik, Carmacks, Faro and Stewart Crossing and a 69 kV line between Dawson, Stewart Crossing, Mayo and Keno) and generates almost 100% of the power on this isolated grid. It is also the electric utility with primary responsibility for planning and development of new generation and transmission facilities in Yukon.

Yukon Energy has an installed generation capacity of approximately 129 MW. Of this, 92 MW is installed capacity at three hydro facilities: Whitehorse, Aishihik and Mayo. A further 0.8 MW is installed wind generation. The remaining 36 MW is installed diesel thermal generating capacity of which 25 MW is installed in the WTGS. Yukon Energy’s wholesale customer, Yukon Electrical Company Limited (YECL), distributes power to 89% of Yukon retail customers, while Yukon Energy distributes power to the other 11% (approximately 1,900 customers) located primarily in Dawson City, Mayo and Faro.

Chapter 1 Page 1-6 Project Introduction and Overview Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Yukon Energy management reports to a Board of Directors through the President. Final approval to proceed with the Whitehorse Diesel-Natural Gas Conversion Project is subject to the approval of the Board of Directors and the territorial Minister responsible for Yukon Energy.

Yukon Energy is incorporated under, and regulated by, the Business Corporations Act (Yukon Government 2002a), the Public Utilities Act (YUB 2002) and the Yukon Waters Act (2003).

The designated contact for the YESAA assessment and subsequent licensing of the Project is Travis Ritchie, Yukon Energy’s Manager of Environment Assessment, and Licensing.

#2 Miles Canyon Road PO Box 5920 Whitehorse, Yukon Y1A 6S7 Ph: (867) 393-5350 Fax: (867) 393-5323 Email: [email protected]

1.4 PROJECT BACKGROUND

Yukon is primarily served by hydro-electric generation. However, as with other hydro based systems in southern Canada, thermal generation is, and will continue to be, an integral and cost effective component required for reliable and flexible power generation on the Yukon grid. Consequently, Yukon Energy owns and operates diesel generation to provide reserve capacity for the isolated Yukon grid in order to meet, emergency back-up requirements, as well as grid loads during winter months and other periods when water availability for hydro generation is limited by seasonal or drought conditions or is otherwise insufficient to meet grid load requirements.

The existing Whitehorse Rapids Generating Station (WRGS) was constructed by the Northern Canada Power Commission in 1958 to supply electricity to the Whitehorse area and included two hydro generating units. The first two diesel units were added in 1968 (WD1 and WD2) and a third hydro turbine was constructed in 1969. Growth in electrical demand in Whitehorse and the addition of an industrial customer in Faro led to the gradual addition of diesel units in 1970, 1975, 1990 and 1991 as well as a fourth hydro turbine in 1984. The current nameplate capacity of the WRGS includes 25 MW of diesel capacity and 40 MW of hydro. Current diesel storage includes one fuel tank (approximately 160,000 litres2).

With the 1998 closure of the Faro mine and resulting decline in Yukon grid loads, there were no material requirements for these diesel generating units to operate on a routine basis. Consequently, retirement or refurbishment of these diesel units was deferred. However, the hydro surplus created when the Faro

2 Two additional double walled, horizontal diesel fuel storage tanks were available on site during the period when the Faro mine was in operation (providing a total additional 100,000 litres of storage on site). After the Faro mine shut down one tank was moved to Dawson and the other tank was moved to Mayo.

Chapter 1 Page 1-7 Project Introduction and Overview Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Mine closed in 1998 has now been depleted by growth in grid loads for non-industrial and industrial customers, resulting in growing diesel fuel energy generation requirements. At the present time, thermal generation is also once again becoming the default option to meet ongoing growth in energy and capacity requirements on the Yukon grid.

Yukon Energy identified the need to replace or significantly refurbish its aging diesel generating units as part of its 2006 Resource Plan filing with the YUB. In its 2011 Resource Plan, Yukon Energy noted the expected need to replace all of its existing diesel units over the next 20 years and identified LNG as the lowest cost near-term option capable of meeting forecast requirements for additional grid and energy generation.

Ongoing growth has resulted in increased use of diesel to meet peak demand and advanced the need to replace the units with more efficient, reliable capacity. When the Mirrlees units (the oldest installed diesel untis) were evaluated, WD3 was deemed to be in the best condition and was refurbished in 2010. WD1 and WD2 (both first in service in 1968) are currently scheduled for retirement in 2014 and 2015, respectively.

Whitehorse is the most appropriate location for initial changeover of diesel to natural gas using LNG. It is the nearest practical grid location for LNG deliveries from Alberta or British Columbia, and the location of the Yukon grid’s largest load centre. It also offers the opportunity to use new gas fired generation to modernize the Whitehorse plant facilities, with its established infrastructure (including transformer capability and on-site staffing needed to operate and maintain the remaining diesel plant), concurrent with the retirement of existing diesel capacity at these facilities.

Planning activities for the Project undertaken to date include preliminary design, engineering, costing and procurement investigations; impact and site option assessments; LNG supply procurement and truck haul investigations and planning; discussions as noted with KDFN and TKC; and a public involvement program including KDFN and TKC, local stakeholders, government, and broad communication with Yukoners. Details on the public involvement program are set out in Chapter 4.

1.5 PROJECT PURPOSE

The Project will replace two diesel thermal units scheduled for retirement in 2014 and 2015 respectively with newer, more efficient natural-gas fired engines and related infrastructure which will result in reduced fuel costs, reduced greenhouse gas and particulate emissions, and increased capacity and reliability. This will also in effect modernize the WTGS and retain flexible and reliable thermal grid generation at Whitehorse (including installation of new fossil-fuel fired generation capacity required for reliable grid generation at peak winter loads or during drought conditions).

The Project will ensure that Yukon Energy maintains the infrastructure necessary in the next few years to address the YUB’s recommended reserve capacity planning criteria requirements, has reserve capacity for seasonal low water periods and drought years, and is able to meet short term non-industrial load growth and peak demand with the least impact on ratepayers.

Chapter 1 Page 1-8 Project Introduction and Overview Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

1.6 REQUIRED AUTHORIZATIONS AND REGULATORY APPROVALS

The Project is subject to a screening level assessment by the Executive Committee of Yukon Environmental and Socio-Economic Assessment Board (YESAB), in accordance with Section 26 of Schedule 3 of the Assessable Activities, Exceptions and Executive Committee Projects Regulations as the Project will involve the expansion of a fossil-fuel fired electrical generating station that potentially increases production capacity by 5 MW or more prior to consideration of the concurrent decommissioning of WD1 and WD2 units at this station, i.e., the Project will increase the production capacity of the WTGS by up to 13.1 MW.

A review of the Project is also anticipated by the YUB under Part 3 of the Yukon Public Utilities Act.

Table 1-1 lists the regulatory permits and approvals that have been identified as being potentially required for the Project.

Chapter 1 Page 1-9 Project Introduction and Overview Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Table 1-1: Regulatory Authorizations Required for the Project

Activity Authorization Required Act or Regulation Pressure piping system Approval and Registration of Boiler and Pressure Vessels Act Design Permission to obtain Quarry Permit Territorial Lands (Yukon) Act, gravel/sand from a quarry Quarry Regulations, Lands Act Clearing timber Land Use Permit Territorial Lands (Yukon) Act, Land Use Regulations, Lands Act Tenure for land lease or Land Disposition Territorial Lands (Yukon) Act, agreement of sale, or other Territorial Lands Regulation, disposition Lands Act, Lands Regulations Registration of an interest in Land Title Registration Land Titles Act land Gas Piping Gas Installation Permit Gas Burning Devices Act Use of natural gas in a gas burning device Electrical work Electrical Permit Electrical Protection Act; Canadian Electrical Code Handling, disposal, generation Amendment to existing Hazardous Environment Act, Storage Tank or storage of special Substances Aboveground Storage Regulations (hazardous) wastes Tank Permit Operation of electricity Amendment to existing Air Environment Act, Air Emissions generating facilities with a Emissions Permit Regulation maximum nameplate capacity equal or more than 1.0 Megavolt ampere (or 1 MW) Transport of dangerous Permit for transport of dangerous Dangerous Goods Transportation goods/waste goods Act, Dangerous Goods Transportation Regulations Erect a sign within highway Sign Permit Highways Regulation right of way Construction of a project Energy Project Certificate Public Utilities Act designated as an “energy project” under Part 3 of the Public Utilities Act Operation of a project Energy Operation Certificate designated as an “energy

Chapter 1 Page 1-10 Project Introduction and Overview Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Activity Authorization Required Act or Regulation project” under Part 3 of the Public Utilities Act Construction and operateion of Facility Licence Oil and Gas Act (Yukon), Gas a facility for the storage and Processing Plant Regulation vaporization of liquefied natural gas. Construction of an oil and gas Construction Authorization facility Operation of an oil and gas Operation Authorization facility Development within the City of Development Permit City of Whitehorse – Zoning Whitehorse Bylaw, Development Agreement Regulations Bylaw (Bylaw 2012- 15) Creation of a new lot within City Authorization to subdivide City of Whitehorse -Subdivision of Whitehorse boundary Bylaw (Bylaw 2012-16) Work within 4 km of aerodrome Transport Canada Obstacle Canadian Aviation Regulation property Clearance Form TP 312 Standards and Recommended Practice

1.7 SUBMISSION ORGANIZATION AND CONTENT

The Project Proposal has been prepared so as to follow the Proponent’s Guide to Information Requirements for Executive Committee Project Proposal Submissions (Proponent’s Guide) in structure and content in all material respects. As the Proponent’s Guide describes in general terms the form of Project Proposal submissions, it has been applied in this document so as to reflect the specific characteristics of the Project.

The following outlines the chapter organization of this Project Proposal:

 Chapter 1: Project Introduction and Overview

 Chapter 2: Project Location

 Chapter 3: Assessment Approach

 Chapter 4: First Nations and Other Public Consultations

 Chapter 5: Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting

 Chapter 6: Project Description

 Chapter 7: Environmental and Socio-Economic Effects Assessment

 Chapter 8: Monitoring and Follow-up Programs

Chapter 1 Page 1-11 Project Introduction and Overview Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

 Chapter 9: Acknowledgement and Certification

 Chapter 10: List of Acronyms, Glossary, and References

Chapter 1 Page 1-12 Project Introduction and Overview Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

2.0 PROJECT LOCATION

Chapter 2 provides a general geographical setting for the Project Proposal in terms of its location within the Yukon. The chapter addresses the requirements stipulated in Section 3.0, Project Location, of the Proponent’s Guide to Information Requirements for Executive Committee Project Proposal Submission (Proponent’s Guide, YESAB 2005) by setting out information regarding geographic location, land tenure, traditional territory of Yukon First Nations, Yukon Land Use Planning Region and consistency of the proposed Project activities with any existing land and/or resource management plans. It also outlines the broad Project Study Area for the Project Proposal assessment as more fully described in Chapter 3, as well as the more localized Project Construction Footprint for the key physical components of the Project, also more fully described in Chapter 3.

Precise final locations of Project components will be available after final engineering design and construction have been completed.

Certain Project components will be situated on, or transect, the same parcels of land as the existing infrastructure (owned by Yukon Energy). In addition, land not presently owned by Yukon Energy is required for the Project.

• With respect to Crown lands required for the Project, Yukon Energy has been engaged in discussions with the Department of Energy, Mines and Resources to ensure that it will be able to acquire fee simple title with respect to those lands or portion thereof, required for the purpose of the construction and long-term operation of the Project. In the interim, Yukon Energy will seek Land Use Permit(s) or other rights to Crown lands as may be needed to proceed with the construction of the Project.

• With respect to the privately owned parcels required for the Project, Yukon Energy has begun discussions with Clublink, the owner of the White Pass and Yukon Railway, in order to secure a long term lease to the portion of the railway right of way on British Yukon Railway (Plan 42261 CLSR) that runs parallel to the proposed site. Negotiations with the landowner towards a formal lease for the land are ongoing.

2.1 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION

The Project is located within the Yukon Southern Lakes Ecoregion, within the Boreal Cordillera Ecozone, and lies within the Traditional Territory of the Kwanlin Dün First Nation (KDFN) and the Ta’an Kwäch’än Council (TKC). The Project will be constructed within a developed part of the City of Whitehorse, approximately two kilometres south of downtown Whitehorse.

The Project Construction Footprint includes the following components that will be located on Yukon Energy property, on lands to be acquired from Yukon Government and on a privately owned parcel (as illustrated in Figure 2-1 and Figure 2-2):

• Existing WTGS on Yukon Energy-owned land (where to-be retired thermal generating units WD#1 and WD#2 will be decommissioned);

Chapter 2 Page 2-1 Project Location Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

• A corridor on Yukon Energy owned land running from the WTGS to the Expanded Site Area (for an underground pipe system between the existing WTGS diesel plant and the facilities on the Expanded Site Area); and

• The Expanded Site Area located west of the Whitehorse Rapids Generating Station power canal and adjacent to Robert Service Way on approximately 0.9 ha of utility zoned land to be acquired from Yukon Government and approximately 0.6 ha of a railway right of way.

Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) will be delivered to the site by truck via the Alaska Highway, Robert Service Way and Miles Canyon Road.

As reviewed in more detail in Chapter 3, a broader study area for the Project Proposal (Project Study Area) is defined as a 500 metre radius surrounding the Project Construction Footprint. A schematic of the Project Study Area is provided in Figure 2-2.

Figure 2-3 provides a Project Study Area Context and indicates the location of the Project Construction Footprint and Project Study Area relative to the nearest residential area (i.e., Riverdale – approximately 0.5 km northwest of the Expanded Site Area), downtown Whitehorse (approximately two kilometres north of the Expanded Site Area) the Erik Neilsen Whitehorse International Airport (approximately 0.5 km west of the Expanded Site Area); the Schwatka Lake aerodrome (700 metres from the Expanded Site Area, just outside the Project Study Area); the nearest TKC Settlement Land parcel C-28B (overlapped by the Project Study Area and 175 metres southwest of the Project Construction Footprint) and the nearest KDFN Settlement Land parcel (the closest parcel is outside the Project Study Area and 900 metres southwest of the Project Construction Footprint).

Figure 5A-3 in Chapter 5 provides an overview of the physical topography of the Project Study Area and indicates it is dominated by urban landscape (including the WTGS, Robert Service Way, the mudbog, and dirt biking jumps and obstacles located on City of Whitehorse adjacent to and west of to Robert Service Way; see Figure 5A-5). Environmentally sensitive areas are located within the Project Study Area (however, these areas are not within the Project Construction Footprint where construction activities will take place). The Expanded Site Area contains some forested area and is located within a birch-willow ecosystem, described further in Chapter 5.

The Yukon River is located within the Project Study Area 180 metres east of the Project Construction Footprint. Schwatka Lake is 500 metres southeast of the Project Construction Footprint. (Figure 2-2 and Figure 2-3).

Chapter 2 Page 2-2 Project Location Document Path: C:\Users\smallory\Documents\TEMP_ENV_COORD\GIS\LNG PROJECT DATA\MAPS\2-1 Fig_LNG WTGS_Project Construction Footprint_31July2013.mxd

135°2'30"W

EXISTING SUBSTATION

NEW OVERHEAD DISTRIBUTION LINE

WD1 AND WD2 UNIT AREA EXISTING DIESEL PLANT

NEW UTILITY TRENCH

SUBSTATION 21m x 24m

SWITCH GEAR

MODULES

LUBE OIL STORAGE

STORM RETENTION AREA

STORAGE TANKS City of Whitehorse ACCESS ROAD Municipal Boundary

VAPOUR BARRIER

Dawson City Project Alaska HWY Site VAPOURIZERS Mayo

TRUCK UNLOADING Carmacks STATION AND SECONDARY Haines Junction Whitehorse CONTAINMENT SECONDARY Watson Lake CONTAINMENT

135°2'30"W

Data Source -Main Map: Coordinate System: NAD83 UTM Zone 8 City of Whitehorse 2006 digital image Legend Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Data Source -Overview Map: Coordinate System: Yukon Albers WTGS and Project Construction Footprint NTDB 2009, 1:1,000,000 Place Names Conversion Project Canadian Administrative boundaries, Geobase 2013 *All data are limited by the date the map was printed. All spatial data subject to change. Facility Data Storage Tanks Utility Trench Substation New Overhead Distribution Line Whitehorse Thermal Switchgear Vapour Barrier Generating Station (WTGS) and . Truck Secondary Containment Storm Retention Area 1:1,630 Lube Oil Storage Access Road Project Construction Footprint Meters Module 0 20 40 80 120 Secondary Containment This drawing has been prepared for the use of Yukon Energy and may not be used, Author: S.Mallory reproduced or relied upon by third parties, except as agreed to by Yukon Energy Vapourizer and its Partners, as required by law or for use by governmental reviewing agencies. Reviewed by: H. Campbell Yukon Energy accepts no responsibility, and denies any liability whatsoever, to any party WD1 and WD2 Unit Area that modifies this drawing without Yukon Enery's express written consent. Date Produced: 05/08/2013 Figure 2-1

135°3'30"W 135°3'0"W 135°2'30"W 135°2'0"W City of Whitehorse Municipal Boundary Riverdale

Whitehorse Thermal Subdivision Project Alaska HWY Erik Nielsen Generating Station Dawson City Site Whitehorse and International Project Construction River Yukon Mayo Airport Footprint Carmacks

Haines Junction Whitehorse Watson Lake 60°42'0"N 60°42'0"N Whitehorse Rapids Generating Station Property Boundary Legend Project Study Area - 500m radius Expanded Site Area Project Construction Footprint Whitehorse Rapids Generating Station Property Boundary

Data Source -Main Map: Expanded City of Whitehorse 2006 digital image Site Area Coordinate System: NAD83 UTM Zone 8 Data Source -Overview Map: NTDB 2009, 1:1,000,000 Place Names Canadian Administrative boundaries, Geobase 2013 Coordinate System: Yukon Albers Project Study *All data are limited by the date the map was printed. All spatial data subject Area to change. .

Kilometers Robert Service Way Motorcross 0 0.075 0.15 0.3 Track 1:6,000 This drawing has been prepared for the use of Yukon Energy and may not be used, reproduced or relied upon by third parties, except as agreed to by Yukon Energy and its Partners, as required by law or for use by governmental reviewing agencies. Yukon Energy accepts no responsibility, and denies any liability whatsoever, to any party that modifies this drawing without Yukon Enery's express written consent.

Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas 60°41'30"N 60°41'30"N Conversion Project Schwatka Lake

Project Study Area

Drawn by: S.Mallory Reviewed by: Yukon Energy 135°3'30"W 135°3'0"W 135°2'30"W 135°2'0"W Date Produced: 05/08/2013 Figure 2-2 Document C:\Users\smallory\Documents\TEMP_ENV_COORD\GIS\LNG Path: Fig_LNG Area_11July2013.mxdProjectStudy PROJECT DATA\MAPS\2-2

Document Path: C:\Users\smallory\Documents\TEMP_ENV_COORD\GIS\LNG PROJECT DATA\MAPS\2-3 Fig_LNG Project Area Overview_09July2013.mxd

135°5'0"W 135°4'0"W 135°3'0"W 135°2'0"W 135°1'0"W 135°0'0"W

City of Whitehorse Municipal Boundary

Dawson City Project Alaska HWY Site

Downtown Mayo

Carmacks

Haines Junction Whitehorse Watson Lake 60°43'0"N 60°43'0"N

Erik Nielsen Whitehorse International Airport

Yukon River

Riverdale Subdivision

Project Study Area Boundary 60°42'0"N 60°42'0"N

Whitehorse Rapids Generating Station Property Boundary

Schwatka Lake 60°41'0"N 60°41'0"N

135°5'0"W 135°4'0"W 135°3'0"W 135°2'0"W 135°1'0"W 135°0'0"W

Data Source -Main Map: Coordinate System: NAD83 UTM Zone 8 City of Whitehorse 2006 digital image Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Data Source -Overview Map: Coordinate System: Yukon Albers NTDB 2009, 1:1,000,000 Place Names Whitehorse Rapids Generating Station Property Conversion Project Canadian Administrative boundaries, Geobase 2013 *All data are limited by the date the map was printed. All spatial data subject to change. Boundary Project Study Area - 500m . Project Study Area Context 1:20,000

Kilometers

0 0.25 0.5 1 This drawing has been prepared for the use of Yukon Energy and may not be used, Drawn by: S.Mallory reproduced or relied upon by third parties, except as agreed to by Yukon Energy and its Partners, as required by law or for use by governmental reviewing agencies. Reviewed by: H. Campbell Yukon Energy accepts no responsibility, and denies any liability whatsoever, to any party that modifies this drawing without Yukon Enery's express written consent. Date Produced: 05/08/2013 Figure 2-3

Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

2.2 PROJECT COMPONENTS

The Project components are as follows:

1. Expanded Site Area Acquisition: Purchase of Crown land and lease of private land to expand the WTGS for the purposes of siting the proposed facilities.

2. Components on Expanded Site Area: Construction and operation of the following components on the Expanded Site Area:

a. LNG truck offloading, storage, and vapourization facilities and related infrastructure, including up to four 166.5 m3 storage tanks, a short all weather access road from Miles Canyon Road for truck offloading and access to the components on the Expanded Site Area, fencing and other facilities required for safe operation. The Expanded Site Area will be designed to accommodate up to six 166.5 m3 LNG storage tanks if needed as part of potential future Projects.

b. Three new 4.4 MW natural gas-fired modular reciprocating generating units and related facilities, including a separate switchgear module, a fluid transfer station, and a small substation to receive power from the generating units. Planned in-service for the first two natural gas-fired units (8.8 MW) is in fourth quarter 2014, and projected in- service for the third natural gas-fired unit (4.4 MW) will occur within a few years of the installation of the first two units, and as required to meet grid capacity planning requirements. The Expanded Site Area will be designed to accommodate additional natural gas-fired units, if needed, as part of potential future Projects.

c. Other Site Infrastructure: i. New property fence and gate constructed to limit access to the new facility to authorized personnel;

ii. Improvement of drainage infrastructure currently in place to manage surface water runoff from Robert Service Way within the City of Whitehorse easement. The drainage infrastructure will be expanded to manage surface water runoff during construction and operation of the new facilities;

iii. Blackstart Power capability for the natural gas-fired generating units and to provide backup generation for the LNG Facility and a blackstart heater for vapourization of LNG; and

iv. Other related facilities, including: natural gas, fire suppression water and glycol/water piping, communications and electric service needed to connect the components; hydrants, streetlights, security systems and other infrastructure, and complete site landscaping as per City of Whitehorse zoning bylaws.

3. Distribution Line and Communication Line on the WTGS to bring power from the new generating units at 35 kV from the new small substation on the Expanded Site Area to the existing S150 substation that supplies power to the Yukon grid (and to provide power to the Expanded Site Area when the new generating units are not operating).

Chapter 2 Page 2-6 Project Location Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

4. Utility Trench on the WTGS for an underground pipe system between the existing WTGS diesel plant and the facilities on the Expanded Site Area for:

a. Water supply to the Expanded Site Area for fire suppression;

b. Glycol/water heating system to make use of the heat produced by the engines located in the existing WTGS facility; and

c. Natural gas supply conversion of the existing oil boiler to natural gas, potential future conversion of existing diesel engine to fuel blend (diesel and natural gas), and/or potential future installation of new gas or dual fuel engines at the existing WTGS in service bays previously used by diesel engines that have been removed.

5. Decommissioning of two Mirrlees Diesel Units (WD1 and WD2) in the existing WTGS, including ancillary equipment and disconnection from the electrical grid.

Details on each of the Project components are provided in Chapter 6, Project Description. Approximate Universal Transverse Mercator Coordinate System (UTM) and Latitude/Longitude coordinates for the Project’s Construction Footprint Area which encompasses the zone of activity for proposed physical works, are provided in Table 2-1.

Chapter 2 Page 2-7 Project Location Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Table 2-1: Location of Project Components

Project Existing Parcel Geodetic Location Comments Component Land Parcel UTM NAD 83 Zone 8 Overlapped by Project Component

Expanded Site Area British Yukon E: 497442.06 m/ N: 6728822.81 m 4 corners Acquisition Rail lease/ E: 497398.10 m/ N: 6728955.00 m Crown land E: 497439.49 m/ N: 6729057.51 m E: 497524.71 m/ N: 6728859.46 m

LNG truck British Yukon E: 497452.62 m/ N: 6728827.23 m 4 corners offloading, storage Rail lease/ E: 497416.86 m/ N: 6728895.97 m and vapourization Crown land facility & related E: 497492.27 m/ N: 6728938.32 m infrastructure E: 497524.71 m/ N: 6728859.46 m

New 4.4 MW British Yukon Modular Units Midpoint natural gas-fired Rail lease/ #1: E: 497453.71 m/ N: 6728975.45 m modular reciprocal Crown land generating units & #2: E: 497459.50 m/ N: 6728966.73 m related facilities #3: E: 497463.15 m N: 6728957.42 m Lube Oil Module E: 497434.06 m/ N: 6728940.94 m Switchgear Module E: 497449.65 m/ N: 6728985.61 m

Other site British Yukon Drainage Infrastructure Midpoint infrastructure (New Rail lease/ E: 497425.38 m/ N: 6728922.40 property fence and Crown land gate; improvement Property Fence of drainage E: 497442.06 m/ N: 6728822.81 m infrastructure; other related E: 497398.10 m/ N: 6728955.00 m facilities) E: 497439.49 m / N: 6729057.51 m E: 497524.71 m/ N: 6728859.46 m Substation E : 497444.01 m/ N : 6729001.51 m

Chapter 2 Page 2-8 Project Location Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Project Existing Parcel Geodetic Location Comments Component Land Parcel UTM NAD 83 Zone 8 Overlapped by Project Component Distribution line British Yukon Distribution line will be located along Distribution line on and Rail lease/ existing access road and go underground Yukon Energy communications Crown land/ near diesel plant. Final layout to be property between line Lot 1022 determined upon site inspection. new substation and S150 Start: E : 497444.01 m/ N : 6729001.51 m End: E : 497550.72 m/ N : 6729306.36 m

Utility trench British Yukon Utility trench from expanded site are to Owned by Yukon Rail lease/ Lot Whitehorse Diesel Plant Energy 1022, Quad Start: E: 497467.56 m/ N: 6728994.19 m Final layout to be 105D/11, Plan determined upon 73440 End: E: 497548.69 m/ N: 6729222.88 m site inspection

Related facilities British Yukon Utility trench from expanded site to Final layout to be including gas, heat Rail lease/ Whitehorse Diesel Plant determined upon piping and electric Crown land site inspection Start: E: 497480.50 m/ N: 6728876.76 m service between facility components End: E: 497467.56 m/ N: 6728994.19 m

Decommissioning Lot 1022, WD1 Owned by Yukon of two Mirrlees Quad Energy E: 497557.39 m/ N: 6729235.25 m Diesel Units 105D/11, Plan 73440 WD2 (WD1 and WD2) in the existing WTGS E: 497552.55 m/ N: 6729228.22 m

2.2.1 Legal Land Description for Expanded Site Area

The Expanded Site Area is located on an unsurveyed parcel adjacent to Robert Service Way (Plan 85587 CLSR) and British Yukon Railway (Plan 42261 CLSR). This parcel contains Drainage Easement B, shown on Plan 85587 CSLR. A legal land description of the Project components will be available after detailed engineering, design construction and land dispositions are finalized with the Crown, and after the land lease agreement is finalized with the private property owner.

2.3 LAND TENURE WITHIN THE PROJECT STUDY REGION

A land tenure search within the Project Study Area, focusing on areas in close vicinity to the existing WTGS, is provided in Appendix 2A. Figure 5A-5 (Appendix 5A) provides an overview of land use and land tenure within the Project Study Area.

Chapter 2 Page 2-9 Project Location Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

In regard to specific land tenure noted to be of interest in the Proponent’s Guide, the following items are noted:

• Protected Areas and Parks - The Project Construction Footprint is located partially within the Chadburn Lake Park Reserve.

The Chadburn Lake Park Reserve was created by a Federal Government Commissioner’s Order (1970-304) in 1970 to preserve an area for recreation close to Whitehorse and to protect the region’s water supply. While the need for recreational space within Whitehorse remains, the water supply no longer comes from Schwatka Lake as all drinking water for Whitehorse area residents now comes from underground aquifers. It is also noted that development activity has occurred within the Chadburn Lake Reserve since its creation in 1970.

As part of the most recent Official Community Plan amendment process, the City of Whitehorse has expanded the area designated as Chadburn Lake Park to include most of Grey Mountain and additional land to the west of Whitehorse. The City of Whitehorse has also indicated its preference that the reserve be removed from the west side of the Yukon River where the Project Construction Footprint is located1. A territorial Order in Council is required to remove the Project Construction Footprint from the original Chadburn Lake Park Reserve.

The Project Study Area is not in the vicinity of any other lands designated under the Parks and Lands Certainty Act, National Parks, Special Management Areas, Habitat Protection Areas, Canadian Heritage Rivers, National Wildlife Areas or Wildlife Sanctuaries.

• Trapping and Outfitting Concession Areas - There is one open trapping concession within the Project Construction Footprint (#288) and one closed trapping concession (#409). There are no additional concessions within the Project Study Area. The Government of Yukon, Department of Environment has indicated that trapping concession #288 does not have a registered license holder at this time.

There are no outfitting concessions within the Project Construction Footprint or the Project Study Area.

• Mineral, Aggregate and Agricultural claims - There are no quartz or placer claims within the Project Construction Footprint or the Project Study Area.

1 See City of Whitehorse 2010 Official Community Plan, which notes as follows (Objective 18.1.2) “Chadburn Lake Park is approximately 8,050 hectares in size and is the largest protected park within City limits. An existing Order in Council protects some of this land from disposition, but park limits also include privately owned land, First Nation settlement land, and areas that have already been developed along the Alaska Highway. Other adjacent areas with high environmental and recreational values have not been included in the existing reserve. The City may request that the Commissioner of the Yukon amend or remove the existing Order in Council in order to have it more accurately reflect the intended area for park preservation as shown on Map 6, and/or to have full jurisdiction and control of the park given to the City. This change to the Order in Council would open up already developed areas along the Highway for further development and protect areas that are environmentally sensitive or used for recreation”.

Chapter 2 Page 2-10 Project Location Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Further, the Government of Yukon in 2012 issued OIC 2012-145 (Prohibition of Entry on Certain Lands – City of Whitehorse – Order), prohibiting the staking of land for the purposes of mineral exploration within the City of Whitehorse for a five year period (commencing July 19, 2012).

There is very little agricultural activity within the City of Whitehorse. Designated agricultural lots are limited to those along the Long Lake Road (outside the Project Study Area). There are no designated agriculture applications, leases or dispositions within the Project Study Area.

Several aggregate pits are located to the southwest of the Project Study Area in the Ear Lake and McLean Lake areas and an asphalt plant is in operation on the south side of Robert Service Way, approximately 1,500 metres southwest of the Project Study Area.

• Water Use Licence Holders - Yukon Energy currently holds a Type A Water Licence numbered HY99-010 (Yukon River at Whitehorse) for the operation of the Whitehorse Rapids Generating Station and the Lewes Dam. There are no other water licence holders identified adjacent to the Project Construction Footprint.

Water Licence holders for the Project Study Area are summarized in Table 2-2.

Table 2-2: Water Licences within Close Vicinity to Whitehorse Generating Station

License License Project Location Description number holder (Approximate)

HY-99-010 Yukon Energy Type A water Yukon River at Operation of the Whitehorse Corporation license Whitehorse Rapids Generating Station and the Lewes Dam as proposed in Water Use Applications HY99- 009 and HY99-010.

MN00-031 City of Type A water Yukon River at To obtain, divert, store and Whitehorse licence Whitehorse alter a flow of water and to deposit a waste.

MS09-289 Government Type B water Yukon River shoreline Construction of a wharf, a of Yukon licence in Whitehorse, YT retaining wall and shoreline erosion protection and conducting maintenance when required.

Chapter 2 Page 2-11 Project Location Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

• Private Landholdings - There are 0.61 hectares of privately owned land located within the Project Construction Footprint. This land is held in fee simple and is part of the British Yukon Rail right of way. Discussions with the owner to date indicate willingness to enter into a long term lease with Yukon Energy for the required lands.

There is also a City of Whitehorse drainage easement (identified as Drainage Easement B) within the Project Construction Footprint for water management off Robert Service Way. This drainage easement will need to be redesigned and relocated.

Private Landholdings within the Project Study Area are outlined in Appendix 2A. All private land holdings required for the Project infrastructure are set out in Table 2-1.

2.4 TRADITIONAL TERRITORY

The proposed Project is located entirely within the overlapping traditional territory of the KDFN and the TKC. However, the Project Construction Footprint is not located on KDFN Settlement Land or TKC Settlement Land. There is one Settlement Land parcel within the Project Study Area, codified in the Ta’an Kwäch’än Final Agreement – this Settlement Land parcel is Lot 1191 – TKC C-28B, located on the west side of Robert Service Way and south of the Project Construction Footprint. The TKC Self-Government Agreement sets out that for land parcels within the City of Whitehorse (including Lot 1191 - TKC C-28B) the TKC will not exercise powers to enact laws (including laws related to planning or zoning) unless otherwise agreed by the TKC and Government or the City of Whitehorse (whichever has responsibility for the matter in question) 2.

The nearest KDFN Settlement Land parcel is Lot 1216 at the intersection of Robert Service Way and the Alaska Highway. The KDFN Self-Government Agreement outlines the development process for KDFN Settlement Land and the regulatory authorities that apply. The majority of Settlement Land within the City of Whitehorse is Type 2 Settlement Land which can be used for residential, commercial, light industrial, industrial or First Nation institutional uses. On Type 2 settlement land KDFN is able to exercise planning, zoning and land development power consistent with the designated land use and may adopt existing Yukon or city laws about public health and safety as its own laws for Type 2 lands3.

Yukon Energy has consulted extensively with TKC and KDFN regarding the Project, including entering into joint discussions regarding the Project with both TKC and KDFN as outlined in Chapter 4.

2 TKC Self Government Agreement, 2002, Section 28.1. 3 2010 Official Community Plan, page 41.

Chapter 2 Page 2-12 Project Location Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Table 2-3: Ta’an Kwäch’än Council Settlement Lands in the Project Study Area

Group/ Lot CLSR# LTO# Tenure Type C. of Rights Quad Title#

1191 - TKC C-28B 105/D11 88071 2003-0224 FN Settlement N/A Surface Land

2.5 YUKON LAND USE PLANNING REGION

The Project is located within the proposed Whitehorse Land Use Planning Region as illustrated in Figure 2-4. As of the time of filing of this Project Proposal, the Whitehorse Land Use Plan has not been completed.

Chapter 2 Page 2-13 Project Location GH W I AY

Big Salmon

137°0'0"W 136°0'0"W 135°0'0"W 134°0'0"W 133°0'0"W City of Whitehorse Municipal

Boundary D

A Project Alaska HWY

O Dawson City Site R

Mayo

Kaska Dene Carmacks Planning Region Haines Junction Whitehorse Watson Lake

Livingstone

L O

N Legend Kluane A Whitehorse Planning Region C Planning Region Yukon Planning Regions Waterbody Watercourse Major Roads 61°0'0"N

61°0'0"N Data Source -Main Map: Yukon Planning Regions -Yukon Land Use Planning Council, 2012 Hypsometry, Waterbodies, Place Names, Watercourses Takhini - NTDB 1:1Million- Digital Chart of the World Canyon Hotspring Coordinate System: NAD83 UTM Zone 8 Teslin Data Source -Overview Map: ALASKA NTDB 2009, 1:1,000,000 Place Names HIGHWAY Planning Region Canadian Administrative boundaries, Geobase 2013 Haines Junction Project Location Coordinate System: Yukon Albers Champagne WHITEHORSE *All data are limited by the date the map was printed. All spatial data subject to change.

HAINES .

Kilometers Marsh Lake 0 12.5 25 50 Johnsons Crossing 1:850,000 This drawing has been prepared for the use of Yukon Energy and may not be used, Robinson Brooks Brook reproduced or relied upon by third parties, except as agreed to by Yukon Energy and its Partners, as required by law or for use by governmental reviewing agencies. Yukon Energy accepts no responsibility, and denies any liability whatsoever, to any party Dezadeash that modifies this drawing without Yukon Enery's express written consent. Klukshu Tagish Jakes Corner NISUTLIN RIVERWhitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas NATIONAL Conversion Project WILDLIFE AREA KLUANE ROAD ATLIN Teslin WILDLIFE Carcross SANCTUARY ROAD Yukon Planning Regions 60°0'0"N 60°0'0"N

Drawn by: S.Mallory Reviewed by: Yukon Energy 137°0'0"W 136°0'0"W 135°0'0"W 134°0'0"W 133°0'0"W Date Produced: 05/08/2013 Figure 2-4 Document C:\Users\smallory\Documents\TEMP_ENV_COORD\GIS\LNG Path: Planning regions_16July2013.mxdFig_Yukon PROJECT DATA\MAPS\2-4

Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

2.6 CONSISTENCY WITH OTHER PLANS

The proponent has reviewed publicly available community plans in the Project Study Area in order to ensure that the proposed Project is consistent with local plans.

2.6.1 Current Land Use & Management Plans

A summary of the land use and management plans considered in relation to the Project is provided below.

Table 2-4: Land Use and Management Plans

Plan General Description Objectives Related to the Project, if any

City of Whitehorse As informed by the City of Whitehorse Foster local and regional Official Community Strategic Sustainability Plan (2007) and the economic development that is Plan (OCP) 2010 City of Whitehorse Integrated Sustainability environmentally sustainable. Plan (2007), the OCP Guides aspects of land planning and management, including zoning, development and land use.

City of Whitehorse The Zoning bylaw accompanies the OCP and Pursuant to the Bylaw use and Zoning Bylaw 2012- “provides for orderly, economic, beneficial, development in each zone shall 20 and environmentally sensitive development in be in accordance with the uses the City”. listed for the zone and all the appropriate requirements of this bylaw (Section 1.6.1).

City of Whitehorse To assist individual and commercial aviation Provides for formalized Schwatka Lake and marine operations to locate on the commercial and recreational use Waterfront Policy Schwatka Lake Waterfront Lands, and to of the lake. Zoning bylaw 97-42 regulate such uses of the Schwatka Lake waterfront.

Yukon Wildland Fire The program aims to protect Yukoners, their Management Plan communities and resources by enforcing the Forest Protection Act and suppressing wildfire from a priority–based approach which places human life, community value and firefighter safety above all else.

Chapter 2 Page 2-15 Project Location Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

2.6.2 Project Consistency with Other Plans

The Project planning and assessment took into consideration the objectives of various management plans that are currently in place, and these objectives informed the public involvement and consultations with KDFN and TKC.

City of Whitehorse 2010 Official Community Plan (including consideration of the Strategic Sustainability Plan and Integrated Sustainability Plan)

In 2007, the City of Whitehorse commenced an extensive public engagement process focused on integration of sustainability into City operations and decision making. This resulted in the Integrated Sustainability Plan and the Strategic Sustainability Plan (SSP). The SSP was adopted in 2008 and informed the 2010 Official Community Plan planning process. The 2010 Official Community Plan (OCP) continued from the Strategic Sustainability Plan incorporating the vision and values developed as part of the earlier planning process4.

The 2010 OCP decisions and policies are organized and prioritized under six sustainability principles (as established by the SSP)5. In order of importance, the listed sustainability principles are: Thriving Environment, Community Development, Diverse Local Economy, Cultural Identity, Equity and Leadership and Education. The Project is generally consistent with the identified sustainability principles and objectives. Specifically, the following is noted regarding Project consistency with sustainability principles in the OCP:

• Thriving Environment – “Stewardship of the natural environment and recognition of its intrinsic value and importance for quality of life”.

o The project avoids environmentally sensitive areas and significant wildlife corridors, riparian areas and wetlands.

o During construction and operations all waste generated on site will be classified and handled appropriately as per the Environment Act and Special Waste Regulation. Throughout the Construction and Operation phases of the Project, wastes will be recycled to the greatest extent possible.

o The project will reduce emissions and improve air quality by replacing diesel fuel-fired generation at the WTGS with cleaner burning natural gas-fired generation.

• Community Development – “Decisions on development, land use, infrastructure, energy and transportation shall be integrated to minimize our ecological footprint”.

o The Project Construction Footprint is not located on TKC or KDFN Settlement Land. The Project Study Area overlaps one parcel of TKC Settlement Land.

o Project is located on land zoned for public utilities use and is located away from other land uses and environmentally sensitive areas.

4 2010 Official Community Plan, page 7. 5 2010 OCP, page 10.

Chapter 2 Page 2-16 Project Location Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

o Project construction and operational activities will comply with all municipal, territorial, and federal regulatory requirements in relation to approvals and licencing, including applicable impact and environmental assessment requirements.

o The construction of the Project on Utility zoned land will not interfere with other Community Development Objectives listed in the OCP.

• Diverse Local Economy – “A vibrant, diverse local economy that encourages self sufficiency, uses resources efficiently, and creates inter-generational wealth.”

o Transportation of LNG to Yukon provides potential for future expansion and diversification of the local economy.

o The Project will remove a small section of White Pass and Yukon Railway (WPYR) tracks in the Expanded Site Area adjacent to the Yukon Energy property. This will not affect use of historic WPYR tracks for tourism purposes within the downtown core.

• Cultural Identity – “We celebrate cultural diversity that strengthens the uniqueness of our northern community.”

o The Project will relocate a small 0.5 km portion of the Yukon loop trail; however, it will not have any significant adverse impact on recreational uses within the area.

o The Project will be built in a previously disturbed anthropogenic environment – with no identified nearby archeological resources. All excavation activities will follow standard archeological resources practices are required by the Historic Resources Act and Yukon Energy’s EMS.

• Equity – “Value equity, fairness and inclusiveness in our community relationships”.

o The OCP at page 80 indicates that one of the objectives related to equity relates to quality of life and access to basic services. In this regard, it is noted that the Project is expected to reduce rates compared to what would be required without the Project. This will benefit Yukon ratepayers broadly.

• Leadership and Education – “Long horizon community leadership true to our principles of sustainable development and global responsibility. Empower every generation to entrench sustainability in education with the benefit of shared northern knowledge.”

o Yukon Energy has developed an inclusive public participation process that brings residents, stakeholders, community associations, and others together to review energy and resource planning issues.

o Yukon Energy continues to work with and partner with key stakeholders.

Chapter 2 Page 2-17 Project Location Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

City of Whitehorse Bylaw 2012-20

The OCP is implemented through a series of land use designations which specify the type of land use permitted in certain areas, and establish policies regarding the development of land within the City of Whitehorse implemented through the Zoning Bylaw6.

The bylaw provides for “zoning for orderly, economic, beneficial, and environmentally sensitive development in the City of Whitehorse,” having regard for the following objectives (per Section 1.2):

• Implementing the Official Community Plan;

• Providing a comfortable community, with a variety of settings, for residents;

• Maintaining and enhancing a community character complementary to the surrounding natural environment; and

• Serving as a centre for a wide range of commercial, recreational, industrial and institutional services to residents and visitors.

Pursuant to the bylaw use and development in each zone shall be in accordance with the uses listed for the zone and all the appropriate requirements of this bylaw (Section 1.6.1).

The Project is an expansion of public utility infrastructure (i.e., the WTGS) and is to be located entirely on land zoned for public utilities use7. The Project is also located away from other land uses and environmentally sensitive areas and is compliant with setbacks as set out in Section 12.5.5 of Zoning Bylaw 2012-20. Further, the Project design includes a vegetation buffer approximately 10 metres in width along the perimeter of the Expanded Site Area, and landscaping will be undertaken at the end of the construction.

Project construction and operational activities will comply with all municipal, territorial, and federal regulatory requirements in relation to approvals and licensing, including applicable impact and environmental assessment requirements.

City of Whitehorse Bylaw 97-42

The bylaw provides for formalized commercial and recreational use of Schwatka Lake to assist individual and commercial aviation and marine operations to locate on the Schwatka Lake Waterfront Lands, and to regulate such uses of the Schwatka Lake waterfront. The Project will not interfere with any existing commercial or recreational uses of Schwatka Lake.

6 Official Community Plan, page 24. 7 Bylaw 2012-20 defines public utilities as “means a buildings, facilities, or equipment whether owned or operated by or for the City, or by a corporation or commission under agreement with or under franchise from a City or under a Territorial or Federal statute, which furnishes services and facilities available to or for use of all the inhabitants of the City, including but not limited to landfills and waste treatment facilities, sewage treatment facilities, pump houses and stations, water treatment plants and electrical production facilities”.

Chapter 2 Page 2-18 Project Location Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Yukon Wildland Fire Management Plan

The Yukon Wildland Fire Management Plan aims to protect Yukoners, their communities and resources by enforcing the Forest Protection Act and suppressing wildfire from a priority-based approach which places human life, community value and firefighter safety above all else.

Yukon Energy does not anticipate that the Project will impede the ability of the Protective Services Branch of the Department of Community Services from fulfilling its objectives.

Chapter 2 Page 2-19 Project Location

Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

3.0 ASSESSMENT APPROACH

Chapter 3 reviews the assessment approach in the Project Proposal, focusing on the following items:

 Overview of Approach;

 Assessment Framework including Cumulative Effects;

 Determining Significance of Residual Effects; and

 Sources of Information.

3.1 OVERVIEW OF APPROACH

The Project Proposal has been prepared in accordance with the Yukon Environmental and Socio- Economic Assessment Act (YESAA), the Yukon Environmental and Socio-Economic Assessment Board (YESAB) Guides1 and standard environmental and socio-economic assessment practice. It sets out the information required from Yukon Energy, for a screening of the Project by the YESAB Executive Committee. In accordance with the matters to be considered under s. 42(1) and 42(2) of YESAA, likely environmental and socio-economic effects of the Project, as well as likely cumulative adverse environmental and socio-economic effects of the Project and their significance are identified after considering the implementation of proposed mitigation, monitoring and follow-up measures. The submission utilizes and integrates available scientific, traditional knowledge (TK), local knowledge and other information relevant to the assessment of Project effects.

Following the direction of s. 50(3) of YESAA, the assessment approach has incorporated a consultation and public involvement process that sought views from the Kwanlin Dün First Nation (KDFN), Ta’an Kwäch’än Council (TKC) and residents/stakeholder groups in Whitehorse where the Project is to be located or might have significant environmental or socio-economic effects (Chapter 4).

The scoping of the Project, as well as a description of Project activities and components, is provided in Chapter 6. The assessment approach addresses the distinct phases of the Project (i.e., construction and operation) and their effects. The Project Proposal ultimately assesses (see Chapter 7) the effects of a preferred location for liquefied natural gas (LNG) storage, vapourization and generating station and associated infrastructure within the context of environmental and socio-economic value components.

The assessment approach focuses on the effects of Project construction and operation. At this time there is no timetable for decommissioning the new facilities, and it is currently not feasible to provide a meaningful assessment of any likely decommissioning plans or the anticipated effects of decommissioning. If at a later date it is determined that the facilities are no longer required, then Yukon Energy would adhere to the legislation and regulations in place at that time and would review

1 YESAB Guides refers to the Assessor’s Guide to the Assessment of Environmental Effects, v. 2006.01; the Guide to Socio-economic Effects Assessment 2006.06; Assessor’s Guide to the Assessment of Cumulative Effects v. 06.01.

Chapter 3 Page 3-1 Assessment Approach Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013 decommissioning plans with regulatory authorities and affected First Nations and other local communities.

3.2 ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK

For the purpose of assessing environmental and socio-economic effects of the Project, current conditions in areas potentially affected by the Project and the projected evolution of these conditions without the Project are considered as the baseline. Potential environmental and socio-economic effects of the Project on this existing baseline are predicted separately in the Project Proposal for each environmental and socio-economic component by comparing:

 What would be expected without the Project (i.e., the “existing conditions” or baseline expected for each environmental and socio-economic component without the Project, including, as relevant, consideration of other projects or activities that have been or will be carried out without the Project); and

 What would be expected with the Project (i.e., each environmental or socio-economic component as modified or affected by the Project based on direct and indirect effects pathways2 from the Project to the environmental or socio-economic component, including as relevant consideration of other projects or activities that have been or will be carried out in combination with the Project).

Following from the Project description and determination of the Project scope (Chapter 6), and reflecting the YESAB Guides and standard environmental and socio-economic assessment practice, the assessment framework for the Project Proposal (including cumulative effects assessment) to assess effects of the Project includes the following basic steps:

 Scoping of Assessment: It is critical at the outset to address assessment scope issues, including selecting valued environmental and socio-economic components (VCs) for the assessment. It is standard practice to focus an assessment on specific environmental and socio- economic components which are determined to be of particular importance. A VC based approach is intended to ensure that potential significant adverse effects to important environmental and socio-economic components will be detected and mitigated through the assessment process. Measures designed to mitigate adverse effects on major components should serve to also minimize likelihood of adverse impacts on other environmental and social components. Overview of specific methods of assessment for specific VCs is reviewed as required in Chapter 7.

 Baseline Conditions: This is a baseline analysis and includes review of current and evolving future VC conditions without the Project, as affected by past, current and other future projects included in the cumulative effects assessment. Chapter 5 provides a scan of the environmental and socio-economic setting. Each existing VC is described in the baseline analysis only to the

2 As reviewed in the YESAB Guides, “direct effects” are the initial, immediate effects caused by a specific activity and “indirect effects” are caused by a given action, but occur later in time or further removed in distance.

Chapter 3 Page 3-2 Assessment Approach Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

extent needed to identify potential Project - VC interactions and to predict the effect of the Project on that VC.

 Effects and Mitigation: This describes quantitatively and qualitatively both positive and adverse effects on VCs likely to result from the Project, after consideration of the baseline conditions without the Project as well as proposed mitigation measures with the Project beyond those already included in the Project description. In accordance with YESAA and the assessor’s guides, the scope of this assessment includes an examination of both environmental and socio- economic effects arising from the Project and is described for each VC in Chapter 7.

 Cumulative Effects Assessment: Cumulative effects assessment (CEA) is integral to the assessment approach and examines the likely adverse effects of the Project in combination with the likely effects of other past, existing and future projects and activities. To be considered a cumulative effect, the other past, existing and future projects being considered in the assessment must affect a VC that is also being adversely affected by the principal project; in this way the projects act cumulatively upon a valued component. This assessment is included in Chapter 7.

 Residual Effects and their Significance: Summarizes the nature and extent of any residual environmental effects of the Project after implementation of proposed mitigation, and includes characterization with rationale as to whether adverse residual environmental and socio-economic effects are significant or not significant. Included as part of mitigation are any plans for responding to any known or predicted residual effects. This assessment is included in Chapter 7.

 Monitoring and Follow-up: The proposed monitoring and follow-up activities should the Project proceed. This description is included in Chapter 8.

This framework is reviewed in more detail below for the following elements:

 Scoping of the Assessment;

 Analysis of Effects (combines baseline conditions with effects and mitigation steps);

 Cumulative Effects Assessment;

 Evaluation of Significance and description of Residual Effects; and

 Monitoring and Follow-up.

3.2.1 Scoping of the Assessment

This step includes:

 Identifying interests related to the Project;

 Selecting VCs for further examination;

 Identifying potential sources and pathways of effects from the Project to each VC selected;

 Identifying spatial and temporal boundaries for assessing effects of the Project for each selected VC; and

Chapter 3 Page 3-3 Assessment Approach Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

 Identifying other actions and effects pathways that may act cumulatively with the Project to affect the same VCs.

In this assessment VCs were identified after consultation with interested parties and experts, field studies undertaken on the terrestrial and aquatic environments, socio-economic data collection and consideration of available TK and local knowledge, as well as any plans and policies applicable to the regional area. The selection of VCs helped to focus the analysis on components deemed to be of particular importance or of special interest to residents or to the ecosystem. Well chosen VCs can also provide a representative measure of the Project’s effects on the non-selected environmental and socio-economic components.

The YESAB Guides provided considerable initial guidance as to scoping. Public consultations and further analysis were used to focus assessment of specific environmental and socio-economic components to define effects pathways, and to identify temporal and spatial boundaries for the assessment of Project effects on selected VCs.

Temporal and geographic study area boundaries for Project effects were identified separately for each VC based on predicted interactions with the Project.

The time periods examined include the Project construction, operations and any decommissioning periods as required to assess duration and/or timing of specific effects related to the Project. In summary, the following distinct time periods are assessed in which Project related effects accrue:

 Construction Phase: This phase generally consists of the estimated time required to complete the construction of the Project, including commissioning of the facilities.

 Operation Phase: The time period following construction, through the life of the relevant components of the Project, during which time the Project will be used for its primary purpose of power generation.

 Decommissioning Phase: For construction-related activities (i.e., staging areas, etc.), comprises the time period immediately following Construction Phase. For the main facilities associated with the Proposed Project, there is no timetable or plan for final disposition or decommissioning of the new facilities. The design life of the facility, before substantial refurbishment, is approximately 40 years, based on the expected average annual use of the facility. When such plans need to be developed, Yukon Energy would submit these plans as required for regulatory review and approval prior to its implementation. Accordingly, the Project Proposal does not provide any further assessment of the Proposed Project final disposition.

The assessment process commenced with the definition of a general geographic location for the Project and a Project Study Area (Figure 2-2) as well as the Project Construction Footprint (Figure 2-1) for the LNG storage, vaporization and generating station and associated infrastructure. For assessment purposes the following areas were defined:

 Project Construction Footprint: The Project Construction Footprint is the geographic area needed for construction and operation of the expanded physical infrastructure associated with the Whitehorse Diesel-Natural Gas Conversion Project including provision for the following:

Chapter 3 Page 3-4 Assessment Approach Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

o Offloading, storage, vaporization facilities, the gas-fired generating units and new substation to be constructed on the Expanded Site Area located on utility zoned land west of the WRGS power canal and adjacent to Robert Service Way on approximately 0.9 ha land to be acquired from Yukon Government and 0.6 ha of a railway right of way to be leased from a private landowner;

o Linear infrastructure extending from the Expanded Site Area to the existing Whitehorse Thermal Generating Station (WTGS) required to link the assets together and tie them into the existing grid and generating facility; and

o The existing WTGS site where decommissioning activities will occur.

The Project Construction Footprint represents the local area examined to assess potential effects of the Project’s physical structures on the environment (see Figure 2-1).

 Project Study Area: A broader Project Study Area for examining potential environmental and socio-economic effects is defined for most VCs as a 500 metre radius surrounding the Project Construction Footprint (see Figure 2-2). The Project Study Area falls within YESAB’s Whitehorse Assessment District. The maximum geographic extent of most likely environmental and socio- economic effects is expected to be included in this area, excluding effects on air quality and noise which will disburse in some instances more broadly than the Project Study Area (Figure 5-7 regarding air emissions), and excluding various positive socio-economic effects which will extend throughout Yukon (e.g., ratepayer savings). With regard to air quality a broader 5 km radius was selected for the purposes of assessing potential cumulative effects with other Projects that may be outside the Project Study Area but that may have effects that overlap spatially and temporally with the effects of the Project. Accidents and malfunctions related to safety/transportation of LNG within Yukon considered an expanded regional scale to encompass fuel transport within Yukon from the British Columbia border southeast of Watson Lake to Whitehorse.

3.2.2 Analysis of Effects & Mitigation

To determine the Project’s effects the baseline conditions for the selected VCs were considered. The consideration of baseline conditions for VCs may include information on existing Project components (including operation of the Whitehorse Thermal Generating Station), technologies/approaches, test results, existing environmental and socio-economic conditions and anticipated Project effects. Understanding the past, current and evolving conditions in which each VC exists is considered important for providing a baseline against which present and future effects of the Project may be measured and determinations of significance of Project effects may be made.

The Project’s baseline conditions need to be understood in the context of the operation of the existing Whitehorse Thermal Generation Station, including the peaking diesel requirements and load growth.

Once baseline data was collected for each VC the assessment considered the effects of the Project, as well as other actions which may act cumulatively with the Project, on the selected VCs. Effects were examined for the construction and operation phases of the Project. Applying standard practice and the YESAB Guides, the assessment of each VC provides a description of the existing baseline environment as scoped, before providing an analysis of Project activities expected to interact with the VC.

Chapter 3 Page 3-5 Assessment Approach Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

The analysis of Project effects considers both the temporal and spatial scope of effects on selected VCs. The temporal scope is VC-specific and extends as long as the Project activities that can interact with the VC are predicted to occur, taking special consideration of the seasonality of Project effects where necessary. The spatial scope includes all areas of overlap and interaction between Project activities and VCs where potentially adverse effects could occur within either the Project Construction Footprint or Project Study Area (depending on the specific VC), including determinations regarding whether Project activities overlap with one or more VCs seasonally or year round and duration of such interactions.

The Project Proposal includes identification of mitigation as part of the effects analysis. Mitigation measures considered during the assessment process include measures to reduce, eliminate or control adverse affects. As set out in YESAA and the guides such measures may also include compensation and alternative ways of undertaking or operating a proposed project that would avoid or minimize any significant adverse effects.

3.2.3 Cumulative Effects Assessment – YESAA Requirements and Overall Approach

The cumulative effects assessment (CEA) is integral to the assessment approach and examines the likely adverse effects of the Project in combination with the likely effects of other past, existing and future projects and activities.

YESAA requires that an Executive Committee Screening consider the significance of any adverse cumulative environmental or socio-economic effects of a project in combination with the ongoing effects of existing projects or the predicted effects of projects that will occur in the future. In effects assessment practice the effects pathways from other projects and human activities must overlap with the effects pathways identified for the project being assessed in order to be considered to act cumulatively on identified VCs.

Although YESAA does not require that a project proposal submission to the Executive Committee consider cumulative effects3, CEA is standard to good effects assessment practice and has been included as part of this submission. The cumulative effects analysis conducted is designed to assist in determinations regarding whether there will be any significant adverse cumulative environmental or socio-economic effects4.

YESAA5 describes the criteria for projects that must be included in a CEA as:

 Other projects for which proposals have been submitted under Subsection 50(1) of YESAA.

 Other existing or proposed activities in or outside Yukon that are known to the Designated Office, Executive Committee or Panel of the Board from information provided to it or obtained by it under YESAA.

3 See YESAA, s. 50(2)(a). 4 See YESAA, s. 42(1)(d). 5 See YESAA, s. 42(1)(d).

Chapter 3 Page 3-6 Assessment Approach Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Only those projects whose effects are likely to act in combination with the anticipated adverse effects of the proposed Project must be considered for the purposes of a CEA under YESAA.

The Project Proposal follows guidance in the Assessor’s Guide to the Assessment of Cumulative Effects (YESAB 2006c), and considers other projects and activities that may potentially act cumulatively with adverse effects of the Project and affect selected VCs. The CEA identified all inputs from other projects that could act in concert with adverse effects of the principal Project activities and influence the VCs identified, including:

 Past, present and likely future projects and activities in the area that may affect identified VCs; and

 Other existing or anticipated pressures (direct or indirect) on identified VCs.

In identifying future projects or activities to be included in the cumulative effects analysis the assessment considers:

 Projects or activities that have already been approved;

 Projects or activities that are already in a government approvals process and on the YESAB registry;

 Other eligible projects or activities not subject to (or yet submitted to) a formal government approvals process are included if there is a high degree of certainty they will occur; and

 The environmental effects of uncertain or hypothetical projects were not considered.

Section 5.4.2 describes the existing and likely future projects and activities in the area that may affect identified VCs.

Following standard assessment practice, where adverse cumulative effects were considered probable, mitigation was applied and determinations were made regarding the significance of any residual adverse cumulative effects after the application of those mitigation measures. While the effects of other projects on selected VCs must be considered, mitigation could only be applied with regard to the Project being proposed.

3.2.4 Residual Effects and Evaluation of Significance

This step evaluates the significance of adverse residual effects likely to result from the Project after consideration of recommended mitigation. Evaluation of significance was carried out in accordance with YESAA, and involves (where feasible) comparing such residual effects against thresholds for a VC. Examples of thresholds that may be used include specified goals or targets, standards or guidelines, carrying capacity or limits of acceptable change. Significance may also be measured by land use objectives or trends, as well as a range of other methods.

The YESAB Guides set out significance determination criteria (based on relevant effect attributes) such as likelihood, duration, magnitude and extent which can be used to provide a preliminary identification of potentially significant effects (further details on approach are provided in Section 3.3 below).

Chapter 3 Page 3-7 Assessment Approach Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

3.2.5 Follow-up & Monitoring

This step sets out recommended monitoring measures. The need for monitoring environmental and socio- economic effects is required for consideration for screenings by the Executive Committee under YESAA. Effects monitoring may be necessary to ensure the success of any mitigation measures that are to be implemented and to ensure the accuracy of any assumptions made regarding predicted effects and their mitigation.

Follow up monitoring may prove valuable to ensure that the Project does not have any unanticipated adverse significant effects through providing additional information regarding whether predictions were accurate, whether any unanticipated effects occur and whether the Project remains in compliance with any terms and conditions specified in its approval.

3.3 DETERMINING SIGNIFICANCE OF RESIDUAL ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS

Predicted residual environmental and socio-economic effects of the Project (i.e., effects after implementation of mitigation measures) are set out in Chapter 7 for the identified VCs. Environmental and socio-economic effects, including the potential effects of accidents and malfunctions, are examined at all stages of the Project’s life-cycle from construction to operation and maintenance activities. There are no plans for decommissioning the Whitehorse Thermal Generating Facility. The assessment approach looks at both positive and adverse residual effects of the Project and includes full consideration of cumulative adverse effects. As required by YESAA (s. 58), the assessment includes a determination as to whether adverse residual effects are significant, or not significant, and the rationale for this determination.

3.3.1 Significance Determination Approach

Environmental and socio-economic effects and their significance are identified and determined using standard assessment practice, the requirements of YESAA and methodologies set out in the YESAB Assessor’s Guides (YESAB 2006a, 2006b).

Deciding whether a project is likely to cause significant adverse environmental or socio-economic effects is central to the concept and practice of project assessment under YESAA and other assessment legislation. The concept of “significance” in this regard cannot be separated from the concepts of “adverse” and “likely”6.

6 YESAA Section 58, regarding ultimate decisions for an Executive Committee screening assessment of a project. See YESAB 2006c (Sections 11 and 12) on the need to determine significance only for adverse effects. See YESAB 2006 (Section 2.8) on the relevance of “likely”. Also, Determining Whether a Project is likely to Cause Significant Adverse Environmental Effects: A Reference Guide for the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (Federal Environmental Assessment Review Office.1994). The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA) Guide also notes; “The ‘likely’ applies to the environmental effects of the project that are both adverse and significant.” Notwithstanding differences in wording of YESAA and CEAA on this matter, the ultimate assessment requirement remains to determine significance for effects that are adverse and likely.

Chapter 3 Page 3-8 Assessment Approach Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Determining “significance” involves scientific (including TK and local knowledge) analysis and interpretation of environmental and socio-economic effects, and consideration of effects of environmental or socio-economic changes caused by the Project on the following (YESAA, s 42):

 The need to protect the rights of Yukon Indian persons under final agreements;

 The special relationship between Yukon Indian persons and the wilderness environment of Yukon; and

 The cultures, traditions, health and lifestyles of Yukon Indian persons and other residents of Yukon.

Mitigation measures and strategies can be important in the assessment of residual effects.

The determination of significance of residual effects may involve comparing such effects, including cumulative effects, against thresholds for environmental and socio-economic components such as specified goals or targets, standards or guidelines, carrying capacity, or limits of acceptable change. Land use objectives and trends may also be utilized to determine significance of residual effects. It is recognized in standard assessment practice, however, that the assessment of project effects is often hindered by a lack of specific thresholds.

Pursuant to standard assessment practice and YESAB Guides, significance of adverse residual environmental and socio-economic effects is evaluated following the approach outlined in this section and considering the following criteria (based on the relevant effects attributes): the Direction or Nature of Effect, the Magnitude of Effect, the Geographic Extent of Effect, Duration of Effect, Frequency of Effect, Reversibility of Effect and Resiliency (Ecological or Socio-economic Context).

The Direction or Nature of the Effect describes the nature of the residual effect and the difference or trend of the effect on the VC compared with what is expected to occur without the Project. Direction is described as:

 Positive - A beneficial or desirable effect on the VC;

 Neutral or negligible - No measurable change in the VC due to the Project; and

 Adverse - An undesirable effect on the VC.

The remaining criteria are defined in Table 3-1 below.

Chapter 3 Page 3-9 Assessment Approach Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Table 3-1: Significance Determination Criteria and Ratings7

Criteria Generic Significance Ratings (or effect Definition attribute) Low Moderate High Magnitude The Predicted severity or Small Moderate Large degree of disturbance the No definable or Effect is slightly outside the Effect is above residual effect has on a measureable effect on range of natural / historic established thresholds component of the the VC. Effect is within variation, and is below of acceptable change biophysical or socio- the range of natural/ thresholds of acceptable or extends beyond the economic environment. historic variation, and is change, where thresholds range of natural / below thresholds of have been established, and historic variation, and acceptable change, the overall VC is still the VC sustainability is where thresholds have sustainable. threatened. been established.

Geographic The spatial extent of the Footprint Local Study Area Region (Yukon) Extent effect. i.e., how far from Effect is within the Effect extends beyond the Effect extends outside the project location the Project Construction Project Construction the Project Study effect(s) are observable. Footprint. Footprint but is within the Area. Project Study Area.

Duration The length of time the Short Term Medium Term Long Term effect will persist. Effect lasting less than 1 Effect extends beyond Effects lasting year or not materially period of construction and materially more than beyond duration of the up to 20 years. 20 years. construction phase of the Project.

Frequency When and how often the Effects occur only once Effects are sporadic or Effects occur effect will occur. or seldom during life of intermittent, occurring only continuously or at project (e.g., initial occasionally and without any regular periodic clearing of right of way). predictable pattern during intervals during the life of the Project (e.g., life of the Project. wildlife-vehicle collisions).

Reversibility If the cause of the effect The effect is readily Effect is reversible during Effect is not reversible were to cease, the time reversible over a short the life of the Project (i.e. during the life of the and effort required to period of time (e.g. less Construction and anticipated Project (i.e. reverse the effect and than 1 year). 40-year Operations phase). Construction and return the VC to an anticipated 40-year acceptable condition. Operations phase) and is therefore considered permanent.

Resiliency The ability of an ecological VC is resilient to such The VC will take some time The VC has low (Ecological community, ecological unit effects and will readily to adapt but is resilient and resilience to imposed and Social or species to adapt to adapt to the effect(s). has the capacity to adapt to changes and may not Context) change, or the ability of a imposed changes. adapt. community, population or sub-population to adapt to change.

7 Direction or nature of the effect is also determined, i.e., whether the residual effect is positive, neutral, or negative/adverse.

Chapter 3 Page 3-10 Assessment Approach Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

The significance of predicted residual adverse effects on each VC is assessed using the above framework and the process outlined below.

The process to determine significance of residual adverse effects first considers the overall direction or nature of effect, i.e., it considers whether the residual adverse effect is positive, neutral or negative/ adverse.

After determining the direction of the overall effect, the evaluation process considers the following criteria for all VCs:

 Magnitude of the Effect (the predicted severity or degree of disturbance the residual effect has on a component of the biophysical or socio-economic environment).

 Geographic Extent of the Effect (the special extent of the effect, i.e., how far from the project location effect(s) are observable).

 Duration of Effect (the length of time the effect persists).

VCs are considered to have residual effects from the Project that are “Not Significant” or a “Low Residual Effect” and are not examined further for the purposes of this regulatory assessment where:

 Residual effects of the Project are low in magnitude (regardless of duration or extent).

 Residual effects of the Project are low in extent (e.g., within the Project Construction Footprint) and not high in both magnitude and duration.

 Residual effects of the Project are short-term (low) or moderate in duration, and not high in magnitude or extent (i.e., residual adverse effects do not extend beyond the Project Study Area).

VCs are considered to have a Negligible Residual Effect where there are no definable effects at any level or effects are insufficient to be termed a low effect, and generally indistinguishable from project baseline conditions.

VC's that meet the following criteria are considered to have a likely adverse effect that is considered to be "potentially significant" (as set out in Figure 3-1) and are examined further:

 A species at risk listed as threatened or of special concern under Species at Risk Act (SARA) [or is being considered for such listing based on a Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC recommendation)];

 Residual effects of the Project are low in geographic extent (within the Project Construction Footprint), high/large in magnitude and high (long-term) in duration;

 Residual effects are within the Project Study Area (moderate in extent) and either high/large in magnitude (regardless of duration) or moderate in magnitude and high (long-term) in duration; or

 Residual effects are high/large in geographic extent (extend well beyond the Project Study Area) and either moderate or high/large in magnitude (regardless of duration).

Chapter 3 Page 3-11 Assessment Approach Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Figure 3-1 illustrates the application of the criteria to determine whether effects are “Not Significant” or “Potentially Significant”. For “potentially significant” effects, initially ranked on this basis, further evaluation is required.

Figure 3-1: Significance Assessment Steps for Project Effects on Environmental or Socio-Economic VCs8

SHORT OR MEDIUM TERM DURATION LONG TERM DURATION

LARGE

MODERATE MAGNITUDE SMALL Project Project Project Study Region Project Study Region Construction Construction Area (Yukon) Area (Yukon) Footprint Footprint GEOGRAPHIC EXTENT GEOGRAPHIC EXTENT

Legend

NoPotentially further assessment Significant Effect is required

FurtherSignificant assessment Effect is required (potentially significant residual adverse effects)

For those VCs that require further evaluation it is relevant to consider the following additional criteria:

 Frequency of the Effect (how often the effect would occur);

 Reversibility of the Effect (is the effect reversible or not reversible); and

 Resiliency (Ecological or Socio-economic Context) (sensitivity to environmental or socio- economic disturbance, capacity to adapt to change).

If a VC is known to be highly resilient (i.e., adaptable to changes in environmental conditions and recovers well from such changes or disturbances), effects that may otherwise be considered significant may – for the purposes of determination of regulatory significance – be determined as not significant, despite magnitude and/or duration or the extent of effects. Conversely, thresholds or guides may identify highly vulnerable VCs where the loss of even a few individuals may affect the long term status of the population.

8 Any VC that is a species at risk listed as threatened or of special concern under SARA (or is being considered for such listing based on a COSEWIC recommendation) and is expected to be adversely impacted by the Project is also considered to have "potentially significant effects" of the Project such that further evaluation is required. In addition to the criteria shown in Figure 3-1, “potentially significant effects” are further assessed in terms of frequency, reversibility, and resilience (ecological or socio-economic context).

Chapter 3 Page 3-12 Assessment Approach Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

In the event that significant adverse effects are predicted for residual effects on VCs, the likelihood is discussed in terms of both the probability of occurrence of the significant adverse effect and the degree of “scientific uncertainty”.

Assessment conclusions are supported by available technical information, TK and local knowledge based on experience in Yukon and elsewhere. In this regard, TK and local knowledge are addressed on an integrated basis throughout the assessment process as they were available.

Monitoring and Follow up are addressed further in Chapter 8 – Monitoring and Follow-up Programs.

3.4 SOURCES OF INFORMATION

This assessment incorporates original studies commissioned by Yukon Energy specific to the Project, including identification of potential facility design prepared by engineers and technical reports and papers on topics relevant to the Project, and as applicable and available, local knowledge and experience. Other information sources include meetings with KDFN and TKC representatives, regulatory agencies and existing public and unpublished information.

Literature searches and personal contacts were conducted to identify both published and unpublished information. A list of documents used and relied upon for this assessment is provided in the reference section in Chapter 10.

Chapter 3 Page 3-13 Assessment Approach

Whitehorse Diesel – Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

4.0 FIRST NATIONS AND OTHER PUBLICS CONSULTATION

An overview of the public and community1 involvement activities is provided in Section 4.1 of this chapter. Section 4.2 describes the principles and approach to consultation, while Section 4.3 describes the methods used. Section 4.4 reviews the activities undertaken with various stakeholders and Section 4.5 describes the key perspectives and issues that were provided and outlines how the issues and concerns raised are responded to in the Project Proposal. The discussion in Section 4.5 provides a summary of all issues raised during the public consultation process, even issues not directly related to the proposed Project, or issues related to effects outside the Yukon which would be addressed by regulatory processes in other jurisdictions. Section 4.6 describes what will occur in terms of communication about the Project upon the filing of a submission to the Yukon Environmental and Socio-Economic Assessment Board (YESAB).

4.1 OVERVIEW

Yukon Energy developed a public involvement approach in order to incorporate community input in the Project design and environmental and socio-economic effects assessment, and to meet the regulatory requirements for public consultation in an effective and credible manner, and as a standing corporate principle for good planning. Public involvement is required under the Yukon Environmental and Socio- Economic Assessment Act (YESAA), and is consistent with the guidance provided in YESAB’s 2005 Proponent’s Guide to Information Requirements for Executive Project Proposal Submissions. Section 50(3) of the Act states:

“Before submitting a proposal to the Executive Committee, the proponent of a project shall consult any First Nation in whose territory, or residents of any community in which, the project will be located or might have significant environmental or socio-economic effects.”

Public involvement focused largely on the stakeholders that reside in closest proximity to the Project, and to which the potential effects of a project would most likely accrue. Stakeholders included citizens of Kwanlin Dün First Nation (KDFN) and Ta’an Kwäch’än Council (TKC), the City of Whitehorse as well as numerous organizations and individuals. In addition, potentially affected non-government organizations, major customers and various federal and territorial government departments were identified. A list of the potentially affected or interested publics is provided in Appendix 4A.

The public involvement process was designed to provide an opportunity for potentially affected and interested parties to participate in Project planning by providing information, allowing for sharing of key

1 The term ‘community’ in this document refers to both place-based communities, which can be defined geographically, and interest-based communities defined by a common interest or activity, also sometimes referred to as a ‘stakeholder’ group.

Chapter 4 Page 4-1 First Nations and Other Publics Consultation Whitehorse Diesel – Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013 perspectives and interests regarding the Project, and to express their concerns regarding any potential Project-related effects through the environmental and socio-economic assessment process.

4.2 PRINCIPLES AND APPROACH TO CONSULTATION

4.2.1 Guiding Principles

Yukon Energy has developed the following principles for public involvement in the project planning:

 Value of Public Involvement: Engaging the public in a participatory manner improves the project planning and assessment and will yield better outcomes for the project.

 Opportunities for Ongoing Involvement: Provide opportunities for interested or potentially affected parties to learn about the Project and provide inputs with respect to interests, concerns and opportunities. Where possible, work through the consultation process to resolve issues and enable participants to have inputs recorded at each stage.

 Opportunities at Various Stages: Before and after filing the Project Proposal, provide opportunities for public input.

 Provide Various Communication Mechanisms: Provide a variety of mechanisms to communicate and interact with the public.

 Required Consultation with Aboriginal Peoples: Recognize the unique status of First Nations who may be affected if the Project is developed. In particular, discuss the location and effects of the Project which is located in the traditional territory of KDFN and TKC.

 Adaptive Approach: Adjust the public involvement activities, as required and feasible, throughout the effects assessment and planning process, in response to issues, concerns and challenges.

 Full and Fair Consideration: Provide clarity on how submitted views and information have been considered and how they have informed Yukon Energy’s project planning and assessment.

These principles are consistent with the YESAA intentions, and the YESAB guidelines that direct the proponent to provide notice of the proposed project in sufficient form and detail to allow the party (to be consulted) to prepare its views on the matter, a reasonable period of time for consultation activities, and fair and full consideration of the views presented. It is expected that the public will have further opportunities to participate in the Project review during the YESAB review process.

Yukon Energy’s public involvement activities were guided in part by discussions held early in the study process with key stakeholders in the vicinity of Whitehorse (e.g., KDFN, TKC, and the City of Whitehorse). Additional opportunities for public consultation occurred prior to the filing of this Project proposal to the YESAB Executive Committee. Further opportunities to communicate with the public after filing with YESAB

Chapter 4 Page 4-2 First Nations and Other Publics Consultation Whitehorse Diesel – Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013 will also occur. A detailed account of these activities and events associated with public involvement are provided in Section 4.4 and associated appendices (see Appendix 4C, 4D, and 4E).

4.2.2 Opportunities Prior to YESAA Filing

As per the YESAB (2005) Proponent’s Guide to Information Requirements for Executive Committee Project Proposal Submissions, Yukon Energy made an effort to provide stakeholders with information about the proposed Project, as well as an opportunity for stakeholders to present their views. This included multiple opportunities before filing the Project Proposal with YESAB.

 Pre-Feasibility Stage: Yukon Energy over the course of 2011 and 2012 embarked on an extensive public engagement program related to the 2011 20-Year Resource Plan: 2011 -2030 (2011 Resource Plan), and this process included consulting broadly with a number of different stakeholders on the LNG supply option.

The 2011 Resource Plan focused on addressing generation and transmission priorities for the 20- Year planning period (2011-2030) and provided updates regarding overall planning challenges, priorities and options reviewed since the 2006 20-Year Resource Plan: 2006-2025 (2006 Resource Plan) review. A copy of the Resource Plan is available on Yukon Energy’s website (including a summary of public input into the 20-Year Resource Plan) at the following link:

http://www.yukonenergy.ca/about/business/resourceplans/.

In preparing the 2011 Resource Plan, Yukon Energy sought input from First Nations and other governments, stakeholders and the public through meetings, workshops and a three-day energy planning charrette held in March 2011. The charrette reviewed a number of supply options and alternatives including wind, biomass, waste-to-energy, hydro, solar, nuclear, DSM, transmission interconnections and gas/liquefied natural gas (LNG). The charrette brought together Yukoners from all walks of life along with nationally and intentionally-recognized energy experts. Information and knowledge was shared and the participants were provided with considerable technical information regarding the resource options reviewed (including LNG) and in turn provided a great deal of input in terms of what Yukon's energy future should look like. Along with providing a list of potential energy options for further investigation and analysis, the charrette participants also helped Yukon Energy formulate four principles around which to base future energy decisions: reliability, affordability, flexibility and environmental responsibility. Charrette materials, including background papers, presentations, meeting minutes and the charrette report, are available on Yukon Energy’s website at the following link:

http://www.yukonenergy.ca/energy/public_engagement/2011_charrette/.

Following the charrette in March 2011, Yukon Energy, as part of its ongoing resource planning public engagement, held several public workshops on resource options reviewed at the charrette

Chapter 4 Page 4-3 First Nations and Other Publics Consultation Whitehorse Diesel – Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

(e.g., waste to energy and biomass, DSM2 and wind). A public workshop on LNG as an option was held in Whitehorse during January 2012 (with background information and presentations posted to YEC web site). LNG workshop materials, including background papers, presentations and a report on the workshop are available on Yukon Energy’s website at the following link:

http://www.yukonenergy.ca/energy/public_engagement/lng/.

The feasibility of the LNG resource option (as well as other resource options such as wind), were also reviewed by the Yukon Utilities Board and intervenors during the 2012/2013 General Rate Application process through interrogatory responses as well as in argument and reply argument3.

 Feasibility Stage and Project Introduction: Yukon Energy in spring/ summer 2012 identified the opportunity, concurrent with the modernization and diesel unit replacement needs at the Whitehorse Thermal Generating Station, to convert from diesel to LNG-supplied gas-fired generation for the replacement units. Yukon Energy approached KDFN, TKC and the City of Whitehorse over the summer and fall of 2012 as preliminary site investigations work commenced. The purpose of this was two-fold. First, Yukon Energy wanted to keep the key stakeholders that would most be affected by the siting and development of the Project apprised of activities being undertaken. Second, Yukon Energy wanted to be made aware of any key interests and issues that might arise regarding the site location and any subsequent decision to move ahead with completing studies and consultation required for a submission to YESAB.

 Interest/Issue Identification, Review of Potential Project Effects & Mitigation: As the Project progressed, Yukon Energy continued to keep key stakeholders such as KDFN, TKC, the City of Whitehorse and regulators informed about the Project. This included introductions to the Project and its components/ options and business case, updates regarding status of Project planning activities and schedule, results of baseline studies, site options and issues, LNG supply options considered and status of Whitehorse diesel plant upgrades.

Discussions continued throughout 2012 and 2013. This stage provided an opportunity for these parties to express key perspectives and issues regarding the Project as studies progressed. Opportunities to discuss potential Project effects and proposed mitigation measures were also provided.

As noted, starting in 2011 and continuing through 2012, Yukon Energy also consulted broadly with a number of different stakeholders on the LNG supply option.

2 Demand-Side Management. 3 Board Order 2013-1, Appendix A, notes at paragraph 384 the view of the Yukon Utilities Board that, “The Board considers that there appears to be a more direct link to these expenditures and a likelihood of cost effectively generating electricity from these expenditures. Therefore, the Board agrees with Yukon Energy that LNG, at this time, appears to be a viable project”.

Chapter 4 Page 4-4 First Nations and Other Publics Consultation Whitehorse Diesel – Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Yukon Energy provided further opportunities for a broader set of stakeholders to learn about the specific Project being proposed, and express their views, starting in July 2013. Where stakeholders expressed particular concerns about the Project, efforts were made to address the issues specifically and in as much detail as possible (see Section 4.5). Feedback was welcome up to the date of submitting this Project Proposal and will continue to be accepted and incorporated into the Project planning throughout the review by YESAB and the public.

4.2.3 Public Communication of the Filing with YESAB

Yukon Energy will communicate its submission of Project Proposal to the Executive Committee with the stakeholders identified in Appendix 4A. This will continue the open dialogue that has been established with local stakeholders such as KDFN, TKC, the City of Whitehorse, and local residents, to ensure that issues they may have identified about Project implementation are addressed.

4.3 METHODS

Several methods to facilitate public involvement were adopted for the Project. These methods were designed to ensure that Yukon Energy was providing information about the Project in a reasonable manner, as well as providing an opportunity to receive information and perspectives from potentially affected and interested parties. The audience and methods used for communication varied and included face-to-face interaction, telephone conversations, and electronic and paper communication.

4.3.1 Face-to Face Interaction Face-to-face interactions with First Nations, stakeholders in Whitehorse, government and other parties took a variety of forms depending on the desired level of interaction from the consulted party. This section describes the various formats of interactions that occurred with different groups, while the subsequent section provides details of the activities that occurred.

4.3.1.1 Interaction with Kwanlin Dün First Nation and Ta’an Kwäch’än Council

 Meetings with Chief and Council: Yukon Energy met with Chief and Council to introduce the proposed Project and to learn and listen to any questions and comments.

 Meetings with KDFN and TKC LNG Partners Committee: The proposed Project will be established within the traditional territories of KDFN and TKC. Consequently, following its First Nation Engagement policy, Yukon Energy initiated a consultation process with KDFN and TKC. In July 2012, a Partners Committee was co-developed between Yukon and the two First Nations4. Since August 2012, the Partners Committee has met on a regular basis to discuss various aspects of the proposed Project, establish a good working relationship, and make substantive progress

4 Terms of Reference and signed confidentiality agreements were completed July 2012.

Chapter 4 Page 4-5 First Nations and Other Publics Consultation Whitehorse Diesel – Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

toward developing economic and business opportunities for the two First Nations related to the Project.

 Personal Communications: Various other conversations occurred with KDFN and TKC representatives, largely to facilitate public involvement activities. These interactions also enhanced the level of understanding about the key community interests and concerns regarding the Project. These communications were accomplished in person, by telephone and by email.

4.3.1.2 Interaction with Municipal and Other Government

 Meetings with the City of Whitehorse: Meetings were held with key staff from the City of Whitehorse and with the Mayor and Council. These meetings focused on informing the City of Whitehorse and relevant departments about the Project, and gaining understanding of key issues and concerns from a municipal perspective.

 Small Group Meetings: Small group meetings were held with various interested federal, territorial, and municipal government departments.

 Open House: Interested federal, territorial, and other municipal government departments were invited to a Project open house in Whitehorse.

4.3.1.3 Interaction with Local Stakeholders and Other Publics

 Small Group Meetings: Small group meetings were held with various interested parties in order to provide information and to understand any key perspectives and potential issues associated with the Project.

 Meetings with Community Members: An open house was held in Whitehorse on July 8, 2013 to inform the community about the Project, and to understand any key issues and perspectives associated with the Project.

 Personal Communications: Community members were provided various outlets to share their concerns and perspectives regarding the Project. These communications were shared by email and on Yukon Energy’s blog and Facebook pages.

4.3.2 Electronic, Paper and Other Media Communication

Electronic, paper, and other media communication were used to inform stakeholders and interested publics about the Project. The details and contents of each of these forms of communication are provided in Appendix 4B.

4.3.2.1 Yukon Energy Website

In June 2013, Yukon Energy created a link on their website posting a brief description of the Project. A link to the website and examples of blog posts are provided in Appendix 4B.

Chapter 4 Page 4-6 First Nations and Other Publics Consultation Whitehorse Diesel – Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

4.3.2.2 Event Notification – Print, Radio, and Online

Yukon Energy used several means to inform the public of the open house or other events. This included public service announcements on the radio (CKRW and CHON-FM), advertisements in the Whitehorse Star and Yukon News, Project website, personal invitations, and social media (e.g., Facebook). Copies of these materials are provided in Appendix 4B.

4.4 REVIEW OF PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ACTIVITIES TO DATE

The following sections summarize the public involvement activities with various groups of stakeholders. Appendices 4C, 4D, and 4E provide the supporting consultation materials including presentations regarding the Project provided at various stakeholder meetings as well as summaries of comments received at public meetings held in July 2013.

4.4.1 Activities Involving Kwanlin Dün First Nation and Ta’an Kwäch’än Council

As noted, the proposed Project will be established within the traditional territories of KDFN and TKC.

Activities involving KDFN and TKC focused on three groups: (1) Chief and Council, (2) The LNG Partners Committee, and (3) KDFN and TKC membership.

Table 4-1 provides a summary of these activities. Presentation materials and summaries of comments received during public consultation meetings held in July 2013 are provided in Appendix 4C.

Chapter 4 Page 4-7 First Nations and Other Publics Consultation Whitehorse Diesel – Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Table 4-1: Summary of Activities Involving KDFN and TKC

Date Location In Attendance Notes

August 8, Yukon Energy LNG Partners Committee Review Terms of Reference; LNG 2012 Boardroom (KDFN, TKC, Yukon Energy) business case; and project management tools.

September Yukon Energy LNG Partners Committee Review overall project status and 12, 2012 Boardroom (KDFN, TKC, Yukon Energy) schedule update; environmental and engineering proposals.

October 17, Yukon Energy LNG Partners Committee Review overall project status and 2012 Boardroom (KDFN, TKC, Yukon Energy) schedule update; and LNG supply options.

November Yukon Energy LNG Partners Committee Review overall project status and 15, 2012 Boardroom (KDFN, TKC, Yukon Energy) schedule update; LNG supply options; environmental and socio- economic baseline studies; and site options.

December Yukon Energy LNG Partners Committee Review overall project status and 10, 2012 Boardroom (KDFN, TKC, Yukon Energy) schedule update; status of Whitehorse diesel plant upgrades; public consultation; and preparation of YESAB application.

January 8, Yukon Energy LNG Partners Committee Review overall project status and 2013 Boardroom (KDFN, TKC, Yukon Energy) schedule update; draft project communication plan; and LNG presentation.

January 23, Yukon Energy LNG Partners Committee Review overall project status and 2013 Boardroom (KDFN, TKC, Yukon Energy) schedule update; and property appraisal.

January 23, Yukon Energy TKC Chief & Council; Yukon Presentation of LNG Project. 2013 Boardroom Energy & consultants

Chapter 4 Page 4-8 First Nations and Other Publics Consultation Whitehorse Diesel – Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Date Location In Attendance Notes

February 13, Yukon Energy LNG Partners Committee Review overall project status and 2013 Boardroom (KDFN, TKC, Yukon Energy) schedule update; site options, zoning, subdividing and lease options; key concepts and principles.

March 2, The Old Firehall TKC and citizens; Yukon Review presentation on the 2013 Energy & consultants opportunities, land lease, and project overview.

March 12, Yukon Energy LNG Partners Committee Review overall project status and 2013 Boardroom (KDFN, TKC, Yukon Energy) schedule update; site options and land status; and business development opportunities.

March 21, Yukon Energy TKC Elders Council Presentation of LNG Project and 2013 Boardroom Land Lease.

April 4, 2013 Yukon Energy LNG Partners Committee Review overall project status and Boardroom (KDFN, TKC, Yukon Energy) schedule update; site options and land status; and business development opportunities.

April 16, Yukon Energy LNG Partners Committee Review overall project status and 2013 Boardroom (KDFN, TKC, Yukon Energy) schedule update; site options and land status; and business development opportunities.

April 17, Kwanlin Dün KDFN Chief & Council Presentation of LNG Project, 2013 Council Chamber Partnership and Business Opportunities.

April 24, Yukon Energy LNG Partners Committee Review overall project status and 2013 Boardroom (KDFN, TKC, Yukon Energy) schedule update; site options and land status; and business development opportunities.

May 2, 2013 Yukon Energy LNG Partners Committee Review overall project status and Boardroom (KDFN, TKC, Yukon Energy) schedule update; site options and land status; and business development opportunities.

Chapter 4 Page 4-9 First Nations and Other Publics Consultation Whitehorse Diesel – Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Date Location In Attendance Notes

May 8, 2013 Yukon Energy LNG Partners Committee Review overall project status and Boardroom (KDFN, TKC, Yukon Energy) schedule update; site options and land status; and business development opportunities.

May 22, Yukon Energy LNG Partners Committee Overall project status and schedule 2013 Boardroom (KDFN, TKC, Yukon Energy) update; site options and land status; business development opportunities.

May 31, Yukon Energy LNG Partners Committee Review overall project status and 2013 Boardroom (KDFN, TKC, Yukon Energy) schedule update; site options and land status; and business development opportunities.

June 6, 2013 Yukon Energy LNG Partners Committee Review overall project status and Boardroom (KDFN, TKC, Yukon Energy) schedule update; site options and land status; and business development opportunities.

June 13, Yukon Energy LNG Partners Committee Review overall project status and 2013 Boardroom (KDFN, TKC, Yukon Energy) schedule update; site options and land status; and business development opportunities.

June 20, Yukon Energy LNG Partners Committee Review overall project status and 2013 Boardroom (KDFN, TKC, Yukon Energy) schedule update; site options and land status; and business development opportunities.

July 2, 2013 Nakwat’a Ku KDFN citizens; Yukon Energy Introduction of proposed LNG Potlatch House & consultants Project.

July 3, 2013 Old Fire Hall, TKC citizens; Yukon Energy & Introduction of proposed LNG Whitehorse consultants Project.

In May 2012, both First Nations were invited to become partners in assessing the feasibility of using LNG as a fuel source in Yukon and agreed to co-develop a Partnership Committee (with terms of reference and signed confidentiality agreements completed July 2012). Biweekly partnership meetings have been held since July 2012, focused on review of the business case, establishing a good working relationship and making substantive progress toward developing economic and business opportunities for the two First Nations relative to the project. Briefings have also been held with TKC and KDFN Chief and Councils, as well as with TKC Elders Council and TKC citizens.

Chapter 4 Page 4-10 First Nations and Other Publics Consultation Whitehorse Diesel – Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Appendix 4C includes a letter from the Office of the Chief of KDFN that confirms the KDFN support for the Project and ongoing commitment to participating in various assessments and permitting processes.

4.4.2 Municipal and Other Governments

Activities involving Municipal and Other Governments focused on formal and informal discussions with the City of Whitehorse, as well as meetings and discussions with relevant territorial government departments.

Table 4-2 provides a summary of these activities. Presentation materials used and summary of issues raised during discussion in July 2013 are provided in chronological order in Appendix 4D.

Chapter 4 Page 4-11 First Nations and Other Publics Consultation Whitehorse Diesel – Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Table 4-2: Summary of Activities with Municipal and Other Governments

Date Location In Attendance Notes

Oct. 12, City Hall City of Whitehorse (senior Discussion regarding potential 2012 officials), Yukon Energy & Project sites. Consultants

Jan. 8, Yukon Energy City of Whitehorse; Overview of Diesel – LNG Conversion 2013 Boardroom Government of Yukon; Concept and general discussion Yukon Energy & consultants regarding likely authorizations necessary and related processes.

Jan. 9, YESAB Whitehorse YESAB; Yukon Energy & Overview of Diesel – LNG Conversion 2013 Designated Office consultants Concept and general discussion regarding likely assessment and regulatory processes.

March 6, City Hall – Heritage City of Whitehorse (Mayor, Presentation of LNG Project. 2013 Room Council, senior officials), Yukon Energy President & Vice President

May 23, City of Whitehorse City of Whitehorse; Yukon Discussed new site for LNG storage 2013 Municipal Services Energy and generation modules. Building

July 8, Mount McIntyre Yukon Climate Change Presentation on Project overview; 2013 Recreational Centre Secretariat; Development anticipated authorizations; Assessment Branch; YG assessment approach; identify key Community Services; YG Oil contacts and communication and Gas Branch; Highways preferences. and Public Works; Yukon Energy & consultants

July 12, Yukon Energy Deputy Fire Chief, Yukon Discussed Yukon Energy’s LNG 2013 Boardroom Energy Project and the Whitehorse Fire Department capabilities and training re: LNG.

Chapter 4 Page 4-12 First Nations and Other Publics Consultation Whitehorse Diesel – Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

City of Whitehorse

Yukon Energy met with the City of Whitehorse in October 2012 to formally introduce the proposed Project. It was an opportunity for the City of Whitehorse to learn about the Project and express any initial concerns or perspectives. Follow-up discussions between Yukon Energy and City of Whitehorse occurred over the course of 2012 and 2013, including discussions on January 8, 2013, March 6, 2013 and May 23, 2013. These sessions provided updates on the Project proposal and environmental studies undertaken to date, and provided an opportunity for representatives of the City of Whitehorse to indicate any further interests or perspectives regarding the Project.

Yukon Energy has also met with representatives of the City of Whitehorse Fire Department in order to discuss the Project and gain an understanding of the Whitehorse Fire Department capabilities and training relative to LNG.

Other Governments

Yukon Energy consultation with territorial government focused on key departments identified either by Yukon Energy or the territorial government as having a potential interest in the Project. This included the Yukon Climate Change Secretariat, Environment, Community Services, Oil and Gas Branch, and Development Assessment Branch, Executive Council Office, and Highways and Public Works.

In addition to ongoing informal communications and discussions, federal, territorial, and municipal (i.e., Whitehorse) government departments were invited to a meeting on July 8, 2013 to formally learn about the Project and were also invited to attend the Whitehorse Open House July 8, 2013.

4.4.3 Local Stakeholders and Other Publics

Consultation efforts also sought feedback from various local stakeholders, non-government organizations, and private citizens.

Potential local stakeholders, organizations and other publics contacted included the following: the Whitehorse Chamber of Commerce, the Lake Laberge Renewable Resources Council (LLRRC), Yukon Conservation Society (YCS), Anti-Poverty Coalition, Utilities Consumers Group, Riverdale Community Association, Downtown Community Association, Schwatka Lake float plane users, Robert Service Campground operators, Miles Canyon Historic Railway Society, Association of Yukon Communities, Yukoners Concerned about Oil and Gas Exploration (YCOGE) and individual community members.

For the most part, these potentially affected or interested stakeholders and organizations were contacted via email. A copy of the invitation email sent is located in Appendix 4E.

The general public was informed of the Project and invited to the Public Open House on July 8, 2013 through a number of media. Specifically, the event was advertised in the Whitehorse Star (June 27, 2013 and June 28, 2013) and Yukon News (June 26, 2013; June 28, 2013; and July 5, 2013), on the radio (CKRW and CHON-FM), as well as using various online tools.

Chapter 4 Page 4-13 First Nations and Other Publics Consultation Whitehorse Diesel – Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Table 4-3 provides a summary of these activities, while the presentation materials used and summaries of comments received from stakeholders, organizations and the public are provided in chronological order in Appendix 4E.

Table 4-3: Summary of Activities with Local Stakeholders and Other Publics

Date Location In Attendance Notes

July 4, Kwanlin Dün Yukon Chamber of Presentation of proposed Project and 2013 Cultural Centre Commerce; Whitehorse results of studies and other work Chamber of Commerce; undertaken to date. Yukon Energy & consultants

July 8, Mount McIntyre YCOGE, YCS Presentation of proposed Project and 2013 Recreational Centre results of studies and other work Yukon Energy & undertaken to date. Consultants,

July 8, Mount McIntyre Members of the public Presentation of proposed Project and 2013 Recreational Centre results of studies and other work YDC, Yukon Energy & undertaken to date. consultants

In July 2013, an invitation was extended to the Lake Laberge Renewable Resources Council (LLRRC) to learn about the Project, however, LLRRC was unable to attend. The invitation to meet with the LLRRC remains open to be conducted at a time of their indicated preference.

On July 8, 2013, Yukon Energy met with representatives of YCS and YCOGE - approximately 20 participants were in attendance at this meeting. A summary of questions and comments received at this session is provided in Appendix 4E.

On July 8, 2013 Yukon Energy hosted an open house for the general public in Whitehorse, including residents of the City and surrounding area. A presentation was provided to introduce the Project, and Yukon Energy staff and consultants were on hand to field questions and receive feedback from participants. This event was designed not only to provide the current understanding of the Project and its components, but to also hear the concerns and views of the public. The presentation by Yukon Energy on the Project status and comments received from the public are provided in Appendix 4E. Approximately 60 people (not including Yukon Energy and its consultants) attended the event.

4.5 KEY INTERESTS & PERSPECTIVES HEARD TO DATE

Participants in public involvement activities provided a range of interests and perspectives. Some interests were very specific, while others were more general. Some similar perspectives were raised on numerous

Chapter 4 Page 4-14 First Nations and Other Publics Consultation Whitehorse Diesel – Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013 occasions, while others were only cited by a single individual or organization. The following sections highlight key issues and perspectives heard during the public involvement process.

In particular, it is noted that a large portion of comments received from the general public did not relate directly to the Project and how it is proposed to be carried out, but were focused more generally on interests and concerns with LNG as a supply option, oil and gas extraction (within Yukon and outside Yukon), hydraulic fracturing and life cycle analysis of LNG vs. diesel. Many comments were focused on advocating use of other renewable supply options such as wind, geothermal, solar and biomass as opposed to LNG.

The key interests, concerns, and perspectives raised during the public involvement process to date have been considered by Yukon Energy and incorporated in the Project design and effects assessment process, where applicable. The interests and perspectives raised by various stakeholders were balanced with other considerations, and met the duty set for by YESAB’s Proponent’s Guide to Information Requirements for Executive Committee Project Proposal Submissions (2005) to “consider fully and fairly any views presented”.

The following section summarizes some of the areas where feedback from public involvement activities was considered in the environmental and socio-economic assessment process. Table 4-4 provides a summary of all issues raised during the public consultation process, even issues not directly related to the proposed Project, or issues related to effects outside the Yukon which would be addressed by regulatory processes in other jurisdictions.

Chapter 4 Page 4-15 First Nations and Other Publics Consultation Whitehorse Diesel-Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Table 4-4: Interests and Concerns Raised by Members of the Public and Areas where Feedback from Public Involvement Activities was considered in the Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Process

Issue Interest/Concern Raised Response Fracking & An overall concern throughout The Project does not propose any activities related to natural gas extraction and will not Use of the consultation process was that lead to fracking in Yukon. The source of LNG supply is from outside Yukon – facilities Unconventional transport of LNG to Yukon for the outside Yukon undergo similarly rigorous environmental and socio-economic effects Gas use in generation of electricity in assessment as in Yukon and are licensed under other regulatory legislation within each (inside and natural gas-fired generators may relevant jurisdiction. outside Yukon) lead to oil and gas exploration LNG supplies for the Project through the foreseeable future will need to be delivered by and fracking in Yukon. truck from Alberta or British Columbia, i.e., Yukon Energy’s requirement for reliable LNG supplies can only be met through reliance on well-established and diverse sources of natural gas production and processing such as have been long-developed in these two provinces. No such well developed and diverse natural gas supply options currently exist in Yukon, nor are such supply options currently expected to be developed in the planning period for the Project absent separate arrangements (i.e., independent of Yukon Energy’s Project) to develop and market Yukon resources for LNG sale to domestic and/or export markets. Concern that Yukon Energy Yukon Energy has secured a minimum five-year flexible LNG supply from Shell Canada’s would consider using Jumping Pound LNG plant being developed near Calgary to start operation in the third unconventional (fracked) gas quarter 2014. There is potential in future to source LNG from the Fort Nelson area in instead of conventional gas to northern British Columbia should additional liquefaction facilities come into service in the reduce supply costs. area, and/or Shell Canada arranges to make LNG supplies available in this area. There is

Chapter 4 Page 4-16 First Nations and Other Publics Consultation Whitehorse Diesel-Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Issue Interest/Concern Raised Response no way to guarantee conventional gas will always be available or selected as a fuel source5. Concern regarding impacts on Facilities outside Yukon are assessed and regulated by other authorities and subject to residents in British Columbia or specific legislation and regulatory requirements in each jurisdiction. Alberta and life cycle assessments related to LNG.

Can diesel be fracked? Is any of Diesel can be fracked. Yukon Energy cannot say with certainty, whether its source of the diesel currently being used diesel supply is from conventional or unconventional sources. fracked?

Concerns raised regarding the life Yukon Energy has made available on its website two separate life-cycle assessments cycle assessment for LNG vs. regarding LNG. diesel. The source of LNG supply is from outside Yukon – facilities outside Yukon are assessed and licensed under other regulatory legislation within each relevant jurisdiction.

Oil & Gas Question regarding supply from Supply from Eagle Plains is not considered to be a viable option for the foreseeable Exploration Eagle Plains. future. Developments such as Eagle Plains are typically advanced to serve larger markets in Yukon than currently existing in Yukon (i.e., for export oversees) and are not developed primarily to service domestic demand.

Climate Change Several concerns were expressed Over the past decade Yukon Energy’s has focused on development of renewal resource

5 Conventional and unconventional natural gas supplies are assessed and regulated by the provincial, territorial, and/or federal authorities in the jurisdiction from which the fuel is sourced and are thereby subject to specific legislation and regulatory requirements in order to make the product available to market. If natural gas, irrespective of its provenance, is made available to the market under such assessment and regulatory regimes it has been presumed to have met the environmental and socio-economic standards of the jurisdiction and thus it is the strict matter of finding an affordable and logistically efficient source of supply that will drive the selection of a fuel provider.

Chapter 4 Page 4-17 First Nations and Other Publics Consultation Whitehorse Diesel-Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Issue Interest/Concern Raised Response regarding Yukon Energy’s overall supply options in order to reduce diesel requirements on the Yukon grid, and in turn has effects on climate change. made significant contributions towards the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in Yukon related to electricity generation. These efforts include the following: 1. Advancement and construction of the Mayo Dawson Line - which supplied surplus hydro to Dawson from the Mayo Hydro plant (displacing continuous diesel generation in Dawson). 2. Advancement and construction of the Carmacks-Stewart transmission Project - Stage 1 of the Project supplied the Minto mine and the community of Pelly with surplus hydro generation on the WAF system – displacing continuous diesel consumption both at the mine (which was operating using diesel generators) and in the community of Pelly. 3. Advancement and construction of the Mayo Hydro Enhancement Project – this Project increased hydro capacity at the Mayo plant by 10 MW displacing diesel generation that would otherwise be required due to growth on the integrated grid. 4. Yukon Energy and Yukon Electrical are jointly advancing a DSM plan - for review by the Yukon Utilities Board as part of the Yukon Electrical 2013-2015 General Rate Application. 5. Yukon Energy continues to pursue investigation and licensing of smaller renewable projects - such as the Southern Lakes Enhanced Storage Concept and the Mayo Lake Enhanced Storage Project. The Whitehorse Diesel-Natural Gas Conversion Project will modernize Yukon Energy’s Whitehorse Thermal Generating Station (WTGS) to meeting growing requirements for reliable and flexible thermal generation on the Yukon grid, with conversion of old and to be retired WTGS thermal generation in stages from diesel fuel to cheaper and cleaner natural gas fuel. Project Various stakeholders suggested The Project is to replace two of the Corporation’s diesel generators with natural gas

Chapter 4 Page 4-18 First Nations and Other Publics Consultation Whitehorse Diesel-Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Issue Interest/Concern Raised Response Alternatives that Yukon Energy should ones. Alternatives to the Project are reviewed in detail in Section 6.2, Chapter 6 (Project consider supply option Description). No feasible alternatives to the Project within the relevant time period have alternatives to LNG such as been identified using new non-fossil fuel generation options. Of the near term supply hydro, solar, geothermal, wind, options, LNG was the only option (other than diesel) to rank high on both reliability and biomass, DSM and purchasing flexibility (which are key requirements related to the thermal generation capacity needs used diesels. being addressed by the Project), and was also the only option with the capability to meet all of the forecast Yukon grid load scenarios without requiring significant diesel generation. As reviewed in the 2011 Resource Plan and other available information, Yukon Energy continues to look for renewable supply options including hydro, wind, DSM, solar, geothermal and biomass to serve our base load. Recent Yukon Energy major renewable resource expansions have included the Mayo B Hydro Enhancement Project, Aishihik Third Turbine Project, and major expansions of the hydro grid (Mayo Dawson Transmission Project and Carmacks Stewart Transmission Project). It was suggested that Yukon Yukon Energy conducted an extensive public planning exercise related to the 2011 Energy should conduct case Resource Plan (see Section 4.2.2). studies on models used in other Chapter 6 (Project Description), Section 6.1 reviews the due diligence review undertaken countries (e.g., contact Alaska by Yukon Energy, the alternatives and alternative means of carrying out the Project who purchases plants from considered by YEC, and the chosen approach regarding the decision to purchase GE J642 Finland). modular units. Question regarding whether See Chapter 6, Section 6.2 (Project Identification/ Scope of Project). Yukon Energy had considered a Forecast grid default diesel generation requirements and the related opportunity to bi-fuel plant as currently secure fuel cost savings through use of new and more efficient gas-fired engines, proposed in Watson Lake. indicate a requirement for new gas-fired generation units for the first stage of the Project (rather than options to convert existing operating diesel units to a blend of gas and diesel generation). Future stages of the Project over the next decade may include a phased conversion of some or all existing EMD and CAT diesel units (approximately 11

Chapter 4 Page 4-19 First Nations and Other Publics Consultation Whitehorse Diesel-Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Issue Interest/Concern Raised Response MW total capacity for four units) at the WTGS to blended gas/diesel fuel use for enhanced displacement of diesel to natural gas.

Question regarding whether Alternatives to the Project are addressed in Section 6.1.1 of Chapter 6. This assessment purchasing the existing Minto notes that life extension of existing units or purchase of used diesel units was not diesel units was an option/ considered feasible given expected diesel generation requirements. alternative to Project. Safety Concern was expressed regarding Due consideration of surface water, ground water and the aquatic environment as key Concerns the proximity of the proposed environmental interests, and considering the proximity of the Yukon River to the Project site to water resources Whitehorse Rapids Generating Station, the quality and quantity of surface water and (i.e., Yukon River). groundwater were identified as potential valued environmental components in the early stages of the effects assessment. The potential for pathways of effects between the Project, surface water, groundwater and the aquatic environment was reviewed during the effects assessment. No effects are anticipated on groundwater supplies at the City of Whitehorse Selkirk wells or in the Riverdale area during the construction and operation phases of the Project, as water does not flow from the Yukon Energy property to the Selkirk wells. Best management practices for erosion and sediment will reduce sedimentation and erosion impacts to surface water quality and quantity on the local landscape from exposed soils. Further detail is provided in Section 7.3.1 of Chapter 7 (Effects Assessment). Various stakeholders expressed Detailed discussions are provided in Section 6.6 of Chapter 6 (Project Description) and in concern for potential safety Section 7.6 of Chapter 7 (Effects Assessment). issues associated with storing As part of standard environmental protection practices, Yukon Energy’s EMS and Job Site LNG (e.g., concern that LNG was Spill Contingency Plan require storage of fuel, lubricants, and other potentially hazardous explosive). materials within dedicated storage areas in work camps and marshalling areas. Potential impacts of accidents and malfunction will be further minimized by any

Chapter 4 Page 4-20 First Nations and Other Publics Consultation Whitehorse Diesel-Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Issue Interest/Concern Raised Response additional specific mitigation measures identified as a condition of licence approval. [See Chapter 7, Section 7.6 (Accidents and Malfunctions)]. Yukon Energy was asked how it The effects of the environment on the Project are addressed in Section 7.5, of Chapter 7 plans to protect the plant from (Effects Assessment). The effects of an event such as a forest fire in the vicinity of the events such as forest fires. Whitehorse Rapids Generating Station would not be materially different regardless of whether thermal generation was provided by new or refurbished diesel generation units at the existing plant or gas fired units supplied by LNG stored at the Expanded Site Area. The expanded site area is shielded by the power canal on the east and Robert Service Way along its western border. Concern was expressed regarding As with risks related to forest fire – the location of the gas-fired generation and LNG potential issues with locating the storage and vapourization on the Expanded Site Area does not materially increase issues facility near the airport. or concerns relative to the Erik Nielsen Whitehorse International Airport. Specifically, the location of the Expanded Site Area below the elevation of the runway and the modules are outside the electronic zoning arc. Yukon Energy has been in contact with Transport Canada to discuss the location of the Project. With regard to the Whitehorse Water Aerodrome on Schwatka Lake there Yukon Energy has considered the impact the stack height of the gas-fired generators would have on visibility for planes taking off and landing at the aerodrome. It is noted that the spillway gate at the Whitehorse Rapids Generating Station is higher than the expected stack height of the gas-fired generating units - mitigating this concern. Float plane operators using the aerodrome were invited to a public consultation session on July 4, 2013; however, none attended the session. Transportation Regulatory agencies inquired LNG delivery to Whitehorse is reviewed in Section 6.1.2 of Chapter 6 (Project about how Yukon Energy was Description) and Section 7.4.2 of Chapter 7 (Effects Assessment). proposing to transport LNG to the site as well as what potential effects on traffic were expected.

Chapter 4 Page 4-21 First Nations and Other Publics Consultation Whitehorse Diesel-Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Issue Interest/Concern Raised Response Business & It was noted that Yukon Energy The effect of local employment opportunities and business opportunities related to the Employment should focus on local employment Project is addressed in Chapter 7 (Effects Assessment). Opportunities opportunities. Yukon Energy was asked how See Section 4.1.1 of Chapter 4 (Consultation). As the proposed project will be established First Nations were being involved within the traditional territories of KDFN and TKC, both First Nations have been involved in the process. in assessing the feasibility of using LNG as a fuel source in Yukon and agreed to co- develop a Partnership Committee (with terms of reference and signed confidentiality agreements completed July 2012). Partnership meetings have been held every two weeks since July 2012 focused on review of the business case, establishing a good working relationship and making substantive progress toward developing economic and business opportunities for the two First Nations relative to the project. Impact on How do diesel costs compare to Ratepayer impacts are addressed in Chapter 7 (Effects Assessment). Please see detailed Ratepayers LNG costs? discussion provided in Chapter 5, Appendix 5A; Chapter 6 and Chapter 7. Load Forecast An open house participant asked The 2011 Resource Plan was focused on development of new supply options to address & Demand why LNG is now being considered potential major new mine loads within the near term planning horizon. While capacity as a backup when two years ago, planning requirements were considered in the Resource Plan, the 2011 Resource at the charrette, Yukon Energy Planning process was focused on energy requirements driven by major new loads. As was looking for new base load such, while supply options to meet base case forecasts (without new mine loads) were energy options. considered, supply options such as LNG were assessed in light of major load increments and not the base case scenario. Subsequent to the Resource Plan, there was an opportunity to develop LNG without major new mine loads connected to the grid. This related to the requirement to replace retiring diesel capacity in 2014 and 2015 and the opportunity to replace this capacity with natural gas fired generation supplied by LNG. Concern that the Project is based The Project is being advanced to replace existing thermal generation sources that

Chapter 4 Page 4-22 First Nations and Other Publics Consultation Whitehorse Diesel-Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Issue Interest/Concern Raised Response on supplying power to the mines. provide back-up power and support base case load forecasts and not new mine loads. Suggest mines be removed from New mine loads are not forecast to connect to the Yukon grid in the near term planning the grid so they become less horizon. Yukon Energy is considered under the Public Utilities Act to have a typical utility dependent on grid power. obligation to serve new non-industrial or industrial customers that request electrical service where these customers locate within areas presently served by Yukon Energy grid power. General Why does the Project require a The Project description is reviewed in Chapter 6 of the Project Proposal. The Project as questions completely new facility? proposed is an expansion and modernization of the existing facility – and is not a about Project “completely new facility”. Various options and approaches were considered to undertake the required modernization of the existing Whitehorse Thermal Generating Facility and the proposed Project was considered the optimal option. The 20-Year Resource Plan Please see Chapter 6 (Project Description) which details the basis for Project costs as indicated cost of diesel at well as costs for alternatives to the Project that were considered. The cost per MW for approximately $1.5 million per new diesels has increased based on more up to date numbers from suppliers that were MW, now it is $3 million/MW. obtained as part of the feasibility review for the Project. Cost per MW for new diesels How did the price change so also includes costs for balance of plant work that would be required in order to install the much in a short period of time? diesel units within the existing WTGS. Concerns regarding Project The existing WTGS was determined to be an optimum location today to develop new gas location and whether natural gas fired generation to facilitate diesel-natural gas conversion on the Yukon grid. fired generation would be Whitehorse is the nearest practical grid location for LNG deliveries from Alberta or British installed in other Yukon Columbia. It is the location of the Yukon grid’s largest load centre. And it offers the communities. opportunity to use new gas-fired generation to modernize the Whitehorse plant facilities, with its established infrastructure (including transformer capability and on site staffing needed to operate and maintain the remaining diesel plant), concurrent with the retirement of existing diesel capacity at these facilities. The option of developing a new Greenfield site was not considered to be cost effective or practical. Major elements of the existing diesel plant at the WTGS will continue to be

Chapter 4 Page 4-23 First Nations and Other Publics Consultation Whitehorse Diesel-Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Issue Interest/Concern Raised Response required over at least the next decade under any scenario examined. The WTGS also provides established infrastructure that facilitates cost effective development of the Project. What is the average life of an The average life of an LNG or diesel unit given expected operation of the plant over the LNG units; a diesel unit? life of the asset is approximately 40 years. How much LNG would you use? The amount of diesel or gas-fired thermal generation (and related costs) in any given How much does Yukon Energy year will vary depending on available water (flood or drought conditions), weather spend on diesel? conditions (peaking requirements during could periods) and requirements to run thermal generation for backup/emergency purposes. Forecast thermal capacity and energy requirements are addressed in Chapter 5 (Environmental Scan), Section 5.3.8 (Yukon Power Grid). What is the cost of the Project? The cost of the Project relative to the cost of new diesel is reviewed in Chapter 6 (Project What is cost of project vs. buying Description), Section 6.1.1 Alternatives to the Project. new diesels? Why are renovations required at The requirement for balance of plant work at the existing WTGS is addressed in Chapter the old plant? 6 (Project Description). In 2006, NTPC and GEA completed an upgrade study of the Whitehorse Diesel Plant, and indentified several components and systems that require upgrades regardless of the outcome surrounding the status of the generators, such as (but not limited to) foundation block, cooling system, air handling system, fuel supply system and building superstructure. What is basis for $2.7 million The basis for the $2.7 million in savings is provided in Chapter 7 (Effects Assessment) savings using LNG? and Appendix 7A. What is the shelf life of LNG? LNG can be held in tanks for several months before it is lost through boil off (BOG) or How long can it be stored? used for the purposes of power generation. However, Yukon Energy will manage its inventory to limit production of BOG and meet its requirements on an ongoing basis. How will Yukon Energy address Focusing on potential future thermal generation projects at the Whitehorse Thermal

Chapter 4 Page 4-24 First Nations and Other Publics Consultation Whitehorse Diesel-Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Issue Interest/Concern Raised Response the need to expand facilities in Generating Station to meet ongoing load growth and/or diesel unit retirements, the the future? Expanded Site Area will be designed to accommodate up to six 166.5 m3 LNG storage tanks and to accommodate up to five 4.4 MW natural gas-fired units. Opportunities will also exist to install new gas-fired or dual fuel units (i.e., units that burn either gas or diesel as opposed to bi-fuel) within the existing Whitehorse Diesel Plant in engine bays made available by retired diesel units (e.g., WD1 and WD2 bays). Impact on White Pass Yukon Rail Please see discussion in Chapter 5 (Section 5.3.6) and in Chapter 7 (Effects Assessment), line Section 7.4.1. Contracting Community members expressed Yukon Energy is undertaking all required planning, environmental and socio-economic concern that Yukon Energy was assessments and permitting, engineering design, procurement, contracting and other preparing to purchase the related activities to obtain authorizations and approvals necessary to allow construction engines before the project has of the Project to commence at the start of May 1, 2014 to meet the in service target of gone through the regulatory late 2014 for the first two natural gas-fired generators. This schedule is driven by process. forecast thermal general requirements for the winter of 2014/2015, both to provide new thermal generation capacity for reliable service during the winter and to save excess of $4 million of thermal fuel generation costs charged to ratepayers in 2015. Due to long lead equipment order requirements, Yukon Energy must order certain equipment before the YESAB assessment and regulatory review processes are complete. Yukon Energy has followed this practice before (most recently for Mayo B where long lead equipment orders were advanced prior to obtaining all required regulatory permits and approvals). To address Project risks the equipment order contract for the engine purchase will include a cancellation clause. Further, as these modular, mobile units are in high demand at this time, it is highly likely that Yukon Energy would be able to sell the units to recover any costs incurred in the event the Project does not proceed. Timing of Concern was noted that the Yukon Energy has consulted on the proposed Project with TKC, KDFN, City of Whitehorse Consultation consultation process seemed and regulators over the past year.

Chapter 4 Page 4-25 First Nations and Other Publics Consultation Whitehorse Diesel-Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Issue Interest/Concern Raised Response rushed; concern was raised that Many of the concerns raised by the general public during the open house sessions the public consultation meeting related specifically to fracking (inside or outside Yukon); and the desire for pursuit of should have occurred earlier. renewable supply options instead of non-renewable options such as LNG. Yukon Energy has discussed these issues with stakeholders in a variety of forums over the past two years. As noted in Section 4.2.2, Yukon Energy over the course of 2011 and 2012 embarked on an extensive public engagement program related to the 2011 20-Year Resource Plan. This included the 3-day March 2011 Energy Charrette and several workshops in 2011 and 2012 to review individual supply options (including a workshop in January 2012 to review the LNG supply option). Yukon Energy also consulted extensively with key stakeholders regarding the proposed Project in 2012 and 2013, including KDFN, TKC and the City of Whitehorse.

Chapter 4 Page 4-26 First Nations and Other Publics Consultation Whitehorse Diesel-Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

4.6 FUTURE STEPS IN PUBLIC CONSULTATION

Yukon Energy recognizes that KDFN, TKC, the City of Whitehorse, and other local stakeholders may have ongoing concerns regarding the implementation of the Project. Yukon Energy is committed to maintaining dialogue with these stakeholders in order to ensure that any ongoing interests and concerns are considered and addressed in a timely and thoughtful manner throughout the project planning, assessment, development, and operational phases.

Public consultation activities will continue prior to and during construction and operation/maintenance. Throughout construction activities, Yukon Energy will ensure open and timely communication with potentially affected publics to minimize any interference between construction activities and external interests. This may include provision of a liaison person for direct communication to Yukon Energy in the event of incidents to report, and/or notices on Yukon Energy’s website. Yukon Energy as a matter of practice endeavours to provide timely acknowledgement of any comments or complaints received and a commitment for some form of response, as appropriate.

Chapter 4 Page 4-27 First Nations and Other Publics Consultation

Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC SETTING

This chapter provides a high-level overview of the environmental and socio-economic setting (baseline conditions) in the vicinity of the Project, as required to address items set out in the Proponent’s Guide Section 4.0, Description of the Existing Environment and Socio-economic Conditions. It is comprised of a summary of existing and known evolving conditions in respect of the following:

 Overview

 Existing Environmental Setting

 Existing Socio-economic Setting

 Existing and Planned Developments

The description of the Existing and Planned Developments includes a description of the existing Whitehorse Rapids Generating Station, its associated facilities as well as operation of the existing facility. Beyond the existing Whitehorse facility, there are a variety of past and current projects and activities that comprise the existing and evolving built environment in the Project Study Area. These projects are identified in Section 5.4.2, and along with proposed and future known projects, form the basis of the cumulative effects assessment in Chapter 7.

The chapter focuses on conditions and relevant developments that exist as a backdrop for the Project. The specific baseline conditions of identified Valued Components (VC) are considered in Chapter 7 based on existing conditions, as well as the expected evolution of conditions in the future without the Project.

5.1 OVERVIEW

The Project will occur within an existing environmental and socio-economic setting that has seen considerable development and activity over a sustained period of time. The presence and influence of the existing Whitehorse Rapids Generating Station (WRGS), including the Whitehorse Thermal Generating Station (WGTS) as well as major hydro generating facilities and Yukon Energy administration offices, is a dominant feature of the existing setting.

Chapter 3 of this Project Proposal sets out the key geographic areas of focus for the assessment work, including the Project Construction Footprint, and the larger Project Study Area. The existing conditions provide a key input for the selection of Valued Components, for the baseline analysis of each VC, and for determining relevant projects to be considered for the assessment of Project effects, cumulative effects and mitigation which is detailed in Chapter 7.

Further detail with respect to existing conditions is provided in the following Chapter 5 Appendices:

 Appendix 5A: Maps.

 Appendix 5B: Updated Near-Term Grid Load Scenarios.

 Appendix 5C: Air Quality Assessment Update in Support of Permit Renewal for Diesel Generator Operations (SENES, 2011).

Chapter 5 Page 5-1 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

 Appendix 5D: Whitehorse Inventory Activity and Emission Factors (Yukon Energy Air Emissions Permit Renewal 2008).

5.2 EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

The Project Study Area is located in the Yukon Southern Lakes Ecoregion, within the Boreal Cordillera Ecozone. The Boreal Cordillera eco-region is characterized by tablelands and rolling uplands separated by wide and U-shaped valleys and occupies the southern Yukon and northern half of British Columbia.

The Project Construction Footprint is located in the City of Whitehorse, within an anthropogenic ecosystem impacted by human activity and developments, including the existing Whitehorse generation facility, road building, gravel pits and other activities (Gartner Lee Limited 2006). The following is a description of the general physiography, surficial geology, soil conditions and climate of the Whitehorse region, as well as vegetation, fish and wildlife and water resources of the area.

5.2.1 General Physiography, Surficial Geology and Soil Conditions

Many of the soil materials in the eco-region were deposited by glaciers, glacial rivers and glacial lakes (Yukon Ecoregions Working Group 2004). Dominant soil materials are derived from volcanic rocks, limestone reefs and clastic sediments produced from glacial lakes. Soils tend to be slightly alkaline and can be classified as eutric brunisols (Yukon Ecoregions Working Group 2004).

The Project Construction Footprint is located within the Yukon River valley. The flat terrain in this area consists mainly of glacial sediments with a veneer of organic material covering sand and gravel of glaciofluvial origin. Till is expected to be present under a sequence of silt, sand and gravel deposits. The till generally found within the Yukon River valley mainly consists of dense greenish grey clast (gravel to cobble size) supported by silt. In the vicinity of the Whitehorse Thermal Generating Station bedrock may be found at a depth of 16 to 18 metres (EBA 2013) and consists of Miles Canyon Basalt, which is part of the Alligator Lake volcanic complex.

Whitehorse lies in a sporadic permafrost region, where permafrost underlies less than 25% of the ground. It is rare to uncover permafrost during excavations. Glaciolacustrine soil is more likely to overlay permafrost than fluvial and glaciofluvial deposits (Mougeot 1998). In Whitehorse and the surrounding area most permafrost has been found below glaciolacustrine deposits (Mougeot 1998). As a result, it is highly unlikely that permafrost underlies any portion of the Project Study Area (which is of fluvial origin). Recent geotechnical investigations on the Ta’an Kwätch’än Council (TKC) property to the south of the Construction Footprint did not encounter permafrost (EBA 2013).

Regional vegetation and wildlife within the ecoregion and specifically within the Project Study Area are addressed in Section 5.2.6.

5.2.2 Climate

The Yukon Southern Lakes Ecoregion is located in the Upper Yukon – Stikine Basin Climatic Zone between the St. Elias Coast Mountains to the West and Cassiar Mountains to the East (Wahl et al. 1987). The mountains create a rain shadow over the City of Whitehorse, which results in low precipitation. Snow

Chapter 5 Page 5-2 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013 cover is generally present from late October to mid-April in the valleys and a month longer in higher elevations (Yukon Ecoregions Working Group 2004). Summer precipitation accounts for one-third to one- half of all precipitation in Whitehorse. Historical precipitation records indicate that the months with the greatest level of precipitation are June to August (Environment Canada 2012). Figure 5-1 below provides monthly mean precipitation and temperature at the Whitehorse Station A, from 1970 to 2010.

Figure 5-1: Monthly Mean Precipitation and Temperature at the Whitehorse Station A, from 1970 to 2010

Source: Environment Canada 2012.

Figure 5-1 above summarizes historical mean monthly temperatures from 1970 to 2010. Temperatures in Whitehorse tend to be very cold in the winter months with mild summers (Environment Canada 2012).

The climate drivers in Whitehorse are warm air masses from the coast and cold Arctic air from the North (Wahl et al. 1987). The mixture of these two air masses can commonly create temperature inversions. Arctic inversions can hang over low-lying areas of Whitehorse in the winter (G.J. Bull & Associates 2005).

The predominant wind direction in Whitehorse is from the South-East (Environment Canada 2012). These winds originate from the Gulf of Alaska (Yukon Ecoregions Working Group, 2004). A wind rose diagram for the Whitehorse surface winds is provided in Figure 5-2 and shows the distribution of winds by direction (i.e., direction from which the wind blows) and speed class. Figure 5-2 shows that the wind in Whitehorse is commonly from the South, following the orientation of the valley. It is also noted that calm conditions (zero or near-zero wind speeds) are experienced over 19.6% of the time.

Chapter 5 Page 5-3 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Figure 5-2: Wind Rose Diagram, EC Whitehorse Surface Station 2010

Source: Senes Air Quality Assessment Update in Support of Permit Renewal for Diesel Generator Operations, page 12.

Ice fog occurs naturally when water vapour encounters very cold air (~-30oC) (American Meteorological Society n.d.), and in Whitehorse is likely to occur during late fall and early winter along the Yukon River. Ice fog does occasionally occur at the Whitehorse Rapids Generation Station. Due to the close proximity to the Yukon River it is possible that ice fog will occur within the Project Construction Footprint.

The Whitehorse Climate Change Adaptation Plan (Hennessey et al. 2011), indicates that climate in Whitehorse is changing, and based on historic climate data has identified climate trends for Whitehorse. A summary of these trends is provided in Table 5-1 and indicates that temperatures are rising in the Whitehorse area (particularly in winter), freeze-up is occurring later in the season, break-up is occurring earlier in the season, and the number of frost free days is increasing. Table 5-1 also indicates a slight increase in precipitation.

Chapter 5 Page 5-4 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Table 5-1: Climatic Trends for Whitehorse Area

Climate Variable 1961 - 1990 2000 - 2009 Rate of Change

Annual Temperature (⁰C) -1.1 ± 1.2 0.0 ± 0.9 0.4⁰C / decade

Winter Temperature (⁰C) -15.9 ± 4.5 -13.2 ± 2.5 0.9⁰C / decade

Annual Precipitation (mm) 268 ± 44 276 ± 46 1.6mm / decade

Summer Precipitation (mm) 109 ± 38 121 ± 33 2.3 mm / decade

Frost-free Days 144 ± 9 149 ± 8 2 days / decade

Source: Hennessey et al. 2011.

5.2.3 Air Quality

Ambient air quality data in Whitehorse are monitored from a station located in downtown Whitehorse and operated by Environment Canada and Yukon Environment (Yukon Environment 2012b). The data from the downtown Whitehorse monitoring station located at 1091 – 1st Avenue is used as National Air Pollution Surveillance (NAPS) data and is quality controlled, assured and standardized by Environment Canada and Environment Yukon for inclusion into the Canada-wide air quality database (Yukon 1 Environment 2012b) . Today sulphur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), ozone, fine particulate matter and carbon monoxide (CO) are measured continuously (Environment Canada 2011). For the Whitehorse monitoring site, only PM2.5, CO, and NO2 have long term data collection records (Audette pers comm 2012).

Ambient air quality standards adopted by the Yukon Territory in 2010 for regulating air quality are outlined in Table 5-2 below. These standards represent the maximum acceptable concentrations of pollutants in ambient air and are used to determine the acceptability of emission from proposed and existing emission sources.

1 The NAPS Network was established in 1969 as a joint program of the federal and provincial governments to monitor and assess ambient air in Canadian urban centres (Environment Canada 2011). The first summary was produced in 1972.

Chapter 5 Page 5-5 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Table 5-2: Excerpt of Key Yukon Ambient Air Quality Standards

Yukon Air Quality Standards Pollutant Time Frame μg/m3 2 ppm3 ppbv4 Annual 30 11

Sulphur Dioxide (SO2) 24 Hour 150 57 1 Hour 450 172 Annual 60 32 24 Hour 200 106 Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) 1 Hour 400 213

8 Hour 5,800 5 Carbon Monoxide (CO) 1 Hour 15,000 13

Particulate Matter (PM2.5) 24 Hour 30

Source: SENES 2011.

Table 5-3 below provides a summary of the available air quality monitoring data for Whitehorse from 2001 to 2009. More recent data for 2010 and 2011 is yet not available from Environment Canada. No monitoring data are available for 2006 due to problems at the downtown Whitehorse station in that year and only particulate matter (PM2.5) data are available for 2007. In addition, no NO2 monitoring data are available for 2008 and 2009 (SENES 2013).

Table 5-3 indicates that the maximum ambient levels of carbon monoxide (CO), NO2, and PM2.5 in Whitehorse are well below ambient air quality standards adopted by Yukon Environment in 2010. Due to forest fires in the area in 2004, 2005, and 2009, the data for NO2 and PM2.5 are anomalously high and are not representative of typical levels of these contaminants in Whitehorse. Similarly, the 24-hour average

NO2 concentrations were also anomalously higher in 2004 and 2005 than in 2001 to 2003. However, the maximum NO2 concentrations recorded in 2004/2005 were still only 20% of the 1-hour average ambient air quality standards of 400 ug/m3 and 23% of the 24 hour average standard of 200 ug/m3. A similar pattern occurs for PM2.5 concentrations over the period for 2001 to 2009 (SENES 2013).

2 μg/m3 – microgram per cubic metre. 3 ppm – parts per million. 4 ppb – parts per billion.

Chapter 5 Page 5-6 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Table 5-3: Air Quality Monitoring Data Summary for Whitehorse

CAC Time YAAQS Level Observed Concentrations (ug/m3) Baseline Frame Air Quality 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Max 4872 4408 4408 2552 2088 n/a n/a 2320 4988 1-h 15,000 98th 1276 1044 812 812 812 n/a n/a 1508 696 988 CO Max 2784 1972 1856 1740 1508 n/a n/a 1929 1436 8-h 5,800 98th 1160 928 696 696 812 n/a n/a 1494 609 861

Max 5.7 19.1 24.8 84.0 74.5 n/a n/a n/a n/a 1-h 400 98th 3.8 5.7 1.9 32.5 32.5 n/a n/a n/a n/a 3.8

NO2 Max 3.8 11.5 9.6 32.5 45.8 n/a n/a n/a n/a 24-h 200 98th 3.8 5.7 1.9 21.0 26.7 n/a n/a n/a n/a 3.8

Annual 60 n/a n/a 1.9 n/a n/a 7.6 n/a n/a n/a n/a

Max 12 11 14 101 80 n/a 9 10 103

PM2.5 24-h 30 98th 9 7 8 46 12 n/a 5 8 15 7.4 n/a – not available or not applicable.

Note 1: Baseline air quality calculated as a 5-Year average of the 98th percentile concentrations for CO (2003-2005 and 2008-2009); a 5-year average (2001-2003 and 2007-2008) of th th the 98 percentile concentrations for PM2.5; a 3-year average 2001-2003 of the 98 percentile concentrations for NO2.

Note 2: In prior Yukon Energy Air Emissions Permit Renewal submissions (2011), the background CO, NO2 and PM2.5 concentrations for Whitehorse were defined as the 98th percentile values from the period of record (the 2011 Air Emissions Permit Renewal Application used the 2001-2005 period). For the 2011 Air Emissions Permit Renewal Application Air Quality Assessment SENES used the background CO levels calculated over the entire 5-year period 2001-2005 but the NO2 and PM2.5 concentrations were defined as the 98th percentile value average over the 3-year period 2001-2003.

Chapter 5 Page 5-7 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Table 5-4 below sets out the average annual PM2.5 and number of days that PM2.5 levels exceeded the national standard in Whitehorse from 2002 to 2009.

Table 5-4:

Average Annual Particulate Matter (PM2.5) and Number of Days that Particulate Matter Levels Exceeded the National Standard in Whitehorse, 2002-2009

Number days PM (μg/m3) Year Mean Annual PM (μg/m3) 2.5 2.5 Exceeded National Standard

2001 Began monitoring in August Began monitoring in August

2002 2.4 0

2003 2.4 0

2004 4.8 12

2005 2.8 4

2006 Not Available Not Available

2007 1.8 0

2008 1.9 0

2009 Not Available 15

Source: Yukon Environment 2012b.

An air quality assessment was completed by SENES Consultants in 2011 to support the air emissions permit renewal application for the Yukon Energy diesel powered generators in Whitehorse, Dawson City, Faro and Mayo (SENES 2011). The 2011 assessment was based on the emissions data collected from a stack sampling program that was completed in July 2011 at the Whitehorse facility. The 2011 assessment included air dispersion modelling of Common Air Contaminants (CAC) from the Yukon Energy plant in Whitehorse and considered carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, sulphur dioxide and fine particulate matter (SENES 2011).

Community emission inventories compiled by SENES in support of prior Yukon Energy air emissions permit renewal applications indicate that Yukon Energy operations contribute relatively small-to- insignificant amounts of emissions for both common air contaminants and greenhouse gases. Most emissions in Whitehorse (as well as other Yukon communities) are dominated by mobile sources and heating using either fuel oil or wood stoves. With the exception of NOx emissions, the contribution of Yukon Energy operations to total community emissions of common air contaminants in 2007 was less than 1% (SENES 2011).

Chapter 5 Page 5-8 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Dispersion modelling analysis in 2011 also indicated the highest ambient air quality impacts for most contaminants were confined to the immediate vicinity of the power plant along the western edge of the property line. Analysis in 2011 indicated as follows (SENES 2011):

 The predicted concentrations for the three gaseous contaminants [CO, NO2 and SO2] would remain within the limits set by the Yukon ambient air quality standards under a worst-case drought scenario operations scenario.

 Similarly, Yukon Energy’s emissions combined with an assumed background PM2.5 concentration of 8.0 ug/m3(5) would, also under a worst case drought scenario, remain within the limits of the Yukon standards everywhere in Whitehorse, except at the Maximum Point of Impingement along the western edge of the facility property line, for only two days of the year.

 The incremental contribution of Yukon Energy emissions to ambient air quality levels in most areas of Whitehorse would remain at or below about 2 ug/m3 (less than 7% of the standard), for the worst case drought scenario.

Tables 5-5 outlines the WTGS diesel engine characteristics as reported in Yukon Energy’s 2011 air emissions permit application (SENES 2011). The WTGS diesel plant rarely operates the older WD1 to WD3 units and more commonly operates WD4 to WD7 (see Table 5-6, which provides the current stacking order for these diesel units).

Table 5-5: Diesel Engine Characteristics

Unit Prime Mover Name Plate MCR Rating In Service Model RPM No. Manufacturer Capacity (kW) (kW) Date

WD1 Mirrlees KV16 3,920 4,000 514 1968 WD2 Mirrlees KV16 5,150 5,000 514 1968 WD3 Mirrlees KV16 5,150 5,000 514 1970 WD4 EMD 20C 2,500 2,500 900 1975 WD5 EMD 20C 2,500 2,500 900 1975 WD6 EMD 20C 2,500 2,700 900 1990 WD7 Caterpillar 3612 3,300 3,300 900 1991

Note: WD refers to Whitehorse diesel units.

5 Air Quality Assessment Update in Support of Permit Renewal for Diesel Generator Operations (SENES, 2011), notes for particulate 3 3 matter, the maximum 24-hour average PM2.5 concentration for the period 2001-2003 was 14 μg/m , compared with 101 μg/m in 2004. The average 98th percentile concentration for 2001-2003 was just 8 μg/m3, compared with 46 μg/m3 in 2004 and 12 μg/m3 in 2005. It is difficult to determine which values should be used to define the ‘normal’ background levels of either of these pollutants. For the purposes of this assessment, the background CO levels have been calculated over the entire 5-year period 2001-2005.

However, the NO2 and PM2.5 concentrations have been defined as the 98th percentile value average over the 3-year period 2001- 2003.

Chapter 5 Page 5-9 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Table 5-6 lists the emission rates for the WTGS diesel generator units as determined through stack testing that was completed in July 2011 (Levelton 2011); this testing assumes that each unit is operating in its prime or steady-state mode. During times of start-up and shutdown or periods of operation outside steady state, higher emissions may occur for a brief period; however, such emissions would occur for brief periods and are expected to be quite small in the context of total hourly emissions for engines.

Table 5-6: Measured Emission Rates for Yukon Energy Diesel Engines

Unit No & Average Emissions (g/h) Stacking

Order* CO NOx SO2 PM10 PM2.5

WD7 686.4 23,512.7 12.8 197.1 174.8 WD6 284.1 30,530.0 48.7 871.8 812.4 WD5 521.3 30,040.9 54.5 924.1 821.8 WD4 1821.0 33,108.8 52.7 536.2 496.5 WD1 656.3 15,817.8 40.0 272.7 238.0 WD2 4942.9 24,388.1 43.0 429.4 380.7 WD3 4132.0 21,680.9 37.4 384.4 299.9

Source: Levelton 2011, as reported in SENES 2011. Note that differences between units in average emission rates (g/h) for any gaseous contaminant reflect different unit capacities (see Table 5-5) as well as differences in unit characteristics. *Current Whitehorse Thermal Generating Station diesel engine stacking order. The SENES 2011 report provided a slightly modified earlier stacking order (but WD1, WD2 and WD3 were all still in the last three unit group in the order).

5.2.4 Noise Levels

Monitoring of background noise was completed in October 2012 using a sound level meter at one location in proximity to the closest permanent residence to the Project Construction Footprint. The noise metre was in place for a period of approximately 5 days from October 17, 2012 to October 22, 2012 and the monitoring program consisted of 120 hours of continuous hourly noise measurements at the specified monitoring location. The results of this monitoring program are summarized in Table 5-7 below.

Table 5-7: Baseline Noise Monitoring Summary (at monitoring location in proximity to closest permanent residence to Project Construction Footprint)

Average Day-Time (07:00 to 22:00) Average Day-Time (07:00 to 2:00) 15-hr Leq, dBA 9-hr Leq, dBA

Leq L90 Leq L90 55.2 48.0 47.3 44.8 Notes:

Leq – The Energy Equivalent sound level. A sound level that if constant over a specified period of time, would contain the same sound energy of varying levels over that same period of time (Cowan, 1994). L90 - Provides an indication of what sound levels would be without transient events. Specifically, the sound level that is exceeded for 90% of the sampling period is used to estimate the approximate background or ambient noise level.

Chapter 5 Page 5-10 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Results of the monitoring program indicate that background noise at the monitoring site during the monitoring period was dominated by local vehicle traffic and sounds of nature, consisting of wind, dog and bird noise and the influence of the Yukon River. Traffic noise was dominated by vehicles travelling along Robert Service Way, with contributions from local traffic along Nisutlin Drive and Alsek Road. Airplane traffic from Erik Nielsen Whitehorse International Airport was also a significant source of transient noise, especially during the morning (8:00 to 9:00) and afternoon (11:00 to 13:00 and 16:00 to 19:00) periods where most commercial flights occur. Typically, these events lasted less than 5 minutes and caused spikes in baseline noise (1-minute Leq) values of approximately 5 to 15 dBA.

L90, used as a measure of ambient noise and representing the noise level exceeded for 90% of the time, eliminates the influence of short-term transient events such as airplane flyovers. The L90 for the monitoring site is approximately 45 to 48 dBA, indicative of a quiet residential area.

5.2.5 Surface Water, Groundwater and Aquatic Species

Surface Water

There are no watercourses located within the Project Construction Footprint. The Yukon River is, however, within the Project Study Area, east of the Project Construction Footprint.

The surface water system in Whitehorse is characterized by deglaciation features such as kettle topography, as well as the Yukon River (Yukon Ecoregions Working Group 2004). The City of Whitehorse sits along the upper reaches of the Yukon River. This large river is the drainage point for many of the watersheds in the Whitehorse area. The Project Study Area straddles the dividing line between the Yukon River South Watershed and the Yukon River North Watershed (Gartner Lee Limited 2001).

At Whitehorse, the Yukon River has an annual average flow rate of 251.7 m3/s, while daily averages range from 644.8 m3/s to 89.9 m3/s (Yukon Energy). The highest rates are usually recorded in the summertime after the snow cover has melted (Yang et al. 2009). Suspended solids and turbidity tend to be higher in spring when increased stream flow from melting snow accelerates bank erosion and overland sedimentation. However, metals primarily associated with suspended solids are not usually available for uptake by fish and other aquatic organisms and are not a concern (LGL Limited 2012).

In 2009, a total of 108 surface water quality samples were collected from ten monitoring stations in Yukon, providing data for the Water Quality Index. Two of the stations with sufficient data for analysis are located on the Yukon River sites above and below the City of Whitehorse, at the Marsh Lake dam and the confluence with Takhini River respectively (closest available data in proximity to the Project Study Area). The Yukon River achieved a water quality index measure of “excellent” at both sites, which indicates aquatic life is not threatened or impaired and measurements never or very rarely exceed water quality guidelines. This indicates that urbanization has not had a significant detrimental effect on the Yukon River at Whitehorse (LGL Limited 2012).

Surface water at the Expanded Site Area is influenced by the raised railway bed that is approximately two meters above the rest of the Expanded Site Area. Field investigations at the Expanded Site Area undertaken in May 2013 also indicate a prominent elevation break running north-south down the center of the Expanded Site Area. The break follows a grass swale that also divides the vegetation zones and

Chapter 5 Page 5-11 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013 ends at the north end of the Expanded Site Area in a large cobble infiltration gallery for stormwater. At the time of the investigation the basin was completely dry.

Plate 5-1: View standing from SE corner looking along southern property line

Chapter 5 Page 5-12 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Plate 5-2: View from south property line looking north up the grassed area between vegetation zones

Chapter 5 Page 5-13 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Plate 5-3: Dry infiltration gallery at the north end of the grassed area between vegetation zones (looking south)

Groundwater

Groundwater is found below the ground surface and typically flows from high ground to low ground, i.e., from recharge to discharge locations. Groundwater provides sustained flow to wetlands, creeks and rivers during dry periods (baseflow) and clean and abundant water supply to wells. Groundwater is not as susceptible to contamination as surface water, but is very difficult to remediate once it becomes contaminated. Water-bearing geological units are referred to as aquifers.

The municipal water supply for the City of Whitehorse is drawn entirely from the Selkirk Aquifer in Riverdale (Yukon Environment 2011). The Selkirk Aquifer is an unconfined to semi-confined glaciofluvial sand and gravel aquifer set within the Chadburn Lake buried river valley (Gartner Lee Limited 2003). Some of the wells which tap this aquifer are less than 30 metres deep, and are recharged by Schwatka Lake and Hidden Lakes. This wellfield is situated less than one kilometre northeast of the Whitehorse Rapids Generating Station, on the east bank of the Yukon River. The Engineering Services Department of the City of Whitehorse is currently leading a wellhead protection study for the wellfield, and confirms that the capture zone for the wellfield does not include the Whitehorse Rapids Generating Station or the Project Study Area. Groundwater from overburden aquifers is also used as the water supply for rural

Chapter 5 Page 5-14 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013 residential subdivisions south of the Study Area, with the closest being approximately 7 kilometres to the south (Yukon Environment 2011).

Yukon Energy has a well at the Whitehorse Rapids Generating Station that provides water to the headquarters office building. A sample collected September 11, 2012 indicates compliance with all of the Canadian Drinking Water Quality standards (AECOM 2012b).

In general, the groundwater quality in the Project Study Area is expected to be good given its location immediately down-gradient of Schwatka Lake. Groundwater is generally north flowing, from Schwatka Lake to the Yukon River downstream of the hydroelectric dam. Locally, the flow direction is strongly controlled by the 20 metre elevation difference between the power canal and the river downstream of the generating station. A dipole effect must exist at the Yukon Energy Whitehorse Rapids Generating Station, and at the Project Study Area this effect would likely be manifested by a strong westerly or clockwise radial flow component on the west side of the river. Groundwater beneath the Yukon Energy Whitehorse Rapids Generating Station discharges to the west bank of the Yukon River close to or not far downstream of the hydroelectric dam. Flow from the Yukon Energy property to the Selkirk wells is practically impossible due to the discharge boundary created by the Yukon River.

Recent geotechnical investigations to a depth of 8 to 10.5 metres were undertaken on the TKC property (southwest of the Expanded Site Area) in December of 2012. Investigations on the TKC property indicate subsurface conditions consisting of 0.3 to 0.6 metres of organics underlain by 2.2 to 2.7 metres of sandy gravel, overlaying sand or silt and sand. Groundwater was encountered within 3 metres of ground surface during drilling. The groundwater quality at these locations was not tested.

In the Fall of 2012, the City of Whitehorse had a well drilled on their property (north of the TKC property and in the vicinity of the mud bog pit). This drilling program (to a depth of approximately 50 metres) encountered glaciolacustrine and glaciofluvial deposits from surface to bedrock. Bedrock was encountered at 50 metres depth. A well screen was installed in gravel materials at 36.3 to 41.4 metres depth (AECOM 2012a). Similar to portions of the Selkirk Aquifer, the gravel unit is semi confined and overlain by fine sand and silt. Although the well is not currently being used, it may be used as a water source in the future.

Aquatic Species

Based on information obtained from the Yukon Fisheries Information Summary System (FISS) database Arctic Grayling, Northern Pike, Slimy Sculpin, Burbot, Longnose Sucker, Lake Whitefish, Round Whitefish, Least Cisco and Chinook Salmon are all present in Schwatka Lake. Information from the Yukon Department of Fisheries indicates Schwatka Lake also supports Lake Trout and Lake Chub (Barker pers comm 2012).

Based on the Yukon River Instream Flow Chinook Salmon Passage and Spawning report (Payne & Associates 2011), there are no passage impediments on the Yukon River between Lewes Dam and the Takhini River confluence. Spawning is known to occur in the Takhini Reach (from the City of Whitehorse to the confluence of the Takhini and Yukon Rivers). As part of the study described in Payne (2011), the Takhini Reach was assessed for habitat suitability based on substrate type. The areas with the highest ranked spawning habitat were at the upper end of the Takhini Reach (Payne & Associates 2011). The

Chapter 5 Page 5-15 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013 upper end of the Takhini Reach, also known as the River Flats, is a confirmed Chinook salmon spawning area (DFO 2012). Habitat associated with the upper Takhini Reach is primarily low gradient riffles, shallow glides, and deep glides. Although there is no known spawning in the Lewes Reach (Lewes Dam to Schwatka Lake), the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) has stated that 50% of the Chinook spawning location upstream of the Whitehorse Rapids fish ladder is unknown (Payne & Associates 2011).

5.2.6 Vegetation and Wildlife Common to the Region

Vegetation

Open coniferous and mixed woodland forests dominate the flora of the Yukon Southern Lakes Ecoregion (Yukon Ecoregions Working Group 2004). Due to human activity and historical fires, the majority of forested land in the Whitehorse region is in mid-to-mature several stages (40 to 120 years old) (Applied Ecosystem Management 1999).

Ecosystem mapping was the primary source of information used to describe vegetation associated with the Project Study Area, and indicates that the Project Construction Footprint lies within a Willow-Shrub Birch Ecosystem. Willow-Shrub Birch Ecosystems are non-forested areas with willow and shrub birch meadows; variable grass, sedge or lichen may also be present depending on the site moisture regime (Gartner Lee Limited 2006).

Site investigations undertaken in May 2013 indicate two distinct zones of vegetation within the Expanded Site Area: a primarily pine stand and a shrub willow stand. The pine stand consists of mostly undisturbed vegetation with some kinnikinnick and soapberry in the understory. The shrub willow stand has some immature poplars with understory predominantly comprised of grasses. The two vegetation areas are divided by a grass swale that runs north south.

Chapter 5 Page 5-16 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Plate 5-4: View from railway looking into the mixed pine stand with kinnikinnick and soapberry in the understory

Plate 5-5: View in the understory of the pine stand

Chapter 5 Page 5-17 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Plate 5-6: View from the southwest looking at Robert Service Way and the shrub willow stand

Wildlife

The importance of habitat to species may be classified through mapping of Wildlife Key Areas, i.e., locations used by wildlife for important, seasonal life functions (Yukon Environment 2009). Wildlife Key Areas have been identified for waterfowl, raptors, and grouse, various ungulates, wolf, woodland caribou, mountain goat, black bear, grizzly bear, sheep, beaver, and muskrat (Yukon Environment 2009). No Wildlife Key Areas, as defined by Yukon Environment (2009), are located within the Project Study Area.

Another method of classifying habitat importance is through wildlife value (importance for life processes) and environmental sensitivity. As can be seen in Figure 5-3, the Project Study Area lies within a zone of awareness for high wildlife value and sensitivity (the river flats area) (Applied Ecosystem Management, 2000a), but is not within the core area of high or moderate environmental sensitivity as indicated on the map.

Chapter 5 Page 5-18 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Figure 5-3: Wildlife Values and Environmental Sensitivity of Yukon River Flats Area

(Applied Ecosystem Management Ltd, Report 2000a).

Table 5-8 summarizes key wildlife groups inhabiting the River Flats Area according to the Applied Ecosystem Management Report (2000a).

Chapter 5 Page 5-19 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Table 5-8: Potential Wildlife in River Flats Area (for map see Figure 5-3)

Group Species Group Wildlife Values

Birds* Water Birds  Mid-river channels of the Yukon River (RI).  Shallow, sheltered side channels of the Yukon River (RI).  Mid-river islands and shorelines (WA, GB, SF, SW). The use of gravel bars and small islands is influenced largely by the discharge of the Yukon River (during peak flow in July and August, most small islands are submerged).

Forest Birds  Mature spruce forests (SF, SW). /Neotropical Migrants  Mid-river islands and shorelines (WA, SF, SW).

Mammals Semi-Aquatic  Shallow, sheltered side channels of the Yukon River (RI). Mammals  Aspen groves (AB) near shorelines. An active beaver lodge is situated within site of the Lewes Boulevard bridge.

Fish Fish  This area contains spawning and rearing habitat in the shallow side channels and along Robert Service Way. Two salmon enhancement channels have been constructed; one adjacent to the Robert Service Campground, the other along the bank of the Yukon River.

Source: Applied Ecosystem Management, 2000a.

* Avian predators are also expected nearby.

The Yukon Southern Lakes region supports a large avian population (Yukon Ecoregions Working Group 2004). Forest birds and neotropical migrants, however, are the only groups with habitat within the Project Study Area. At least five species of song birds have been observed in the tree canopy of the Expanded Site Area.

The Yukon Southern Lakes region also has the highest mammalian diversity in the Yukon (Yukon Ecoregions Working Group, 2004), and species in the area include grizzly bears, Dall sheep, stone sheep, wolves, beaver and wolverine (Yukon Ecoregions Working Group 2004). Arctic ground squirrel burrows have been noted throughout the Expanded Site Area.

Based on data from Yukon Environment (2012a), there are potential Species at Risk that have their range within the Project Study Area, including birds, mammals, and amphibians. Although there is potentially suitable habitat within the Project Study Area (based on the vegetation structure and composition), this habitat is fragmented and disturbed due to the various anthropogenic sources such as off-road vehicles, vehicle traffic, roads and the airport. As a result of these disturbances, it is highly unlikely that any Species at Risk rely on this area for habitat. Species at Risk with ranges potentially overlapping the Project Study Area are set out in Table 5-9 below.

Chapter 5 Page 5-20 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Table 5-9: Species at Risk with Ranges Overlapping the Project Study Area

Species Species at Risk Status and Habitat Requirements

The Common The common nighthawk inhabits open coniferous forests and even flat gravel roofs. This Nighthawk species is listed as threatened under the SARA (SARA Registry 2012). (Chordelies minor) The Project Study Area has fragmented coniferous forests with some openings that may provide suitable habitat for the Common Nighthawk.

Olive-sided The olive-sided Flycatcher breeds in open coniferous forest with natural openings and is Flycatcher listed as “Threatened” under SARA (SARA Registry 2012). The Study Area has highly (Contopus fragmented coniferous forests with some open areas. cooperi)

The Bank Swallow The bank swallow is currently under COSEWIC review and may be listed in the upcoming (Riparia riparia) year (Mulder pers comm 2012). The Bank Swallow lives in low areas along rivers, streams, oceans or reservoirs that have vertical cliffs or banks (Cornell Lab of Ornithology 2012). These birds also inhabit human-made sites such as sand or gravel quarries or road cuts. The Yukon Conservation Data Centre (Mulder pers comm 2012) suggests this species may be present within nearby cliffs to the west of the Project Study Area. It is unlikely this species will be within the Project Study Area.

Horned Grebe A Special Concern species, the horned grebe’s habitat is typically fresh or brackish waters (Podiceps auritus) in wetland, marshes or secluded areas of open water, it is unlikely to be found within the Project Study Area (SARA Registry 2012).

Little Brown Bat The little brown bat is listed and Endangered and is the only mammal listed under SARA (Myotis lucifugus) that could potentially be within the Project Study Area. (SARA Registry 2012) The little brown bat requires mixed forest near water for foraging; the shrub willow and pine stand within the Project Study Area may provide suitable habitat for this species.

Western Toad The western toad lives in habitat ranging from the shallows of lakes to road side ditches. (Anaxyrus boreas) Adults also use forested habitat with dense shrub cover (SARA Registry 2012). The Western Toad is listed as a species of Special Concern under SARA. Whitehorse is an area that is at the northern extent of the Western Toad range. The Project Study Area does not appear to provide suitable habitat for the Western Toad.

Dune Tachinid Fly The dune tachinid fly is listed under SARA as a species of Special Concern. The nearest (Germaria known location is approximately 1 km from the Project Study Area. Dune tachinid flies angustata) are unlikely to be present within the Project Study Area as they require active dune habitat, not found in the Project Study Area (SARA Registry 2012).

As identified by Yukon Environment 2012a and Mulder pers comm 2012.

Chapter 5 Page 5-21 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

5.3 EXISTING SOCIO-ECONOMIC SETTING

5.3.1 Population

In the early 20th century migration in and out of the Yukon was quite high largely due to fluctuations in the economy related to the mining industry and highway construction. The population has stabilized over the past 50 years and population shifts that occur in response to mining and resource development are not as prominent (City of Whitehorse 2010).

Since 2003, the Yukon and Whitehorse populations have been growing, and over the last 10 years, the annual rate of growth has ranged from 0.7% to 3.4%, with an annual average of 1.7% (Yukon Bureau of Statistics 2011a).

The Yukon Bureau of Statistics population projections predict ongoing growth in both Whitehorse and Yukon over the next ten years (see Table 5-10). These projections are based on observed trends in the following defined reference periods: June 2009-June 2011; June 2006-June 2011; and June 2001-June 2011. These projections do not account for any specific future changes in business or government projects which could affect the population (Yukon Bureau of Statistics 2011a). Opening or closure of a large mine, for example, may result in deviation from these projections.

Table 5-10: Current Population and Population Projections for Yukon and Whitehorse

Population 2011 Population 2021 Population 2021 Population 2021 Low Medium High

Yukon 35,175 40,130 41,698 43,188

Whitehorse 26,711 30,721 32,194 33,179

(Yukon Bureau of Statistics 2012a; 2011a).

The City of Whitehorse has also been planning for residential growth. The increasing population and shrinking average household size is expected to have a direct impact on the number of housing units required. As of 2006, there were 8,631 dwelling units within City of Whitehorse limits, with an average of 2.4 people per household (City of Whitehorse 2010). Based on the Yukon Bureau of Statistics population projection, over 2,500 new dwelling units may be required in Whitehorse by 2021.

5.3.2 Land Use

The Project Construction Footprint is located along Robert Service Way, just over two kilometers south of the centre of downtown Whitehorse.

Chapter 5 Page 5-22 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

The Construction Footprint Area is zoned Public Utilities in the 2010 Whitehorse Official Community Plan and the Whitehorse Zoning Bylaw. Under the Whitehorse Zoning by-law 2012-20 (adopted July 23, 2012) Public Utilities means:

“buildings, facilities, or equipment whether owned or operated by or for the City, or by a corporation or commission under agreement with or under franchise from the City or under a Territorial or Federal statute, which furnishes services and facilities available to or for the use of all the inhabitants of the City, including but not limited to landfills and waste treatment facilities, sewage treatment facilities, pump houses and stations, water treatment plants, and electrical production facilities”.

Electrical production facilities fit within the definition of public infrastructure and thus the proposed Project fits with the current zoning for the area.

Robert Service Campground, City of Whitehorse-owned baseball diamonds and the airport are located north of the Project Construction Footprint. Miles Canyon Road and the power canal for the Whitehorse Rapids Generating Station are located west of the Project Construction Footprint. Vacant Yukon Government land zoned for Environmental Protection is located south of the Project Construction Footprint.

The nearest residences are across the Yukon River in Riverdale 500 m northwest of the Project Construction Footprint at the edge of the Project Study Area. The Riverdale subdivision has a population of approximately 4,885 residents6. There are only five dwellings within the 500 m Project Study Area radius.

The Project Construction Footprint is partially within the Chadburn Lake Park Reserve. The Chadburn Lake Park Reserve was created by a Federal Government Commissioner’s Order (1970-304) in 1970 to preserve an area for recreation close to Whitehorse and to protect the region’s water supply. While the need for recreational space within Whitehorse remains, the water supply no longer comes from Schwatka Lake as all drinking water for Whitehorse area residents now comes from underground aquifers. It is also noted that development activity has occurred within the Chadburn Lake Reserve since its creation in 1970. As part of the most recent Official Community Plan amendment process, the City of Whitehorse has expanded the area designated as Chadburn Lake Park Reserve to include most of Grey Mountain and additional land to the east of Whitehorse. The City of Whitehorse has also indicated its preference that the reserve be removed from the west side of the Yukon River where the Project Construction Footprint is located7.

6 Yukon Bureau of Statistics population report (December 2012). 7 See City of Whitehorse 2010 Official Community Plan, which notes as follows (Objective 18.1.2): “Chadburn Lake Park is approximately 8,050 hectares in size and is the largest protected park within City limits. An existing Order in Council protects some of this land from disposition, but park limits also include privately owned land, First Nation settlement land, and areas that have already been developed along the Alaska Highway. Other adjacent areas with high environmental and recreational values have not been included in the existing reserve. The City may request that the Commissioner of the Yukon amend or remove the existing

Chapter 5 Page 5-23 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

The Project is not in the vicinity of any other lands designated under the Parks and Lands Certainty Act, National Parks, Special Management Areas, Canadian Heritage Rivers, National Wildlife Areas or Wildlife Sanctuaries.

Robert Service Way is west of the Project Study Area. Properties owned by TKC and the City of Whitehorse are each located west of Robert Service Way and partially within the boundaries of the Project Study Area. The property owned by TKC is southwest of the Project Construction Footprint. There are no buildings or other structures currently on this property, and approximately 50% of this property is cleared and there are several informal trails and old roads crossing the site. The property owned by the City of Whitehorse is north-west of the Project Construction Footprint. It is primarily cleared and there are no structures on the property. The cleared area of the City of Whitehorse property is used as an unofficial snow dump during the winter months. The City of Whitehorse is considering the option of building a municipal services building on the property.

5.3.3 Resource Use

There is one open trapping concession within the Project Construction Footprint (#288) and one closed trapping concession (#409). There are no additional concessions within the Project Study Area. The Government of Yukon, Department of Environment has indicated that trapping concession #288 does not have a registered license holder at this time.

There are no outfitting concessions within the Project Construction Footprint or the Project Study Area.

There are no quartz claims, placer claims, designated agricultural applications, leases, or dispositions within the Project Construction Footprint or Project Study Area.

5.3.4 Recreation

There are several recreational uses that are currently taking place in the vicinity of the Project Study Area and Project Construction Footprint (see Appendix A, Figure 5A-5).

A portion of the Yukon River Loop Trail, a popular recreation route, runs through the Project Study Area and Project Construction Footprint, along the eastern boundary of the Expanded Site Area. This trail is used for hiking, dog walking, mountain biking, sightseeing, and as a cross country ski route. The Yukon River Loop Trail Marathon is held each August and proceeds along the network of loop trails in the area, through Robert Service Campground and past the WTGS and power canal, before proceeding along Schwatka Lake. The Yukon River Loop Trail also acts as a connector route to the Millennium Trail (Figure 5-4).

Order in Council in order to have it more accurately reflect the intended area for park preservation as shown on Map 6, and/or to have full jurisdiction and control of the park given to the City. This change to the Order in Council would open up already developed areas along the Highway for further development and protect areas that are environmentally sensitive or used for recreation”.

Chapter 5 Page 5-24 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Figure 5-4: City of Whitehorse Map Depicting the Millennium Trail and Yukon River Loop Trail

Source: City of Whitehorse n.d.

Note: Expanded Site Area associated with the Whitehorse Diesel – Natural Gas Conversion Project is identified with a star.

The Millennium Trail is a non-motorized multi-use paved trail. The trail connects several recreational resources, such as the Whitehorse skate park, Parks Canada’s SS Klondike National Historical Site, Robert Service Campground and whitewater paddling resources (City of Whitehorse 2007).

A network of old roads and informal trails crossing the TKC property to the south west of the Project Study Area is used for a range of recreational activities including walking, mountain biking, dirt biking,

Chapter 5 Page 5-25 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013 snowmobiling and ATVing. The trail network provides a connection to the more formalized walking trail that runs around the airport lands at the top of the escarpment.

Every year the City of Whitehorse permits a couple of events to take place on their property located north-west of the Project Study Area; activities include use of the mud bog and an extreme obstacle course. The mud bog has a mud pit, stands and fencing that remain on the site year round.

A series of jumps and obstacles used by dirt bikes are found in the north-eastern corner of the City of Whitehorse property. This area was under lease to the local dirt biking association, but that lease has expired. A similar area of jumps used by mountain bikers is located just west of the City of Whitehorse property halfway up the escarpment on Yukon Government land.

Other recreation uses in the area surrounding the Project include baseball diamonds and Robert Service campground, both located north of the Whitehorse Rapids Generation Station.

5.3.5 Local and Regional Economy

As of September 2012, the Yukon had an unemployment rate of 6.3%, down from 8.8% in May 2012 (Yukon Bureau of Statistics 2012b). The national unemployment rate as of 2011 is 7.4% (Yukon Bureau of Statistics 2012b). Over the past 15 years, the Yukon unemployment rate has been varied, but has generally been on the decline, ranging from a high of 11.6% in 1998 to a low of 3.2% in 2006.

Figure 5-5: Yukon and Canadian Unemployment Rates

(Yukon Bureau of Statistics, 2012b and Statistics Canada, 2012).

Chapter 5 Page 5-26 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Of the 19,800 workers currently employed in Yukon, nearly 80% are employed full time. The four levels of government in the territory employ 36.4% of the work force. Of those working in the private sector, 24.6% are self-employed (Yukon Bureau of Statistics 2012b).

In the Yukon, 18% of workers (See Table 5-11) are employed in the goods–producing sector, which includes those industries involved in extracting or processing natural resources; jobs in this sector are primarily in construction and mining. The remaining 82% of the work force is associated with work in the service producing sectors (Yukon Bureau of Statistics 2012b).

Table 5-11: Total Yukon Employment by Sector

Sector Number of Workers

Goods-producing sector 3,600 Forestry, fishing, mining, oil and gas 700 Construction 2,200

Services-producing sector 16,200 Trade 2,200 Transportation and warehousing 900 Finance, insurance, real estate and leasing 800 Professional, scientific and technical services 1,200

Business, building and other support services 700 Educational services 1,300 Health care and social assistance 2,400 Information, culture and recreation 1,300 Accommodation and food services 1,400 Other services 700 Public administration 3,300

TOTAL EMPLOYED 19,800

Source: Yukon Bureau of Statistics 2012b. Note: The sum of industry rows shown does not equal sector totals as industries with fewer than 500 workers are not shown. 5.3.6 The Social and Cultural Context

The Project Study Area is located within the traditional territory of the TKC and the Kwanlin Dün First Nation (KDFN). In particular, the Project Study Area south-west of the Project Construction Footprint overlaps an area of TKC Settlement Land. Both groups are affiliated with the Southern Tutchone Tribal Council.

Chapter 5 Page 5-27 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

The Ta'an Kwäch'än take their name from Tàa'an Män (now known as Lake Laberge) which is the central focus of their traditional territory. Their lands extended north to Hootalinqua, south to Marsh Lake, west to White Bank Village (confluence of Takhini and Little Rivers), and east to Winter Crossing on the Teslin River (Ta'an Kwäch'än Council 2008). The Kwanlin Dün First Nation takes their name from the waterway now referred to as Miles Canyon, their ancestors called the area Kwanlin - “running water through canyon”. The heart of their traditional territory is the Whitehorse area (Ecofor 2012).

The land that is now Whitehorse became the location of a permanent settlement soon after the start of the Klondike Gold Rush. As the Klondike Gold Rush continued, the White Pass and Yukon Route Limited (WPYR) railway company developed a railway from Skagway to Whitehorse. Following the opening of the railway in July 1900, Whitehorse grew from a community of temporary camps to a bustling transportation town. Whitehorse was incorporated as a City in 1950 and in 1953 was named the capital of the Yukon (transferred from Dawson City) (Yukon Info 2012). The community has held on to its historical roots and there are a vast number of historical buildings, walking tours, and museums in town (Ecofor 2012).

Heritage Resources

There are no known or recorded heritage sites within the Project Study Area or the Project Construction Footprint, but a few sites have been recorded in the vicinity of these study areas. The Project Study Area has not received a great deal of previous heritage survey and assessment efforts. However, there have been a small number of archaeological surveys conducted in the vicinity with recorded artifact sites located near the outer edge of the Project Study Area comprised mostly lithics, isolated materials, and historic sites. Identified areas with potential for heritage resources are also outside the Project Study Area.

Overall, a high percentage of the Project Construction Footprint and Project Study Area have been previously disturbed by human activities, including major land altering disturbances due to the construction of Robert Service Way and the Whitehorse Dam in 1951-52. Currently, Lot 1267 (on the west side of Robert Service Way and across from the Project Construction Footprint) has an access road into a recreation use area which includes a dirt bike course, mud-bog arena, and leveled snow dump lot. Lot 1191 (across Robert Service Way and to the south of the Project Construction Footprint) appears to have had a woodlot clearing in areas as well as piles of fill dumped in various locations, and Lot 1191 also seems to have cut lines and recent trails located in the wooded area.

A segment of the WP&YR route is located within the Project Construction Footprint. Certain segments of the WP&YR line within Whitehorse have been covered and paved (such as Second Avenue and Robert Service Way), while other sections of the line between Whitehorse and Carcross have been impacted by erosion and other natural impacts and are no longer present.

The significance of the WP&YR to the development of the Yukon is well known. The WP&YR is an important tourist attraction. Further, features and structures associated with the WP&YR have been recognized for their heritage value. The Alaskan portion of the rail line was designated with an Alaska Heritage Resources Survey (AHRS) as number SKG-0106, and is included in the Skagway & White Pass Historic District (SKG-00013), and is part of the Klondike Gold Rush National Historical Park (SKG-00086).

Chapter 5 Page 5-28 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

However, the Canadian portion of the WPYR is not recorded with a Yukon Historic Sites Inventory number.

The WP&YR railroad was given additional recognition in 1994 when it was named an International Historic Civil Engineering Landmark.

5.3.7 Transportation, City Services and Emergency Response

Transportation

The Project Study Area is located between Robert Service Way (also known as the South Access Road) and Miles Canyon Road. Robert Service Way is the main route into town from south of Whitehorse. The Project Study Area would be accessed via Miles Canyon/Robert Service Way intersection which is approximately 1.7 kilometers from the Alaska Highway. This is a four-way intersection with a dedicated left turn lane in both directions on Robert Service Way. Paved shoulders on both sides of the road provide bike lanes. There are no sidewalks.

The Alaska Highway will be the route used for transporting LNG from British Columbia to the WTGS. Throughout the year the traffic volumes fluctuate with the season, the highest volumes are experienced during the summer months (June – August), while the least traffic volumes have been recorded during the winter months (December – March). Table 5-12 summarizes the average daily traffic volume data from Jake’s Corner, Yukon Territory from 1991 to 2011, excluding 1995 as there were no data for that year.

Chapter 5 Page 5-29 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Table 5-12: Average Daily Yukon Traffic Summary for Km 1341.5 on the Alaska Highway at Jakes Corner, Yukon Territory

Year Average Daily Average Daily Average Daily Traffic - North Traffic South Traffic (North Bound Bound and South) 1991 782 495 638.5 1992 632 479 555.5 1993 714 567 640.5 1994 703 548 625.5 1996 384 245 314.5 1997 609 553 581 1998 750 595 672.5 1999 711 582 646.5 2000 770 650 710 2001 740 607 673.5 2002 717 602 659.5 2003 729 590 659.5 2004 710 576 643 2005 553 484 518.5 2006 657 516 586.5 2007 685 542 613.5 2008 679 521 600 2009 609 512 560.5 2010 532 555 543.5 2011 500 588 544

Source: Yukon Highways and Public Works 2011.

City of Whitehorse Fire Department

The City’s Fire Department operates out of Fire Hall Number One on Second Avenue and Fire Hall Number Two located in the City’s Public Safety Building at the top of Two Mile Hill at the Range Road intersection. Fire Hall Number One is equipped with one pumper and a rescue truck. Fire Hall Number Two is equipped with one pumper, a 2,000-gallon combination pumper-tanker, a 1,000-gallon tanker, a 1,500-gallon tanker, a 75-ft aerial ladder truck and a 4X4 utility/command vehicle8. The Fire Department has a full-time fire crew supported by volunteer fire fighters9, as follows: Fire Chief, Fire Prevention Officer (four Platoon Chiefs); Training Officer (four Fire Captains); 12 Career Firefighters and

8 http://www.city.whitehorse.yk.ca/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=1642. 9 http://www.city.whitehorse.yk.ca/index.aspx?page=157.

Chapter 5 Page 5-30 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013 approximately 30 Volunteer Firefighters. The Fire Halls are staffed 24 hours/day on a rotational shift pattern by a normal complement of five members on duty, three in one hall and two in the other, with volunteers providing backup for all responses. The Whitehorse Fire Department responds to approximately 500 to 600 incidents per year. This works out to an average of five to ten calls per week and fluctuates throughout the year10.

The Fire Marshal’s Office will have a role in permitting the storage tanks and fire and life safety equipment related to the Project, in order to ensure that critical safety conditions (primary containment, secondary containment, safeguard systems, separation distances) and all other industry standards and regulatory compliance conditions are met. The Fire Marshal’s Office is also in the process of developing first response training specific to LNG. This training process includes the Deputy Fire Marshal in May 2013 traveling to Massachusetts Firefighting Academy to receive comprehensive LNG safety and emergency response training11.

Police Services

Police service is provided by the Royal Mounted Canadian Police (RCMP), and Bylaw Enforcement is provided by the City of Whitehorse. The RCMP provides policing with a staff at the Yukon headquarters of about 40 officers, including an inspector and First Nation community constables. An aircraft section of the RCMP, based at Whitehorse, has one aircraft. The RCMP also has a satellite office in McIntyre subdivision12.

Emergency Medical Services

The Whitehorse General Hospital in Riverdale is the primary acute care facility in the Yukon, providing 24 hour service, 7 days a week to the City of Whitehorse and all communities within Yukon. The Whitehorse General Hospital currently employs over 350 staff and has 49 in-patient beds, 10 bassinets for newborns, and 10 surgical day care beds, an emergency department and operating room suites. It is equipped with a full range of medical imaging services including CT scanning, digital mammography and ultrasound and offers laboratory services, a therapies department and a range of medical and surgical specialists13. Usage statistics for the Whitehorse Hospital are indicated in Table 5-13 below.

10 http://www.city.whitehorse.yk.ca/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=1642. 11 Comments filed by the Fire Marshal as part of the Watson Lake Bi-fuel Project Designated Office review. 12 http://www.yukoncommunities.yk.ca/communities/whitehorse/community/. 13 http://www.whitehorsehospital.ca/wghabout/history/.

Chapter 5 Page 5-31 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Table 5-13: Usage Statistics for Whitehorse General Hospital14

Fiscal 2007/08 Fiscal 2008/09 Fiscal 2009/10 Admissions 3,160 3,160 3,299 Patient Days 14,493 13,933 14,602 Births 350 363 357 Emergency Visits 23,882 23,896 25,391 Visits to Visiting Specialists 4,034 4,231 5,507 Surgical Visits 673 690 603 Outpatient Visits 39,662 42,036 43,621

Source: Whitehorse General Hospital n.d.

Ambulance service is provided by the Yukon Government, with the main base of operations located at the Whitehorse General Hospital. Emergency medical services are responsible for the emergency care and transportation of the sick and injured within Yukon. Call volume within Whitehorse is 5,828 call per year. Emergency call (911) services are available within a 50 mile radius of Whitehorse15.

Schools and other Services

There are 14 public schools in Whitehorse including: 8 elementary schools, 2 Catholic elementary schools, 2 secondary schools, 1 Catholic secondary school and 1 K-12 French First language school16. No schools are located within the Project Study Area and the closest school in proximity to the Project is Vanier School located approximately 1 km northeast from the centre of the expanded area. Other schools within a 1.5 km radius of the Expanded Site Area are as follows: Christ the King Elementary School (1.1 km North-northeast); Selkirk Elementary School (1.45 km North-northeast); Grey Mountain Elementary School (1.5 km East-northeast) and FH Collins High School (1.5 km North).

City water and sewer lines do not extend to the Project Construction Footprint.

Existing Whitehorse Rapids Generating Station Safety and Security Measures

The WRGS has personnel on site 24 hours a day/ 7 days a week, is fenced and maintains a suite of security devices (e.g., cameras, automated access controls), and protocols to ensure site security and public/ worker safety.

14 http://www.whitehorsehospital.ca/wghabout/fastfacts/. 15 http://www.community.gov.yk.ca/ems/index.html 16 http://www.education.gov.yk.ca/psb/

Chapter 5 Page 5-32 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

5.3.8 Yukon Power Grid

As with other hydro based systems in southern Canada, thermal generation is, and will continue to be, an integral and cost effective component required for reliable and flexible power generation on the Yukon grid. Unlike other hydro based systems in southern Canada, however, Yukon's isolated grid has no access to external North American power grids to secure extra power when it is needed, or to sell surplus renewable generation when it occurs. These features of the Yukon situation enhance the ongoing requirement for reliable and flexible thermal generation on the Yukon grid.

The Yukon grid is primarily served by hydro-electric generation, e.g., hydro has recently accounted for 99% of Yukon Energy's grid power generation. However, Yukon Energy owns and operates diesel generation to provide reserve capacity for the isolated Yukon grid in order to meet generation energy loads during winter months and other periods when water availability for hydro generation is limited by seasonal or drought conditions or is otherwise insufficient to meet grid load requirements.

As reviewed in Yukon Energy's last Air Emissions Permit (No. 4201-60-010) Renewal Application (pages 30-31) for 2012-2014 filed with the Yukon Environmental and Socio-Economic Assessment Board (YESAB) on October 25, 2011 relating to all Yukon Energy diesel generation units, absent the ability to have adequate installed diesel generation on the system and the ability to operate the diesels as required at the full capacity of their rated output, Yukon Energy could experience one or more of the following conditions:

 In very cold weather conditions, Yukon Energy would be unable to meet peak loads of the integrated transmission grid. Interruptions of service on substantial portions of the grid could occur - and once these occurred, 'cold pick-up' conditions could make it very difficult to resume service.

 In unplanned system outages, particularly in winter conditions, Yukon Energy would similarly by unable to supply load. Outages due to this factor could readily be of extended duration, such as the experience of January 28, 2006, where due to a major failure of the power cables at the Aishihik hydro plant, up to 6 Whitehorse-Aishihik-Faro (WAF) diesels operated for two days to maintain power to the system, and the system was not fully restored to normal status until February 21, 2006. Diesel generation was similarly used to supply substantial components of the load following the fire at the Whitehorse Rapids hydro plant in October 1997, and to various grid locations during forest fires when transmission lines can be required to be de-energized.

 During drought conditions, even at recent load levels, the diesel units could be required for energy-related reasons to maintain service to load and ensure the hydro plants can maintain their water levels within licensed ranges. For example, diesel generation for this purpose was required in the late winter of 1999 due to severe drought conditions experienced at Aishihik in 1998.

 In planned system outages, such as transmission line maintenance and periods when construction activity at a hydro facility requires shutdowns, e.g., during recent enhancement construction work at Mayo B and at Aishihik.

Chapter 5 Page 5-33 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Inability to rely on diesel generation in one or more of the above situations would present, as noted in Yukon Energy's last permit renewal application,17 "...an obvious and acute risk to human health and safety and public and private infrastructure, particularly during cold winter temperatures".

Yukon Energy's use and reliance on its diesel facilities is constrained by the terms and conditions of its Air Emissions Permit (which currently must be renewed every three years with the current licence ending December 31, 2014), as well as the requirements of relevant legislation that applies to these facilities, including the Environment Act and the Air Emissions Regulations18.

Changing Grid Load and Generation Conditions

Grid conditions have changed a lot over the last twenty years.

When the Faro mine was operating in the 1990s, baseload diesel generation was required throughout the year on the WAF grid. After the Faro mine closed in early 1998, substantial surplus hydro generation became the norm for many years after the drought conditions prevalent in 1999 ended, and only limited diesel generation occurred on the Yukon grid.

By the end of 2011, completion of the Carmacks-Stewart Transmission Project (CSTP) connected the WAF and Mayo-Dawson grids, and completion of the Mayo B Hydro Enhancement Project and the Aishihik Third Turbine Project also expanded Yukon Energy's hydro generation capability on the new Integrated Grid19.

Notwithstanding these increased hydro capabilities, ongoing load growth on the grid has depleted the surplus hydro available since the 1998 Faro mine shut down. In response to these changed conditions, Yukon Utilities Board (YUB) Order 2013-1 recently directed Yukon Energy to forecast hydro and diesel requirements assuming 100% long-term average hydro generation.

Forecast Diesel Generation on Yukon Grid without Major New Mines

Yukon grid load growth without any major new mines or new sources of generation is projected to require additional diesel fuel energy generation over the planning period to 2030. These projections assume long-term average hydro generation from existing Yukon Energy hydro facilities at Whitehorse, Aishihik and Mayo.

17 See page 31 of permit renewal application. 18 See Appendix 2B for copy of current Air Emissions Permit, which includes legal and regulatory constraints that were reviewed at length in Yukon Energy's last Air Emissions Permit (No. 4201-60-010) Renewal Application (pages 31 to 35) for 2012-2014 filed with YESAB on October 25, 2011. 19 The 2012/13 General Rate Application notes (at page 1-4 and 1-5) that completion of these projects in 2011 reduced forecast diesel generation requirements for 2012/2013 and future years, and diesel reduction benefits will grow with load growth, e.g., at annual long- term average hydro generation the forecast diesel generation reduction in 2012 is 23.9 GW.h and in 2013 is 26 GW.h (reflects grid generation loads at range of 416 to 430 GW.h/year), and forecast diesel generation reduction increases to 34.9 GW.h at grid load of 500 GW.h/year, 42 GW.h/year at grid load of 650 GWh/year and 44.8 GW.h/year at grid load of 750 GW.h/year.

Chapter 5 Page 5-34 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

As reviewed in Appendix 5B20 and summarized in Table 5-14 below, without connecting any new mines or developing other major new sources of generation [and after assuming load reductions from Demand- Side Management (DSM) programs], Yukon grid load growth under Base Case21 load conditions is projected to require long-term average diesel fuel energy generation that increases from 8 GW.h in 2013 to 31 GW.h in 2015, 47 GW.h in 2020 and 85 GW.h in 2030.

Table 5-14: Forecast Base Case Grid Diesel Generation Requirement (2013-2030)

Year 2013 2015 2020 2025 2030

Diesel 8 GW.h 31 GW.h 47 GW.h 40 GW.h 85 GW.h Generation

% of Grid 1.9% 6.8% 9.8% 8.5% 16.3% Generation

Note: Table also included in Appendix 5B.

Notwithstanding the recent connection of the grids and expansion of existing hydro generation capability, growing diesel fuel energy generation requirements over the planning period reflect the extent to which the hydro surplus created when the Faro Mine closed in 1998 has now been depleted by growth in grid loads for non-industrial as well as industrial customers22.

As reviewed in Yukon Energy's 2011 20-Year Resource Plan, Yukon Energy continues to pursue new renewable energy developments to displace growing diesel generation requirements, as well as DSM program implementation working with Yukon Electrical Company Ltd. (YECL).

Potential near-term hydro enhancement options to develop if and when regulatory requirements can be satisfied include Mayo Lake Storage Enhancement and Marsh Lake (Southern Lakes) Storage. For future consideration when long term loads can justify such developments, Yukon Energy is also pursuing a wind development that could range up to 20 MW at Techo (formerly Ferry Hill) in the Stewart Crossing area as well as potential future hydro generation at various potential greenfield sites.

20 Appendix 5B provides YEC's March 2013 update to Appendix A to the YEC’s Overview of 20-year Resource Plan: 2011-2030. 21 Base Case per Appendix 5B assumes non-industrial load and currently connected mines, plus Whitehorse Copper Tailing industrial load (the latter as forecast in YEC's approved Compliance Filing for its 2012/2013 GRA, assuming connection to the Integrated Grid in mid-2013). Yukon Electrical Limited’s recent 2013-15 GRA load forecast filing shows about 6.175 GW.h higher forecast purchase power than YEC 2012/13 GRA Compliance Filing wholesale forecast for 2013. YEC’s load forecast has not been updated to reflect higher sales forecast in YECL 2013-15 GRA, or changing forecast for Whitehorse Copper Tailing's load. 22 Appendix 5B includes load scenarios with potential new mine connections (Victoria Gold and/or Carmacks Copper) which would greatly increase forecast grid default diesel requirements for about 8 to 10 years. The expected load lives for such mines limit opportunities for new and capital intensive greenfield renewable resource developments.

Chapter 5 Page 5-35 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

As in the past, thermal generation requirements will be reduced each time new renewable generation is developed in the future - however, in addition to providing conventional grid backup generation, thermal generation will continue to provide reliable energy supply on the Yukon grid until new renewable resource energy options are brought on line.

Forecast New Capacity Required on Yukon Grid without Major New Mines

Base Case load growth on the grid combined with diesel unit retirements is forecast to require material new installed generation capacity over the next 20 years (see Table 5-15)23. A key factor is that all Yukon Energy diesel units, totaling 36 MW of capacity, are currently planned for retirement by 2031. Moreover, these diesel retirements may need to be advanced as loads and usage of the engines increase or parts and maintenance costs increase or become unavailable.

Table 5-15: Forecast Base Case New Grid Capacity Requirement (2015-2030)

Year 2015 2020 2025 2030

Forecast Non- 74.9 MW 81.94 MW 91.3 MW 103.3 MW Industrial Peak1

Forecast Peak with N- 111.9 MW 118.94 MW 128.3 MW 140.3 MW 1 Reserve Capacity2

Existing Peak Winter 106.5 MW 100.18 MW 84.7 MW 78.9 MW Capacity3

New Capacity 5.4 MW 18.8 MW 43.6 MW 61.4 MW Requirement4

1.Non-industrial peak load on grid, after assumed Demand Side Management (DSM), less 1 MW for assumed Haines Junction load. See Appendix 5B. 2. Aishihik hydro generation capacity (N-1 event is loss of transmission to this plant - also means loss of Haines Junction diesel capacity). 3. Existing winter capacity in 2013 is 114.49 MW excluding Fish Lake hydro and Haines Junction diesel (see Table 2-3, Yukon Energy 20-Year Resource Plan: 2011-2030, December 2011). Reductions after 2013 reflect planned retirements of diesel engine units and the de-rated capacities of these units at this time (e.g., Mirrlees WD1 and WD2 have de-rated capacity of 8 MW versus rated capacity of 9.07 MW). 4. New capacity requirement equals forecast peak with N-1 reserve less existing peak winter capacity.

23 Capacity planning criteria adopted by Yukon Energy were reviewed by the Yukon Utilities Board in its review of Yukon Energy's 2006 20-Year Resource Plan, and consequently addressed in the recommendations from the YUB to the Minister of Justice dated January 15, 2007. Absent major new mine loads, the determinative requirement is that the grid be planned to be able to carry the forecast peak winter loads (excluding major industrial loads) under the largest single contingency (known as "N-1"), i.e., assuming the loss of the system's single largest generating or transmission-related generation source (currently Aishihik generating capacity).

Chapter 5 Page 5-36 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

In summary, the combination of load growth on the grid and diesel unit retirements is forecast to require material new generation capacity, increasing from 5.4 MW in 2015 to 6.8 MW by 2016, 9.1 MW by 2017, 18.8 MW by 2020, 43.6 MW by 2025 and 61.4 MW by 203024.

Forecast Ratepayer Fuel Costs for Diesel Generation

Yukon Utilities Board (YUB) Order 2013-1 recently directed Yukon Energy, for the purpose of approved revenue requirements used to set rates for 2012 and 2013, to forecast hydro and diesel requirements assuming 100% long-term average hydro generation. This direction re-establishes the full benefit savings to ratepayers, determined using long-term average hydro generation (i.e., without uncertainties of forecasting actual hydro generation each year) of changing from diesel to lower cost reliable generation than displaces diesel generation requirements25.

The last YUB approved forecast fuel cost of grid diesel generation for Yukon Energy average 28.7 cents/kW.h (Yukon Energy 2012b)26.

Variability in Actual Hydro & Diesel Grid Generation Due to Water Flows

Diesel generation forecasts for each load scenario, as well as for setting rates, reflect long-term average hydro generation, i.e., the average hydro generation over 28 recorded water year conditions at the assumed load, as estimated by the power benefits model used by Yukon Energy for grid generation planning.

The Overview of Yukon Energy's 20-Year Resource Plan: 2011-2030 reviewed the variability in actual hydro and diesel generation between years, and within each year, due to variability in water availability, and how this highlights the need for reliable and flexible thermal generation to accommodate this variability.

Table 5B-3 and Figure 5B-3 in Appendix 5B provide a detailed review of potential annual diesel generation variability for the year 2016 under each load scenario for each of the 28 water years (the figure shows the annual load duration curve for diesel for each load scenario). By way of example of the

24 Appendix 5B, Table A-4. 25 Variances [at General Rate Application (GRA) approved fuel prices] between actual diesel generation costs and expected diesel generation costs for each year (based on actual grid loads) are accounted for through the Diesel Contingency Fund (where funds are held in trust on behalf of ratepayers to help stabilize rates relative to cost variances caused by annual changes in hydro water flows). Variances in actual diesel fuel prices from approved GRA fuel prices are accounted for through Rider F provisions with charges or credits passed through to ratepayers based on actual energy use. 26 YUB approved GRA diesel fuel prices at Whitehorse at $1.0513 per litre (higher prices at other grid diesel generation sites). Average fuel costs for diesel generation on the grid reflect average efficiencies of existing units expected to be used.

Chapter 5 Page 5-37 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013 annual variability affecting grid diesel generation, the following are noted for 2016 diesel generation requirements with the Base Case load forecast27:

 Long-term average diesel generation is estimated at 39.2 GW.h, based on all 28 water years.

 The median year diesel generation forecast for the same load is slightly lower at 36.3 GW.h, signifying the extent to which long-term average diesel generation is driven by low water or drought conditions in a small portion of the years.

o In 18% of the 28 years (i.e., five years, reflecting the worst drought conditions on record in five consecutive years from 1995 to 1999), diesel generation at the 2016 forecast load is estimated to range from 77.5 GW.h to 127.4 GW.h (i.e., 2 to more than 3 times the long-term average).

o In contrast, in the five years with the highest water availability (reflects 1991 to 1994 inclusive, plus 1981 and 1989), diesel generation at the 2016 forecast load is estimated to range from 7.5 GW.h down to 1.1 GW.h (i.e., only 19% to 3% of the long-term average).

Aside from annual diesel generation variability due to annual water variability, forecast diesel generation also typically varies a great deal by seasons within the year. The long-term average forecast, for example, shows very low expected diesel generation during about five months of the year (late May to late October) under each of the load scenarios.

One key implication resulting from seasonal and annual hydro generation variability is that overall thermal generation capacity on the Yukon grid will tend to show low average annual utilization, i.e., well below 80% to 90% average annual utilization that might be assumed in some baseload industrial operations. In addition, engine operation, as well as fuel purchases and deliveries related to Yukon Energy thermal generation, will show material annual as well as seasonal variability. A related implication is that the expected life of thermal generation facilities of the grid will tend to be materially longer than would be expected with higher levels of average annual use.

5.4 EXISTING AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS

5.4.1 Existing Whitehorse Diesel Plant Conditions

Today, and in the future, the Whitehorse diesel plant is critical to reliable power supply at Whitehorse and for the overall Yukon grid. Going forward, however, this plant requires modernization, upgrades and

27 Review of other load scenarios in Appendix 5B show the extent to which annual generation variation linked to annual water variability changes with higher or lower grid loads. At lower loads, little if any diesel generation is forecast in several years - while at higher loads, material diesel generation is forecast for each of the 28 water years. In all load cases, the implications of a multi-year drought highlight the extent to which high diesel generation could be required for several years in a row.

Chapter 5 Page 5-38 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013 new generating engines to extend its life in order to retain flexible and reliable thermal grid generation at Whitehorse.

The Whitehorse diesel plant was initially commissioned in 1968, and has seven engines with an installed nameplate capacity of 25.2 MW that are all planned to be retired within the next 13 years (9 MW retired by 2015):

 In 2014/15, two Mirrlees (WD1 and WD2) are planned for retirement, removing 9.07 MW of nameplate capacity from this plant and from the grid. As noted in Yukon Energy's last Air Emissions Permit renewal application, these units have been expected in recent years to operate only in emergency and/or severe drought conditions, and for very short periods of “exercise” (e.g., <4 hours) to ensure reliable operability28.

 By 2025, the remaining Mirrlees unit (WD3 in 2021) and the three EMDs (2025) are planned for retirement, removing an additional 12.85 MW of nameplate capacity; the final CAT unit (WD7) at the Whitehorse plant is planned for retirement in 2026. These retirement plans may also be advanced if Yukon Energy faces issues with spare parts, repairs or other considerations that shorten a unit's effective life.

As reviewed earlier (see Section 5.3.8), Whitehorse diesel capacity to be retired in 2014/15 and ongoing non-industrial load growth result in a requirement for at least 5.4 MW of diesel generation capacity by late 2014, 6.8 MW by late 2015 and 9.1 MW by late 2016 to maintain grid system capacity needed for growing non-industrial peak winter loads with the required provision for loss of the system's single largest generation or transmission-related generation source. Additional diesel generation capacity (11.2 MW) would be needed by late 2017, and in each year thereafter during the planning period to 2030.

As reviewed earlier (Section 5.3.8), forecast default diesel generation requirements on the Yukon grid without major new mine connections (i.e., Base Case forecast) are expected to increase from 8 GW.h in 2013 to 31 GW.h in 2015 and 47 GW.h in 202029. Except during emergencies, droughts or planned shutdowns, all of this diesel generation would likely occur at the Whitehorse Diesel Plant30.

28 See Appendix 5B (Air Quality Assessment Update in Support of Permit renewal For Diesel Generator Operations; SENES, 2011) to Yukon Energy's last Air Emissions Permit (No. 4201-60-010) Renewal Application for 2012-2014 filed with YESAB on October 25, 2011. Table 2.5 shows Whitehorse Yukon Energy Average and Worst-case Diesel Power Generation Forecast 2014 broken out by unit in unit stacking order - it shows WD1, WD2 and WD3 at bottom of the stacking order. Under forecast long-term average grid diesel generation forecast for 2014 of 19.5 GW.h, none of these three units was expected to be used (and all grid diesel generation was assumed to occur at the Whitehorse diesel plant); under a worst-case drought scenario for 2014, the Whitehorse diesel plant was projected to generate 75.8 GW.h diesel generation (approximately 67% of total grid diesel at 112.6 GW.h [Table 2 in Application]) with WD2 supplying 12.3 GW.h (about 28% of annual use of nameplate capacity) and WD1 supplying 8.6 GW.h (about 24% of annual use of nameplate capacity). 29 Forecast Base Case default diesel grid generation between 2015 and 2020 is 39.2 GW.h in 2016, 44.6 GW.h in 2017, 48.2 GW.h in 2018 and 2019. 30 See Table 2.5 in Appendix 5B (Air Quality Assessment Update in Support of Permit renewal For Diesel Generator Operations; SENES, 2011) to Yukon Energy's last Air Emissions Permit (No. 4201-60-010) Renewal Application for 2012-2014 filed with YESAB

Chapter 5 Page 5-39 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Diesel-based Alternatives at Whitehorse Plant

Alternatives in response to this situation during the 2014-2017 period other than installing new gas-fired engines are as follows:

 Defer replacement (status quo) - Yukon Energy would not retire the existing WD1 and WD2 units under these conditions - but retention of units beyond planned retirement would expose all grid customers to unreliable generation capacity as well as higher O&M costs, and replacement would be required in any event as soon as feasible, i.e., by late 2015 at the latest. Expected diesel generation requirements would be supplied at an approved average fuel cost of 28.7 c/kW.h (e.g., $9.0 million fuel cost for forecast 2015 grid loads).

 New Diesel Engine replacement - Given the Base Case forecasts for growing diesel generation requirements, Yukon Energy would secure efficient new diesel engines rather than consider the option of spending funds to extend the life of the Mirrlees units that are to be retired. Based on planning assessments, the best option in this regard would likely be to install new diesel engines within the existing Whitehorse diesel plant, utilizing the engine bays previously used by the two retired Mirrlees units. For comparative purposes, an alternative has been examined assuming two 6.7 MW new diesel engines (13.4 MW), with the first unit installed in late 2014 and the second in late 2015, and with fuel efficiency that results in average fuel costs of 24.6 c/kW.h at currently approved fuel prices. Installation of these new units would serve two objectives: provide the required new capacity needed for reliable grid electricity supply; and facilitate use of more efficient diesel generation units to meet a substantive share of ongoing grid diesel generation requirements (e.g., if 85% of the long-term average 2015 diesel generation was assumed to be supplied by the new unit. Annual fuel cost savings would approximate $1.1 million).

Whitehorse Diesel-Natural Gas Conversion Opportunity

Concurrent with the modernization and diesel unit replacement needs today at the Whitehorse Diesel Plant, there is opportunity to convert from diesel to liquefied natural gas (LNG)-supplied gas-fired generation to meet growing electricity loads on the Yukon grid with a fuel that is cleaner burning and cheaper than diesel, benefiting both the environment and Yukon ratepayers. The specific near-term opportunity relates to the requirement for at least 5.4 MW of new diesel generation capacity at the Whitehorse plant by late 2014, 6.8 MW by late 2015 and 9.1 MW by late 2016 to maintain grid system capacity needed for growing non-industrial peak winter loads with the required provision for loss of the system's single largest generation or transmission-related generation source.

The LNG option for power generation was identified in Yukon Energy's 2011 20-Year Resource Plan: 2011-2030 as one of the most promising new supply options available today for Yukon. It was reviewed

on October 25, 2011. This table shows that under forecast long-term average grid diesel generation forecast for 2014 of 19.5 GW.h, all grid diesel generation is assumed to occur at the Whitehorse diesel plant.

Chapter 5 Page 5-40 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013 at a public workshop held by Yukon Energy in Whitehorse in January 2012. LNG was contrasted with other near-term resource supply options available to Yukon Energy, and ranked high in reliability and flexibility (similar to diesel), medium/high in affordability (gas costs have recently fallen well below diesel), and medium in environmental responsibility (gas-fired compared with diesel-fired generation has lower greenhouse gas (GHG), particulate, and nitrogen oxide air emissions). Of the near term supply options, LNG was the only option with the capability to meet all of the forecast load scenarios without requiring significant diesel generation.

LNG has emerged recently as a low cost fuel option relative to oil products such as diesel due to a major shift in the price of natural gas relative to crude oil in North America, reflecting emergence of greatly increased natural gas supplies in this region. Interest today in LNG development, including active ongoing consideration of various LNG export opportunities from British Columbia to Asia, reflects expectations that the major gap between natural gas and crude oil prices (on an equivalent price per Btu basis) will likely be sustained for the next 20 years or more into the future. Figure 5-6 below highlights the extent to which crude oil prices jumped well above natural gas prices in North America shortly prior to 2010, and are expected, in the latest forecast outlook (April 2013) provided by the U.S. Energy Information Administration, to remain well above natural gas prices through to at least 204031.

31 U.S. Energy Information Administration; Annual Energy Outlook 2013 (USEIA 2013). This report's reference Case forecast expects Henry Hub spot prices for natural gas (2011$) to increase by an average of about 2.4 percent per year, from $3.98/MMBtu in 2011 to $7.83/MMBtu in 2040. Over this same period the report expects Brent crude oil prices (2011$) to increase from $19.18/MMBtu in 2011 to $28.05 per MMBtu in 2040.

Chapter 5 Page 5-41 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Figure 5-6: Ratio of Brent Crude Oil Price to Henry Hub Spot Natural Gas Price in Energy Equivalent Terms, 1990-2040

Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration; Annual Energy Outlook 2013 (USEIA 2013)32.

LNG supplies are planned to be available by third quarter 2014 from southern Alberta (Shell Canada's new plant near Calgary) and southern British Columbia (Fortis's facility in Delta). A Ferus/Encana liquefaction facility is also being developed to start production in 2014 at Grande Prairie, Alberta. Yukon Energy has also worked with Western Copper and Gold and Spectra Energy (as well as others) to examine future opportunities for LNG supply to be developed at the much closer location of Fort Nelson, BC.

LNG can be trucked today from each of these locations to Whitehorse with diesel fueled tractors, using a Standard Tridem Trailer (about 54 cubic metre net capacity). Yukon Energy has been working with Western Copper and Gold and PROLOG Canada Inc. to secure permitting for an A-Train Trailer with 95.3 cubic metre net capacity (Yukon approvals have been secured, and now attention is being focused on securing Alberta and British Columbia approvals).

The Whitehorse plant is an optimum location to develop new gas-fired generation capacity today to facilitate the above diesel to gas conversion. Whitehorse is the nearest practical grid location for LNG deliveries from Alberta or British Columbia. It is the location of the Yukon grid’s largest load centre and it offers the opportunity to use new gas-fired generation to modernize the Whitehorse plant facilities, with

32 http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/pdf/0383(2013).pdf.

Chapter 5 Page 5-42 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013 its established infrastructure (including transformer capability and on site staffing needed to operate and maintain the remaining diesel plant), concurrent with the retirement of existing diesel capacity at these facilities.

5.4.2 Other Existing and Planned Developments

Outside of Yukon Energy’s existing facilities, a variety of past and current projects and activities comprise the existing and evolving built environment in surrounding the Project Study Area.

As noted in Section 3.2.3, an identification of existing and future projects or activities is required for the purposes of cumulative effects analysis. Accordingly, projects identified in this section include:

 Project or activities that have already been approved;

 Projects or activities that are already in a government approvals process and on the YESAB registry; and

 Other known projects with a high degree of certainty they will occur or be submitted to YESAB.

The environmental effects of uncertain or hypothetical projects were not considered.

As noted in Chapter 3, the maximum geographic extent of most likely environmental and socio-economic effects are expected to be within the Project Study Area, excluding effects on air quality and noise which will disburse in some instances more broadly than the Project Study Area (Figure 5-7 regarding air emissions), and excluding various positive socio-economic effects which will extend throughout Yukon (e.g., ratepayer savings). With regard to air quality a broader 5 km radius was selected for the purposes of screening potential cumulative effects with other Projects that may be outside the Project Study Area but that may have effects on air quality that overlap spatially and temporally with the effects of the Project. The screening considered projects with effects on air quality within a 10 km radius (with potential to overlap with Project effects within the 5 km radius selected).

Existing Activities/Projects

A detailed list of existing current projects and activities is provided in Table 5-16. Existing activities within the Project Study Area are included in Table 5-16 below and mostly relate to existing trails and other areas where recreational activities take place (e.g., campgrounds, motorcross track). Existing activities with effects related to air quality that may potentially overlap with Project effects on air quality relate mostly to dust and vehicle emissions produced by a quarry and a concrete batch plant.

Chapter 5 Page 5-43 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Table 5-16 Existing Projects and Activities Considered in the Cumulative Effects Assessment

Existing YESAB Comments Projects or Registry Activities ID No.

Annie Lake 2011-0129 The project is located in the vicinity of the Copper Haul Road. Trucking Ltd The project was scheduled to commence in 2011 and be in operation Gravel Quarry for the next 25 years, operating between the months of May and Lease October. The YESAB Evaluation Report identified dust and vehicle emissions as having potential negative effects on air quality. The report concluded that heavy equipment and truck traffic associated with project activities will have vehicle emissions, however, effects on air quality were considered not significant. The assessment concluded that under the proposed operating conditions, significant adverse effects to air quality will not occur.

Concrete Batch 2010-0228 The project is located on lot 1247 of the McLean Lake Road. Plant on McLean The concrete batch plant will be operational from March to December. Lake Road Construction will commence in 2010 and operation is expected to commence in 2014 and continue for 50 years. Dust was considered in the effects assessment for human health. Trails – Yukon N/A The Millennium Trail is contained in the northern section of the Project River Loop and Study Area, but is not within the Project Construction Footprint. The Millennium Trail Yukon River Loop Trail runs through the centre of the Project Study as well as Area and intersects the Project Construction Footprint. Various unnamed various trails are contained on the hills in the west and east portion of the unnamed trails Project Study Area but are not within the Project Construction Footprint. Robert Service N/A A small portion of the campground is contained in the northern section Campground the Project Study Area, but not within the Project Construction Footprint

Motocross Track N/A The Motocross Track is contained in the western section of the Project Study Area, but not within the Project Construction Footprint.

Riverdale N/A A small number of residences in the Riverdale neighbourhood are neighbourhood contained in the northeastern portion of the Project Study Area, none are not within the Project Construction Footprint. * N/A – “Not Applicable” Source: YESAB Online Registry

Chapter 5 Page 5-44 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Projects for which proposals have been submitted

A detailed list of existing future projects and activities is provided in Table 5-17. There are no future projects or activities within the Project Study Area. Future activities with effects related to air quality that may potentially overlap with Project effects on air quality are reviewed in Table 5-17 below and relate to two quarries and the Whitehorse Copper Tailings Reprocessing and Reclamation project. In each case, effects are expected to relate primarily to dust and vehicle emissions.

Table 5-17 Projects Currently Undergoing Assessment

Future YESAB Comments Projects or Registry ID Activities No.

Whitehorse 2011-0064 The project is located in the vicinity of the Copper Haul Road. Copper The project is expected to commence in 2013 and is expected to be in Tailings operation for the next 7 years, operating between the months of Reprocessing March and November. and The Designated Office Report determined that if the project is carried Reclamation out as per proponent commitments with mitigations as directed there will be no residual adverse effects on environmental quality. Quarry 2013-0018 Application is in process and no Evaluation Report has been released. Adjacent to The project is located on lot 1247 of the McLean Lake Road 2.8 km Lot 1247 away from project located on the Copper Haul Road. The quarry plans McLean Lake to operate from March to November. Rd. Yellow Truck 2013-0015 The project is located in the vicinity of the Copper Haul Road. Excavating The project is expected to commence in 2013 and is expected to be in Gravel Quarry operation for the next 20 years, operating between the months of May and October. Dust and vehicle emissions were identified as having potential negative effects on air quality. It was concluded that truck traffic related to the project will not represent an increase in traffic as the proponent is currently working in another area and will simply be moving operations to a new area.

Chapter 5 Page 5-45 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting

Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

6.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

6.1 PROJECT IDENTIFICATION/SCOPE OF PROJECT

Overview

The Project will modernize Yukon Energy's Whitehorse Thermal Generating Station (WTGS) to meet growing requirements for reliable and flexible thermal generation on the Yukon grid, with partial conversion of old and to-be-retired WTGS thermal generation from diesel fuel to cheaper burning and cleaner natural gas fuel supplied by liquefied natural gas (LNG) delivered by truck from Alberta or British Columbia.

To accommodate new facilities required for the Project, Yukon Energy will acquire approximately 0.9 ha of Public Utility zoned Yukon Government lands, and 0.6 ha of a railway right of way on the Expanded Site Area adjacent to the south of the existing WTGS site (see Figure 2-2).

The Project scope will involve the installation of LNG truck offloading, storage, vapourization and related infrastructure on the Expanded Site Area and replace two diesel generating units scheduled for retirement in the existing WTGS by 2015 (9.1 MW total capacity) with three new modular natural gas- fired generating units (13.1 MW total capacity) to be located on the Expanded Site Area. Two natural gas-fired units (8.8 MW) are anticipated to be in service Q4 2014 to provide capacity and fuel cost savings during the winter of 2014/2015. Projected in-service for the third natural gas-fired unit (4.4 MW) will occur as required to meet grid capacity planning requirements, and is anticipated to be within a few years after the first two units are in service.

Estimated capital cost (2013$) for the Project is $38.8 million, with $34.4 million for the initial phase to be completed by the end of 2014 and the balance of $4.4 million when the third natural gas-fired unit is installed.

Summary of Project Components and Activities

In summary, the Project components are as follows (see Figure 6-1 below, which copies Figure 2-1):

1. Expanded Site Area Acquisition: Purchase of Crown land and lease of private land to expand the WTGS for the purposes of siting the proposed facilities.

2. Components on Expanded Site Area: Construction and operation of the following components on the Expanded Site Area:

a. LNG truck offloading, storage, and vapourization facilities and related infrastructure, including up to four 166.5 m3 storage tanks, a short all weather access road from Miles Canyon Road for truck offloading and access to the components on the Expanded Site Area, fencing and other facilities required for safe operation. The Expanded Site Area will be designed to accommodate up to six 166.5 m3 LNG storage tanks, if needed as part of potential future projects.

Chapter 6 Page 6-1 Project Description Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

b. Three new 4.4 MW natural gas-fired modular reciprocating generating units and related facilities, including a separate switchgear module, a fluid transfer station, and a small substation to receive power from the generating units. Planned in-service for the first two natural gas-fired units (8.8 MW) is in fourth quarter 2014, and projected in-service for the third natural gas-fired unit (4.4 MW) is currently expected to occur within a few years of the installation of the first two units. The Expanded Site Area will be designed to accommodate additional natural gas-fired units, if needed as part of potential future projects.

c. Other Site Infrastructure, including:

i. New property fence and gate constructed to limit access to the new facility to authorized personnel;

ii. Improvement of drainage infrastructure currently in place to manage surface water runoff from Robert Service Way within the City of Whitehorse easement. The drainage infrastructure will be expanded to manage surface water runoff during construction and operation of the new facilities;

iii. Blackstart power capability for the natural gas-fired generating units and to provide back up generation for the LNG Facility and a blackstart heater for vapourization of LNG; and

iv. Other related facilities, including: natural gas, fire suppression, water and glycol/water piping, communications and electric service needed to connect the components; hydrants, streetlights, security systems and other infrastructure, and complete site landscaping as per City of Whitehorse zoning bylaws.

3. Distribution Line and Communication Line on the WTGS to bring power from the new generating units at 35 kV from the new small substation on the Expanded Site Area to the existing S150 substation that supplies power to the Yukon grid (and to provide power to the Expanded Site Area when the new generating units are not operating).

4. Utility Trench on the WTGS for an underground pipe system between the existing WTGS diesel plant and the facilities on the Expanded Site Area for:

a. Water supply to the Expanded Site Area for fire suppression;

b. Glycol/water heating system to make use of the heat produced by the engines located in the existing WTGS facility; and

c. Natural gas supply for conversion of the existing oil boiler to natural gas, conversion of existing diesel engines to fuel blend (diesel and natural gas), and/or future installation of new gas or dual fuel engines at the existing WTGS service bays previously used by diesel engines that have been removed.

5. Decommissioning of two Mirrlees Diesel Units (WD1 and WD2) in the existing WTGS, including ancillary equipment and disconnection from the electrical grid.

Chapter 6 Page 6-2 Project Description Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Figure 6-1: Project Construction Footprint

Chapter 6 Page 6-3 Project Description Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Yukon Energy is undertaking all required planning, effects assessment and permitting, engineering design, procurement, contracting and other related activities to obtain authorizations and approvals necessary to allow construction of the Project to commence at the start of May 2014 to meet the in- service target of late 2014 for the first two natural gas-fired units. This schedule is driven by forecast thermal generation requirements for the winter of 2014/15, both to provide new thermal generation capacity for reliable service during that winter and to save in excess of $4 million1 of thermal fuel generation costs charged to ratepayers in 2015. Cost savings resulting from the Project will benefit all Yukon's electricity ratepayers.

New natural gas-fired engines are assumed to have an economic life of 40 years, based on expected average annual utilization of these assets. Assuming that the facilities will continue to be required for established backup capacity for the Yukon grid, it is expected that individual components will be replaced as they reach end of life and the Project facilities will not be decommissioned.

The infrastructure design and Project activities will be conducted in accordance with CSA Standard Z276- 11 Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG): Production, Storage and Handling, which establishes essential requirements and minimum standards for the design, installation and safe operation and maintenance of LNG facilities. Yukon Energy will also be subject to requirements under the Yukon Oil and Gas Act, and Gas Processing Plant Regulation.

Yukon Energy has secured an LNG supply of up to 250 cubic metres per day for a minimum of five years from Shell Canada’s Jumping Pound LNG plant being developed near Calgary and scheduled to start operation in third quarter 2014. There is also the potential in future to source LNG from the Fort Nelson area in northern British Columbia should additional liquefaction facilities come into service in this area, and/or Shell Canada arranges to make LNG supplies available in this area.

Truck delivery of LNG to the WTGS will use a new double trailer (A-Train) combination with a 95,000 litre capacity, although currently available Tridem units with a 54,000 litre capacity may be used initially if there are delays in the licensing and fabrication of the new A-Train units.

6.2 ALTERNATIVES & CHOSEN APPROACH

As reviewed in Section 5.3.8, thermal generation is, and will continue to be, an integral component required for reliable and cost effective power generation on the isolated Yukon grid. As reviewed in Section 5.4.1, Whitehorse diesel generation capacity to be retired in 2014/15 and ongoing non-industrial load growth result in a requirement for at least 5.4 MW of new thermal generation capacity by late 2014, 6.8 MW by late 2015 and 9.1 MW by late 2016 to maintain grid system capacity needed for growing non- industrial peak winter loads, and additional new thermal generation capacity is forecast to be needed after 2017.

1 Estimated based on long-term average thermal generation of 30.70 GW.h for Base Case load forecast over the nine months period from October 1, 2014 to June 30, 2015; reflects the difference between estimated diesel fuel cost of $8.81 million with existing diesel units (based on Yukon Energy’s 2012/13 GRA Compliance Filing average diesel fuel generation cost of 28.7 c/kW.h), and $4.38 million with new LNG units (based on LNG LNG fuel cost (based on LNG fuel cost at 13.5 c/kW.h with 95% diesel displacement, and assuming A-train LNG transportation is established and an AECO gas price of $4.5 per MMBtu).

Chapter 6 Page 6-4 Project Description Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

The purpose of the Project is to provide new natural gas-fired thermal generation capacity to meet Yukon Energy's reserve capacity planning criteria2, including reserve capacity for seasonal low water periods and drought years while supplying short-term non-industrial load growth and peak winter demand, with the least cost impact on Yukon ratepayers.

6.2.1 Alternatives to the Project

No feasible alternatives to the Project within the relevant time period have been identified using new non fossil fuel generation options.

Yukon Energy is working with Yukon Electrical Company Limited (YECL) to provide Demand Side Management initiatives. However, while such initiatives are expected to reduce future load growth (as recognized in the updated load growth forecast adopted for this project proposal and reviewed in Section 5.3.8), they do not provide an alternative to the Project in addressing the need for new reliable capacity on the isolated Yukon grid.

Yukon Energy's 2011 Resource Plan examined a wide range of near-term resource supply options3, none of which (other than diesel) is a viable alternative to the Project.

 Of the near term supply options, LNG was the only option with the capability to meet all of the forecast Yukon grid load scenarios without requiring significant diesel generation, and was also the only option (other than diesel) to rank high on both reliability and flexibility (which are key requirements related to the thermal generation capacity needs being addressed by the Project).

 Excluding the relatively small energy supply impact of potentially available near term hydro enhancement projects4, LNG is also the lowest cost near-term resource supply option (ranked medium/high in affordability).

2 As reviewed in Section 5.3.8, capacity planning criteria adopted by Yukon Energy were reviewed by the Yukon Utilities Board in its review of Yukon Energy's 2006 20-Year Resource Plan, and consequently addressed in the recommendations from the YUB to the Minister of Justice dated January 15, 2007. Absent major new mine loads, the determinative requirement is that the grid be planned to be able to carry the forecast peak winter loads (excluding major industrial loads) under the largest single contingency (known as "N-1"), i.e., assuming the loss of the system's single largest generating or transmission-related generation source (currently Aishihik generating capacity). 3 See Chapters 6 and 8, Yukon Energy Corporation; Overview of 20-Year Resource Plan: 2011-2030; July 2012. 4 Potential near term hydro enhancements include Mayo Lake Enhanced Storage Project, Marsh Lake Storage, and (on a more delayed basis) Gladstone Diversion. The first two options are estimated respectively to supply 4 and 6 GW.h/year (long-term average) incremental energy supply to the grid. Development of the first two options, if and when regulatory requirements can be satisfied, would still leave material forecast long-term average diesel generation requirements (see Section 5.3.8 for review of these diesel requirements, which are forecast, with Base Case loads, at over 30 GW.h/yr after 2014). As noted in Section 5.3, for future consideration when much higher long-term grid loads can justify such developments, Yukon Energy is also pursuing a 20 MW wind farm at Techo (also known as Ferry Hill) in the Stewart Crossing area as well as potential future hydro generation at various potential greenfield sites; however, before and after such future new renewable resource developments, thermal generation will continue to provide reliable baseload energy supplies on the Yukon grid during the transition periods between successive new renewable resource developments (in addition to providing conventional grid backup generation).

Chapter 6 Page 6-5 Project Description Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

 At Base Case forecast grid loads, none of the non-hydro renewable resource options (e.g., wind and biomass were both examined) could provide levelized costs of energy over their life competitive with diesel generation5.

Other alternatives to the Project during the 2014-2017 period involve the following two options requiring continued reliance on diesel generation:

1. Defer Replacement (status quo) – Under this option, Yukon Energy would not retire the existing WD1 and WD2 Mirrlees diesel units - but retention of these units beyond planned retirement would expose all grid customers to unreliable generation capacity as well as higher O&M costs, and replacement would be required in any event as soon as feasible, i.e., by late 2015 at the latest. Implications of this option include:

 Exposure of grid customers to unreliable generation capacity until such time as the engines are either replaced or have been worked on as required to extend their lives as emergency backup units (low utilization engines). As noted, Yukon Energy would assume that replacement or life extension would be required by late 2015 at the latest; based on earlier estimated capital costs for Mirrlees life extension, extending the 9 MW for another 10 years is likely to require a capital cost of at least $4.5 million6 (implies initial annual depreciation and return costs of approximately $0.7 million in 2015 and 2016)7.

 Expected diesel generation requirements would be supplied relying on other existing diesel units (i.e., WD1 and WD2 use would be avoided, other than for emergency) at an approved average fuel cost of 28.7 cents/kW.h, e.g., $9.0 million fuel cost for forecast 2015 Base Case grid loads of 31.3 GW.h, and approximately 700 tonnes or more of GHG emissions from Yukon Energy's facilities per GW.h of diesel electricity generated.

 Opportunities to reduce ratepayer costs and diesel generation emissions would be deferred, and economic development opportunities that could be realized from the Project would not occur.

5 See Yukon Energy: Overview of 2011 Resource Plan: 2011-2030, which reviews wind and biomass options in the context of much higher near-term loads (i.e., Scenario A with DSM/SSE that assumed connection of Victoria Gold mine load); Table 8-2 in this report indicated that Lifecycle Cost of Energy (2010 cents/kW.h diesel displaced) at 40 cents/kW.h with Scenario A load for either 15 MW wood biomass option or for 21 MW wind option. The economic feasibility of these capital intensive renewable resource supply options (relative to diesel) is made much worse under the much lower Base Case loads (relative to Scenario A loads) that apply today when assessing the Project. 6 Yukon Energy's 2008/2009 GRA filing noted an expected average cost per MW for Mirrlees units at Whitehorse of approximately $0.482 million per MW including provision for common upgrade costs required. It is likely today, based on experience, that the common cost requirements would be estimated to be higher than assumed in the 2008/2009 General Rate Application (GRA). The life of such extensions is currently assumed to approximate 10 years (and might be less if spare part availability and other issues required earlier action). 7 Assumes 10 year depreciation and average return cost (debt and equity) of 5.45%/year, based on average return on equity (40% at 8.25%) and average cost of debt (60% at 3.6%) for 2013 as approved by Yukon Utility Board for Yukon Energy's 2012/2013 GRA.

Chapter 6 Page 6-6 Project Description Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

2. New Higher-Efficiency Diesel Engine Replacement - Given the Base Case forecasts for growing diesel generation requirements, under this option Yukon Energy would secure higher efficiency new diesel engines rather than consider the option of spending funds to extend the life of the Mirrlees units that are to be retired. Based on planning assessments, the best option in this regard today would likely be to install new diesel engines within the existing Whitehorse diesel plant, utilizing the engine bays previously used by the two retired Mirrlees units8. For comparative purposes, an alternative has been examined assuming two new 6.7 MW diesel engines (13.4 MW)9, with the first unit installed in late 2014 at an estimated capital cost of $22.5 million and the second unit installed in late 2015 at an estimated capital cost of $11.0 million10 (to meet grid capacity planning requirements); it is further assumed that these new units have higher fuel efficiency than the current units that results in lower average fuel costs of 24.6 cents/kW.h (for generation from the new Whitehorse units) at currently approved fuel prices11. Implications of this option include:

 Installation of these two new diesel units would address two of the stated objectives for the Project:

o Provide the required new capacity needed for reliable grid electricity supply (annual costs for the $33.6 million would approximate $2.3 million in 2015 and $2.5 million in 201612); and

o Facilitate use of more efficient diesel generation units to meet a substantive share of ongoing grid diesel generation requirements (e.g., approximately 85% of the long-term average 2015 diesel generation with the first new unit, increasing to 98% in 2016 with the second new unit), with resulting annual fuel cost savings approximating $1.1 million in 2015 and $1.6 million in 2016).

8 Investigations to date have not revealed a viable modular diesel engine option that would be located outside the current diesel plant and suited to Yukon Energy needs, i.e., the specific modular option available for natural gas engines in a northern climate is not available for diesel engines at this time, and other modular options identified to date are too small for Yukon Energy’s needs. 9 Yukon Energy completed preliminary engineering and costing in 2013 for a dual fuel (gas-diesel) engine option that would have utilized these two Mirrlees bays with two new 6.7 MW Wartsila dual fuel engines. Cost estimates for balance of plant upgrade work required for this option has been utilized for assessing the likely capital cost required for two new 6.7 MW diesel units located in these same bays within the existing Yukon Energy diesel plant. In utilizing these bays for a new higher efficiency option, it is reasonable to focus on new units that would effectively utilize the available space (leads to larger units, for example, than Yukon Energy is selecting for modular gas engines with no similar constraints or that would be used by Yukon Energy to replace the EMD units in the smaller EMD bays at the existing diesel plant). 10 Estimate includes planning costs, required balance of plant upgrade work inside the existing diesel plant, and demolition costs to remove WD1 and WD2. Overall capital cost of $33.6 million for 13.4 MW new capacity averages $2.5 million per MW, and is competitive with estimated greenfield site cost for new generation excluding costs for related transformation. Upgrading the existing old diesel plant would extend the life of this facility and avoid the need for added transformation and other costs associated with developing a new greenfield facility. 11 Assumes 40% efficiency (4.28 kW.h/litre) and current YUB approved GRA (2012/2013) diesel fuel prices for Yukon Energy at Whitehorse ($1.0513 per litre). 12 Assumes 40 year depreciation and average return cost (debt and equity) of 5.45%/year, based on average return on equity (40% at 8.25%) and average cost of debt (60% at 3.6%) for 2013 as approved by YUB for Yukon Energy's 2012/2013 GRA.

Chapter 6 Page 6-7 Project Description Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

 The new diesel option will be less costly on a present value basis for ratepayers than the deferral option, when full consideration is given to ongoing new capacity requirements, the limited life of the deferral option relative to life of the new diesels, and the fuel cost savings secured with the new diesels13.

 Opportunities to reduce ratepayer costs and diesel generation emissions would be deferred, and economic development opportunities that could be realized from the Project related to introducing lower cost natural gas fuel to Yukon would also be deferred.

In summary, based on review of the above investigations and analysis, it was determined that the specified need to meet near term forecast requirements for reliable and flexible new capacity on the Yukon grid would best be met through development of the Project. Compared to the feasible and best alternative available today (i.e., new higher efficiency diesel replacement), the Project provides a cheaper and cleaner option for Yukon Energy and Yukon ratepayers.

6.2.2 Alternative Means of Carrying Out the Project

Requirements and opportunities that define the Project scope reflect existing Whitehorse Diesel Plant conditions and planned retirements, forecast requirements for new thermal generation capacity on the Yukon grid as well as forecast default diesel generation on the grid, and opportunities for diesel-natural gas conversion at the WTGS (see Section 5.4.1).

At the outset, it was recognized that the first stage of the Project to be developed over the next few years would require 13 MW or more of new gas-fired generation units rather than options to convert existing operating diesel units to a blend of gas and diesel generation. This requirement reflects the following:

 Need to retire 9 MW of existing diesel generation by 2015;

 The related requirement for new thermal capacity in excess of 14 MW within the next five years to meet capacity planning criteria on the grid; and

13 Due to the higher initial capital costs, annual ratepayers costs for the new diesel option would initially be slightly higher than for the deferral option (e.g., about $0.51 million higher in 2015, declining to $0.30 million higher in 2016 and only $0.05 million higher in 2017 - estimates reflect difference in annual capital costs [higher for new diesel units] less savings in annual fuel costs from use of the higher efficiency units); the present value at the start of 2015 of this added cost approximates $0.8 million (assumes 5.45% Yukon Energy average cost of new capital). However, this initial three year comparison ignores the fact that new engine capacity is 4.4 MW greater than the deferral example (e.g., 13.4 MW versus 9 MW) - if this 4.4 MW is deferred until no longer than 2017, as is reasonable to assume, and is also somehow secured at a cost of only $0.5 million/MW (which is likely not reasonable to assume), its present value cost of the 4.4 MW added capacity at the start of 2015 would be $1.9 million or over $1 million higher than the present value of the costs savings over the initial few years. The higher present value cost for the deferral option versus new diesel option increases further when it is also recognized that life extension only lasts for 10 years versus new diesel life is assumed at 40 years. A key factor here is the extent to which new diesel units offer the opportunity for material fuel cost savings going forward over the planning period.

Chapter 6 Page 6-8 Project Description Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

 The forecast default diesel generation requirements on the grid with the related opportunity to secure fuel cost savings through use of new and more efficient gas-fired engines.

It was also recognized from the outset that LNG supplies for the Project through the foreseeable future would need to be delivered by truck from Alberta or British Columbia, i.e., Yukon Energy’s requirement for reliable LNG supplies can only be met through reliance on well-established and diverse sources of natural gas production and processing, such as those that have been long-developed in these two provinces. No such well developed and diverse natural gas supply options currently exist in Yukon. Such supply options are not currently expected to be developed in the planning period for the Project absent separate arrangements (i.e., independent of Yukon Energy’s Project) to develop and market Yukon resources for LNG sale to domestic and/or export markets.

Integration with Existing WTGS Operation

The existing WTGS operation was determined to be an optimum location for the Project.

Whitehorse is the nearest practical grid location for LNG deliveries from Alberta or British Columbia. It is the location of the Yukon grid’s largest load centre. And it offers the opportunity to use new gas fired generation to modernize the Whitehorse plant facilities, with its established infrastructure (including transformer capability and on site staffing needed to operate and maintain the remaining diesel plant), concurrent with the retirement of existing diesel capacity at these facilities.

The option of developing a new greenfield site for the Project in the Whitehorse area and separate from the WTGS was considered but was not found to be cost effective or practical. Major elements of the existing diesel plant at the WTGS will continue to be required over at least the next decade under any scenario examined. As noted, the WTGS also provides established infrastructure that facilitates cost effective development of the Project.

In summary, it was concluded that the diesel-natural gas conversion initiative on the Yukon grid is best facilitated by having the Project integrated with the existing WTGS operation.

Project Capacity Requirement

The Project is to provide sufficient new gas-fired generation capacity between 2014 and 2017 at Base Case forecast loads (a) to meet grid capacity requirements during these years with retirement of the two Mirrlees units14, and (b) to displace during each of these years more than 90% of expected grid diesel generation requirements (assuming long-term average hydro generation) and reduce diesel generation during drought years.

In order to enhance efficient use of new gas-fired generation, it is assumed that this new generation will be operated on a prioritized basis where feasible to maximum capacity prior to use of any other grid diesel generation, and will be operated to enhance hydro storage for use in the wintertime (so that enhanced hydro generation can help to displace diesel generation during periods of peak diesel

14 Based on grid capacity planning criteria as reviewed in Section 5.3.8, the minimum new gas-fired grid capacity (cumulative to each date) required is 5.4 MW by 2015, 6.8 MW by 2016, and 9.1 MW by 2017.

Chapter 6 Page 6-9 Project Description Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013 requirements). To assess potential capacity required to displace long-term average diesel generation, one MW increments of gas-fired generation have been examined assuming maximum operation of the units (see Appendix 6.B, Table 1 for 2015 and Table 2 for 2016):

 Installing only 5.4 MW gas-fired generation in 2015 (i.e., minimum new capacity requirement) would likely not displace more than about 75% of long-term average diesel generation in 2015 (and less in 2016 and subsequent years), even if operated to maximize hydro storage, given the inability of this scale of generation to address thermal generation requirements during major drought years15. Similarly, installing 6.8 MW gas-fired generation in 2016 would likely not displace more than about 78% of expected diesel generation (see Table 2 of Appendix 6.B).

 To displace more than 90% of expected diesel generation (at long-term average hydro conditions) with gas fired generation operated in this assumed manner, 8 MW of gas fired is required by 2015 and 9 MW by 2016 (see Tables 1 and 2 of Appendix 6.B). In these cases, diesel generation exceeds 5 GW.h/yr in only two extreme drought years.

 To displace over 99% of expected diesel generation, 10 MW of gas fired generation is required by 2015 and 12 MW by 2016. In order to secure similar diesel displacement without requiring incremental new generation, Yukon Energy is also examining (for a future stage of the Project) retrofit of the remaining EMD units at Whitehorse to a blended use of gas and diesel during the few times when new gas-fired engines would not be fully able to displace all diesel generation.

As reviewed below, investigation of gas engine supplier options identified the GE pre-engineered J624 modular unit option as the preferred modular engine option for the Project16. This scale of unit was concluded to be the relevant modular option for the initial conversion Project, i.e., two of these units (approximately 8.8 MW total new engine capacity) would accommodate initial minimum new capacity requirements for 2015 and a third unit (approximately 13.1 MW total new engine capacity) would meet expected near-term new capacity requirements for 2017 or later. In addition, based on the assessments reviewed above and in Appendix 6.B, this scale of new gas-fired capacity would offer opportunity to displace over 90% of expected Base Case diesel generation requirements during this period.

Alternative Means Examined For Major Project Components

The Project to modernize and convert the WTGS from diesel to gas fuel involves two basic components: (a) conversion of old diesel units to new gas-fired engines, and (b) development of related new “LNG Facilities” (i.e., the LNG truck unload, storage, vapourization and related facilities). In effect, the LNG Facilities are required to receive the LNG, to store it until required for power generation, and then to

15 See Appendix 6.B, Table 1. Column F shows that 5 MW of gas fired generation operated at full capacity displaces only 71% of expected diesel, while 6 MW displaces 80% of expected diesel. Columns I to M show the extent to which expected diesel during the worst drought years is impacted by each MW of added gas-fired generation. Table 2 shows that, due to load growth, expected diesel displacement for each of these gas-fired generation capacities is reduced in 2016, e.g., 5 MW new capacity displaces only 61% of expected diesel and 6 MW displaces only 71%. 16 Review of potentially available modular unit options indicated that GE is the only vendor currently offering such gas fired options in the scale relevant to Yukon Energy and with demonstrated cold climate northern operating experience.

Chapter 6 Page 6-10 Project Description Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013 vapourize the LNG to natural gas for use in gas-fired engines. Heat from the gas-fired engine operation (or other sources) is used to facilitate ongoing cost effective vapourization of the LNG.

At the outset, options were examined to install new gas-fired engines within the existing diesel plant, i.e., within the WD1 and WD2 service bays that would be made available upon retirement of these Mirrlees units. However, it was recognized at an early stage of the planning that the existing WTGS site would not offer adequate space to accommodate the required LNG Facilities. Accordingly, it was determined that either an expanded site or a new site across Robert Service Way in close proximity to the WTGS would be needed for the LNG Facilities component, and a utility trench to interconnect the LNG Facilities and the existing Diesel Plant was assumed to be part of the Project to move natural gas and heat between these facilities.

Within the above framework, alternative means were examined separately for both the new gas-fired engine component and the LNG Facilities component:

1. New Gas-Fired Engine Component: Options were examined for new engines within the existing Diesel Plant and also for modular units that would be located outside the existing plant.

a. Within Existing Plant Option: Alternative new engine options (e.g., dual fuel [gas- diesel] versus gas-only fired engines, different scales and designs) were initially examined for siting within the existing Diesel Plant, including a review of the costs associated with required balance of plant work (to modernize the plant17) and the engineering challenges associated with installing new units in existing bays within an operating thermal facility. Preliminary engineering and costing was completed for an option to install two 6.7 MW dual-fuel Wartsila engines18 (total new capacity 13.4 MW) by October 2014 in the service bays vacated by the WD1 and WD2 retirements, with ability to utilize existing substation capacity previously used by the Mirrlees units. The following conclusions resulted from this assessment:

. Schedule challenges and reliability risks: Although a schedule to complete by October 2014 was feasible (subject to engine contract award by June 2013), the requirement for advanced removal of WD1 and WD2 in order to install the new engines in these bays would remove capacity prior to new gas-fired generator capacity being operational and any unanticipated delays could lead to reduced thermal capacity during peak winter months; overall, the option's

17 In 2006, NTPC and GEA completed an upgrade study of the Whitehorse Diesel Plant. The report indentified several components and systems that require upgrades regardless of the outcome surrounding the status of the generators, such as (but not limited to) foundation block, cooling system, air handling system, fuel supply system and building superstructure. Preliminary engineering for the Project developed estimated costs for balance of plant work required to utilize the Mirrlees bays for new engines. 18 The Wartsila units were simply assumed for the purpose of preparing preliminary engineering design and costing. In January 2013 Yukon Energy issued an RFI to engine suppliers for budgetary estimate for dual fuel and/or single natural gas reciprocating and/or gas turbines to be in service by the end of Q3 2014, including information on engine performance, technical descriptions, fuel blending options and key commercial terms. This RFI indicated that the 6.7 MW Wartsila units were the largest dual fuel units that could be located in both the WD1 and WD2 service bays.

Chapter 6 Page 6-11 Project Description Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

sequential need to remove and scrap/salvage existing units in order to install the new units creates a very tight schedule with attendant system reliability risks to get this construction work completed in the window between March 1 and October of 2014 (or any subsequent year).

. Capital Costs: Estimated capital costs for 13.4 MW (two new engines) and related balance of plant work (including all related engineering and estimated owner's costs, and removal of the two Mirrlees units, but excluding planning costs common to all options) approximate $31 million, with over 40% of this estimate being balance of plant upgrade costs.

. Unit Size and Efficiency: Use of the existing Mirrlees service bays leads to selecting new units that will fully utilize the maximum capacity of the existing plant, which tend to be larger than would otherwise be preferred for the Project (reduced operating flexibility and likely fuel efficiency of engine operation under expected load conditions at this time).

. Contracting Issues: The required contracting approach would require that Yukon Energy engage engineering and project management to coordinate the design and installation of the engines (assuming engine supplier responsibility for design and construction) with the design and construction of the balance of plant work that would be carried out by parties other than the engine supplier.

b. Modular Unit Option: Further to an Request for Information (RFI) process that Yukon Energy carried out in January 2013, meetings with GE introduced the option to secure smaller gas engines (specifically the J624 modular unit option with 4.375 MW per unit) as pre-engineered plug and play units installed on a pad on the Yukon Energy site outside the current Diesel Plant, potentially eliminating the need for material infrastructure or balance of plant facilities beyond the pad foundation. Review of potentially available modular unit options indicated that GE is the only vendor currently offering such options in the scale relevant to Yukon Energy and with demonstrated cold climate northern operating experience. This is GE's largest gas unit available as a pre-engineered modular unit, and it was initially designed to withstand cold climate conditions (an operating plant is in use in northern Russia). For Project purposes, it was concluded that three J624 modular units would be appropriate (13.1 MW total capacity), with two units (8.8 MW total capacity) being installed in the first phase before the end of 2014. The following conclusions resulted from Yukon Energy's assessment of this modular unit option:

. Unit Location: Yukon Energy confirmed a variety of suitable site options for the modular units on its existing Whitehorse Rapids Generating Station property and/or on adjacent lands (the Expanded Site Area). When it became clear that the Expanded Site Area was available for the Project, it was determined that this would be the optimum location for the modular units (given ability to accommodate up to 5 such units on this site along with the LNG Facilities).

Chapter 6 Page 6-12 Project Description Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Locating the units on this part of the Expanded Site Area avoids issues of potentially conflicting uses on the existing WGTS site. Even though the modular units are located on the Expanded Site Area, a utility trench will be developed to interconnect the LNG Facilities and the existing Diesel Plant to move natural gas and heat between these facilities (this will facilitate future use of natural gas for blended gas-diesel fuel use in existing or new engines at the existing Diesel Plant, as well as other potential gas uses in Yukon Energy’s facilities, e.g., for boiler heating).

. Related Transformer Requirements: A material new Yukon Energy requirement with the J624 modular units relates to the 4.16 kV design which is not compatible with the existing T4 transformer made available by retirement of WD1 and WD2, i.e., the Mirrlees are at 6.9 kV (unlike Yukon Energy's other units at the Diesel Plant that generate at 4.16 kV). The T4 transformer would be left in place as a spare for WD3 and WH2 hydro units. To accommodate this added requirement, a budget allowance was included for a new transformer/substation on the Expanded Site Area that would receive the power from the units and provide it at 35 kV to the existing Yukon Energy substation at the WTGS that connects to the grid.

. Schedule Challenges and Reliability Risks: A schedule to complete by October 2014 was determined to be feasible, subject to engine contract award before the end of June 2013. The modular unit option removed the requirement for advanced removal of WD1 and WD2 in order to install the new engines in these bays, and thereby removed the attendant system reliability risks to get retired unit removal and new unit installation work completed in the window between March 1 and October of 2014 (or any subsequent year).

. Capital Costs: Estimated capital costs for 13.1 MW (three new engines) and related work (including all related engineering, site civil and electrical work, substation and related costs, estimated owner's costs, and removal and salvage/scrap of the two Mirrlees units, but excluding planning costs common to all options) approximate $26 million.

. Unit Size and Efficiency: the modular unit option frees Yukon Energy from unit size constraints regarding use of the existing Mirrlees service bays, and thereby flexibility and fuel efficiency of engine operation under expected load conditions at this time.

. Contracting Issues: Relative to the option of installing new engines within the existing plant, the “plug and play”or "modular" approach reduces risks regarding design/construction costs (engine work occurs off site to a major degree), shipping and on-site construction installation requirements.

Chapter 6 Page 6-13 Project Description Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

2. LNG Facilities Component: Following determination that a new site, outside the existing Yukon Energy property, would be required for the LNG Facilities, nearby site options were examined on each side of Robert Service Way.

a. Site Options across Robert Service Way: Four sites were identified across Robert Service Way from the WTGS that could accommodate the assumed LNG Facilities requirements (based on review of site areas, and any potential interference with the Whitehorse Airport) – including two sites closest to Yukon Energy’s site and adjacent to the west side of Robert Service Way (the Ta’an Kwäch’än Council [TKC]) site and the City of Whitehorse site). The two other sites examined are owned by Kwanlin Dün First Nation (KDFN), and are not preferred for the LNG Facilities due to greater distance from the WTGS site as well as closer proximity to the Alaska Highway and the flight paths for the Whitehorse Airport. Yukon Energy confirmed the interest of the City of Whitehorse and each First Nation to work with Yukon Energy to provide each of these site options for the LNG Facilities. Conceptual design and environmental data collection work assumed a preferred site on the TKC site (municipal engineering work determined that this site would be approximately $0.6 million lower costs than the alternative preferred City of Whitehorse site). Ongoing consultations and review indicated that both the preferred and alternative preferred sites would need to be rezoned and for that purpose would be required as well to go through the City of Whitehorse zoning amendment (Official Community Plan or OCP) process. It was estimated that a zoning amendment through City of Whitehorse OCP and bylaw re-write process could take until approximately to the end of calendar 2013 at the earliest.

b. Expanded Site Area Option on Yukon Energy-Side of Robert Service Way: A new potential site option of approximately 1.5 ha was identified in March 2013 on the Yukon Energy-side of Roberta Service Way and adjacent to the south end of the WTGS site (the Expanded Site Area). This site, which is owned primarily by the Yukon Government (with adjacent White Pass & Yukon Railway right-of-way lands), is already zoned for Public Utility use (and therefore its use for the LNG Facilities does not need to proceed through an OCP process). Yukon Energy has subsequently confirmed the Yukon Government’s willingness, in principle, to sell to Yukon Energy the portion of the Expanded Site Area owned by the Yukon Government (approximately 0.9 ha), and the White Pass and Yukon Railway’s willingness, in principle, to provide Yukon Energy with a long-term lease of the portion of the Expanded Site Area occupied by its right-of-way (approximately 0.6 ha). Yukon Energy has also confirmed preliminary site design that could accommodate on the Expanded Site Area both the LNG Facilities (with up to six 166.5 m3 LNG storage tanks) and the GE J624 gas-fired engine modules (with up to five modules), and that the Expanded Site Area option will allow for some capital cost savings (approximately $0.6 million) over the other preferred site options due to moving LNG storage closer to the WTGS site and the existing generating and substation facilities. See Figure 6-1 or Figure 2-1.

Chapter 6 Page 6-14 Project Description Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

In summary, based on review of the above investigations and analysis, it was determined that the new natural gas-fired GE J624 modular engine units and the Expanded Site Area option for the LNG Facilities (as well as for the modular engine units) would provide the lowest cost and least risky means to implement the Project on an expanded WTGS site. Although the Expanded Site Area will be planned to accommodate up to five modular engine units and up to six 166.5 m3 LNG storage tanks, it has been determined that only three modular engine units (13.1 MW total capacity19) and four such storage tanks (666 m3 total capacity20) will be installed at this time.

New natural gas-fired engines are assumed to have an economic life of 40 years, based on expected average annual utilization. Assuming that the facilities will continue to be required for established backup capacity for the Yukon grid, it is expected that components will be replaced as they reach end of life and the Project facilities will not be decommissioned.

The Project will introduce a new fuel to Yukon Energy's existing WTGS, i.e., natural gas supplied by LNG. Project activities will be conducted in accordance with Canadian Standard Association Z276-11 Liquefied Natural Gas: Production, Storage and Handling, which establishes essential requirements and minimum standards for the design, installation and safe operation and maintenance of LNG facilities. Yukon Energy will also be subject to requirements under the Yukon Oil and Gas Act, and Gas Processing Plant Regulation.

LNG Supply

Yukon Energy has secured a minimum five-year (starting from date of first delivery) flexible LNG supply of up to 110,750 kg per day (approximately 250 cubic metres per day) from Shell Canada’s Jumping Pound LNG production facility being developed near Calgary which is planned to start operation in third quarter 2014 with an estimated capacity of 250,000 metric tonnes per year (e.g., more than 1,500 cubic metres per day).

The Shell supply option near Calgary was selected based on availability of reliable LNG supplies in the near term that are well in excess of Yukon Energy's needs (with ample ability to expand requirements well above forecast Base Case load requirements) and attractive negotiated (and confidential) commercial terms. LNG costs to Yukon Energy under the contract with Shell will fluctuate each month to reflect the latest published month Alberta Energy Company (AECO) index price of natural gas as reported by Natural Gas Exchange.

There is also the potential in future to source LNG at any time (i.e., including during the term of the Shell contract) from the Fort Nelson area in northern British Columbia should additional liquefaction facilities

19 As noted, 8.8 MW (2 units) will be developed initially (in-service before end of 2014) and the final 4.4 MW developed when required to meet new capacity requirements within a couple of years. 20 At maximum daily capacity usage (assuming minimum daily average 40% energy conversion efficiency), 666 m3 LNG storage reflects 8.0 days fuel requirements with 8.8 MW modular unit engine capacity and 5.4 days fuel requirements with 13.1 MW modular unit engine capacity. This level of storage capacity is considered fully adequate at this time, given expected normal grid thermal generation load requirements even in winter (which are well below sustained operation of these modules at maximum daily capacity levels) as well as availability of ample back-up diesel generation.

Chapter 6 Page 6-15 Project Description Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013 come into service in this area, and/or Shell Canada arranges to make LNG supplies available in this area, similar to how diesel suppliers currently store fuel at staged locations in the north (e.g., Whitehorse Marwell Industrial Subdivision).

LNG Delivery to Whitehorse Site

LNG will be transported from Calgary to the WTGS in double-jacketed, tank-type transport equipment that maintains a vacuum between the tank walls to stabilize the extremely low product temperature.

Significant travel distances and the comparatively low density of LNG (60% of diesel fuel) emphasize the importance of having the most economical type of transportation possible while maintaining rigorous safety standards. Yukon Energy intends to contract for fuel delivery from Calgary or other LNG supply locations to the Whitehorse site later in 2013. Prior to proceeding with this contracting, Yukon Energy has been involved in the preliminary design for the trailer units in order to address the tight timelines for the Project and the objective to keep delivered LNG costs as low as possible.

Yukon Energy and Western Copper & Gold contracted PROLOG Canada to work with tractor trailer manufacturers and the Yukon Government Department of Highways and Public Works to design a double trailer (A-Train) combination with a 95,000 litre capacity [see Figure 6-2] as an alternative to the Tridem units with a 54,000 litre capacity that are currently used to transport fuel into Yukon. The Tridem trailers may be used in the short-term if there are delays in the licensing and fabrication of the new units.

Figure 6-2: Proposed 11 Axle A-Train Tanker Configuration

Chapter 6 Page 6-16 Project Description Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

The 11-axle A-Train, as designed, exceeds current size restrictions in the Yukon so FPI Innovations was contracted by PROLOG to conduct a performance test of this new configuration to ensure that the new design meets minimum performance standards. This is a requirement in order to have the units approved for use on highways in Alberta, British Columbia, and the Yukon.

The following are noted regarding the LNG truck haul options examined:

 Assuming 40% energy conversion efficiency at a minimum for the modular gas-fired engines, the initial low volume LNG haul cost from Shell’s Calgary facility (2,325 km) is estimated at 4.4 ccents/kW.h with A-Train units and 6.3 cents/kW.h with Tridem units; with development of more efficient operations with larger and more stable loads, the estimated A-Train delivery cost from Calgary falls to 3.7 cents/kW.h, and from the much closer Fort Nelson area (978 km) it falls to 1.6 cents/kW.h. The major advantage of the A-Train units over the Tridem units is the 76% higher net load capacity per trip.

 The A-Train has been approved for use in Yukon for supply to Whitehorse along the Alaska Highway, but has yet to be approved for use in Alberta or British Columbia21.

 Initial tractors for the LNG haul are assumed to be diesel-fueled engines. To secure lower costs and emissions; however, ongoing efforts will occur to secure LNG-fueled tractors as soon as is practical. PROLOG Canada has estimated that LNG-fueled tractors might reduce Yukon Energy LNG haul costs by 20% to 30% compared to diesel-fueled tractors (assumes development of more efficient operations with larger and more stable loads than will initially occur with Base Case loads).

In summary, even if Tridem units for LNG delivery and an AECO gas price at $4.5/MMBtu (i.e., well above recent maximum AECO gas prices that approximated $3.5/MMBtu in April 2013) are assumed, the delivered cost of Shell-supplied LNG at Whitehorse would be less than 15.5 cents/kW.h (assuming 40% minimum average fuel conversion efficiency), which remains well below the current cost of diesel fuel for Yukon Energy of 28.7 cents/kW.h in existing diesel units and 24.6 cents/kW.h in potential new higher efficiency diesel units. Yukon Energy is pursuing permitting and use of A-Train trailer units to further reduce this delivered cost of LNG by approximately 1.9 cents/kW.h.

6.3 MAJOR PROJECT COMPONENTS TO BE CONSTRUCTED AND OPERATED

Each of the major components of the Project to be constructed and operated as outlined in Section 6.1 and Figure 6-1 is described in further detail below with particular attention to the LNG Facilities and related safety and security measures that will be in place to prevent, or reduce the impact of, accidents and malfunctions related to the LNG Facilities.

21 Yukon Energy and Western Copper and Gold have been working with PROLOG Canada over the past year to do the necessary investigations and submissions required to finalize an acceptable A-Train design for permitting. Now that the Yukon highway safety review has been completed as required for use of such equipment on Yukon Highways to supply Yukon Energy, ongoing activity will focus on securing approvals for Alberta and British Columbia segments of the truck route from Calgary to the Yukon border.

Chapter 6 Page 6-17 Project Description Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

6.3.1 LNG Facilities

The LNG Facilities to be located on the Expanded Site Area will include offloading, storage and vapourization facilities, and interconnecting piping between these facilities and the gas-fired engines. The LNG Facilities will include four 166.5 m3 storage tanks (total useable capacity of 666 m3)22, a short all weather access road from Miles Canyon Road for truck offloading and access to components on the Expanded Site Area fencing and other facilities required for safe operation.

The LNG Facilities will be designed with provision for overall site capability to accommodate (with expansions under future projects) approximately 999 m3 of LNG storage (six tanks each with a capacity of 166.5 m3)

These facilities will be required to meet all standards, codes and regulations enforced by federal, provincial/ territorial or municipal jurisdictions. Specificallly, following the requirements of CSA Z276- Standard, the design of the LNG Facilities includes the following four elements that provide protection and safety both for workers at an LNG facility and that of the community around the facility: Primary Containment, Secondary Containment, Safeguard Systems and Separation Distances.

The major elements of the LNG Facilities are outlined in more detail below:

Truck Unloading Facilities & Operations

The truck unload facilities include all necessary infrastructure to secure offloading of LNG from each truck into a LNG storage tank. The unloading bay will include a manifold for unloading a single LNG tanker at a time, an interface for load recognition and verification, unloading flow custody transfer meter (Corellas meter) to measure LNG tanker inventory transfer, Cryogenic liquid (3” vacuum jacketed) and vapor (2”) hoses to connect the LNG highway tanker to LNG unloading headers, LNG unloading header and isolation valves, vapor return header and isolation valves, and two 100% tanker LNG unloading pumps. As described further below, the unloading bay area will include a spill collection system to transport potential LNG spills to an impoundment area.

As off-loading is expected to take between 2 to 4 hours per truck, a shed with washroom facilities and monitoring equipment will also be available for the driver.

Truck unloading operation will be performed by trained facility operators who will remain in attendance throughout the unloading procedure. Truck drivers will be trained and authorized to operate valves and move hoses for unloading operations and will be expected to monitor the unloading operation.

During unloading operations the driver will secure the truck in the unloading bay, turn the truck engine off and chock the wheels. The truck ignition keys will be removed and secured during unloading operations. Prescribed identification and delivery validation procedures will be followed. An umbilical cord will be connected to the LNG highway tanker to monitor truck/ tanker safety systems and unloading and

22 Assuming that each truck is an A-Train unit with a net storage capacity of 95 m3, a total storage facility capacity as initially to be developed of 666 m3 represents approximately 7 truckloads. As reviewed under Operations Phase, expected truck loads required per week will vary widely depending on the season, current hydro water conditions and grid loads.

Chapter 6 Page 6-18 Project Description Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013 vapour hoses will be connected between the tanker and the unloading manifold. Throughout unloading, vapour pressure in the tanker will be controlled by a pressure control valve. The manual LNG unloading valves will be opened to allow LNG to flow from the tanker and LNG unloading will continue until the tanker is empty of liquid. The LNG pump will automatically stop when the Corellas meter senses a low (no) flow reading. The operator will confirm the LNG tanker is completely empty and the vapour and LNG on-off valves on the unloading manifold will be closed. Hoses and umbilical cord will be disconnected using appropriate procedures. Once unload and validation procedures are complete the tanker will depart.

During LNG tanker unloading operations vapour pressure will decrease as the liquid is unloaded unless externally replenished. A vapour return line maintains minimum tanker vapour pressure and ensures that an adequate flowrate of LNG is provided to the unloading pump while minimizing final vapour space pressure in the empty tanker.

To prevent unsafe conditions, fire and gas detectors will be installed in specific locations in the unloading area and emergency call points as well as sirens and beacons will be provided to alert personnel to emergency situations. A terminal to truck umbilical cable connected to the LNG tanker will ensure that the truck engine is off, the LNG tanker is earthed and the truck and tanker braking systems are set and wheels chocked before loading is permitted. Emergency shutdown valves are provided in the liquid and vapour lines to and from the unloading bays and LNG pump outlets to isolate the system in an emergency.

LNG Storage Tanks – Primary Containment System

Primary containment of LNG on site is within the four 166.5 m3 horizontal single containment vacuum jacketed bullet tanks installed for LNG storage on site. The site layout is designed to be able to add two additional tanks as required in the future and foundations for two future tanks (including provision for connections and tie ins) will be constructed during the initial construction.

The storage tanks have a stainless steel inner tank that contains the LNG and a carbon steel outer tank. The volume between the two tanks is under vacuum which serves to thermally insulate the inner tank from ambient conditions23. Each tank will sit on a two pedestal foundation. The LNG storage tanks will have piping and remotely actuated open/closed isolation valves designed to allow tank filling and withdrawal to and from each tank. Tanks will have top spray filling and be instrumented with two independent level gauges that provide inventory readings and can close the inlet and outlet valves in the event of unusual events. LNG will be fed from the storage tanks to two external LNG tank pumps from withdrawal lines located on the bottom of each tank. The pumps will be sized for the ultimate design flow rate of LNG. Two 50% LNG pumps will be installed initially with foundation for a third (including provision for connections and tie ins) provided during the initial construction.

23 The vacuum insulation provides thermal insulation with typical boil off rate equal to 0.25% per day of the capacity of LNG in the tank.

Chapter 6 Page 6-19 Project Description Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

The manufacture of these vessels is strictly regulated, including design, fabrication and testing requirements. In accordance with National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 59A requirements, the tanks would be designed as per the American Petroleum Institute (API) 620 standard. Since the tank is exposed to cryogenic liquid, the design will also be in accordance with the requirements of the Appendix Q of the API 620 standard. The CSA Z276 Standard requires that LNG storage containers have product retention valves, excess product loss detection, gas detection and remote activated isolation integrated with the storage container system.

Secondary Containment System

In the unlikely event of a spill or leak of LNG from the primary containment system, secondary containment is provided that will contain the LNG and direct the spill to a containment or in-ground impoundment area where the LNG will be held until it evapourates into the atmosphere. Secondary containment for LNG facilities is required to comply with strict regulatory and industry standards and codes (i.e., CSA Z276-11), must prevent potential off-site migration of LNG spills and releases, and must be sufficiently robust to address the following scenarios:

 A Total LNG storage tank failure – pursuant to the CSA Z276-11 standard, the secondary containment structure must be designed to hold 110% of the entire contents of a single LNG storage tank in the event of an LNG tank rupture; and

 A 10 minute LNG release from the process or transfer operations – pursuant to the CSA Z276-11 standard the impoundment area must be designed to contain a 10 minute spill based on the largest flow rate of the facility.

The spill containment system is comprised of the following elements: LNG secondary containment areas, LNG sub-impoundments, paving, curbs and LNG transfer trenches in areas where LNG is stored, processed or unloaded. Area paving beneath any equipment that contains LNG will be graded to direct any LNG spill towards a transfer trench and curbing will prevent the LNG from flowing off the area paving by any route other than the transfer trench.

The LNG storage tanks will sit on a raised area approximately 6 inches above a trough area that feeds into the transfer trench that is 1 ft wide and 2 ft below grade. If LNG spills from its primary containment (i.e., the LNG storage tanks), it will flow by gravity through the transfer trench to the main impoundment area (or secondary containment pit) and begin to warm and change phases into a gas, creating a vapour above the released liquid. Figure 6-3 below illustrates the elevation drop and the drainage from the LNG tank containment area to the main impoundment area. In the final design, this will be a continuous grade where the slope of the entire area drain toward the exit drain in a smooth and continuous manner.

Chapter 6 Page 6-20 Project Description Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Figure 6-3: Elevation Drop and Drainage from Tank Containment Area to LNG Main Impoundment Area

Figure 6-4 shows the dimensions of the LNG storage tank containment area and the length of the trench between the containment area and the main impoundment area.

Figure 6-4: LNG Storage Tank Containment Area

Chapter 6 Page 6-21 Project Description Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

The truck loading site will also contain a 16 ft by 20 ft sloped pad that leads to a transfer trench to transfer any spill from the truck unloading pad to the impoundment. Figure 6-5 below shows the LNG truck unloading area, the length of the trench leading to the containment pit and the dimensions of the containment pit.

Figure 6-5: LNG Truck Unloading Area

**Not shown are the LNG process equipment pad that also has a trench to the containment pit and the non-process equipment pad that drains to storm water drain. Storm water landing in areas outside the limits of the LNG spill containment curbing will be directed to storm water facilities that are separate from the LNG spill containment facilities, and storm water that has flowed into the LNG impoundment will be removed using automatic water pumps installed in the impoundment. Pumps designed for automatic operation will have automatic shutdown controls to prevent operation when LNG is present or if water temperature is below its freezing point.

Safe Separation Distances

LNG is a colourless, odourless, non-corrrosive, non-toxic, non-flammable cryogenic liquid at normal atmospheric pressure. It has a boiling point of typically -162°C and begins to boil when it comes into contact with an environment warmer than itself, such as water, air, land, etc., (e.g., in the event of a leak or spill). If LNG is released through a leak or a spill it will warm and return to a gaseous state24. As LNG vapourizes, cold vapours condense the moisture in the air which will form a white vapour cloud until the gas is warmed by ambient air, dilutes and disperses. A vapour cloud can only ignite if it encounters an ignition source within its flammability range25.

24 LNG has a chemical composition that is predominantly methane (87-99% by volume), with small percentages of ethane, and heavier hydrocarbons. In the unlikely event of a leak or spill, the vapours will initially be heavier than air and remain close to the ground – but as the methane warms and reaches temperatures of approximately -110 Celsius the vapour rises. (See YESAB Project Number 2013-0009 YESAB DO Report, pages 37-38). 25 As noted in the recent YESAB Report regarding the Watson Lake Bi-Fuel Project (YESAB Project Number 2013-0009 YESAB Designated Office (DO) Evaluation Report, pages 37-40) due to lack of oxygen in the liquid, LNG is not flammable. The flammable

Chapter 6 Page 6-22 Project Description Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

In order to comply with CSA-Z276-11 the LNG facility must be sited with appropriate separation distances such that in the unlikely event of a release, thermal radiation or vapour releases to secondary containment systems will not adversely impact adjacent property. Based on results of dispersion modeling, in the unlikely event of a release, a 800 ft long and 8 ft high vapour retention wall is included in the facility design to ensure that any vapour cloud is contained within the Expanded Site Area. The vapour retention wall is designed to retain the vapour plume within the property boundary limits until it has sufficient retention time to warm and mix with the atmosphere to dilute below one-half of the Lower Flammability Limit (as required by CSA Z276-11).

LNG Storage Tanks – Vapour Space and Vapour System

Vapour is generated as a result of ambient heat transfer into the LNG storage tank system through thermal insulation systems or operating equipment.

Boil off gas26 compressors and pad gas systems27 will be in place to ensure LNG tank vapour remains within an optimal range. Each LNG tank is also equipped with four pressure relief valves, two of which are always on stream and two of which are on the dead leg of a threeway valve. A single LNG facility flare system is provided to facilitate disposal of excess vapour pressure to the atmosphere in a safe location in the event of abnormal process conditions or pressure build-up that exceeds fuel gas consumption. The vapour disposal system is an elevated vertical pipe with a flare tip and will be located in an area where flammable gas can be safely discharged.

The vapour system will operate to provide a safe conduit for vapour distribution, vapour pressure balancing and utilization within the LNG facility without atmospheric venting. In order to avoid atmospheric venting, when excess vapor is produced and the high pressure set-point is reached, the boil off gas compressor will automatically start, and will compress and transfer excess vapor to the gas distribution system for use as natural gas fuel. Yukon Energy has several fuel uses year round that can beneficially consume the boil off gas (BOG) to maintain the vapour space pressure below the PSV (pressure relief valves) set point. As such, little if any venting is anticipated.

When a vapor deficit occurs, vapor makeup “pad gas” is automatically provided from the natural gas send-out line to the vapor system to prevent low or vacuum pressure from occurring in the LNG storage tank vapor space and vapor system.

In the unlikely event that vapor production exceeds vapor recovery capacity of the BOG compressor, the excess is flared to the atmosphere as an abnormal operating condition to prevent over pressurization in the LNG storage tank vapor space and vapor system. PSV’s and TSV’s (thermal relief valves) are hard range is the range of a concentration of gas or vapour that will burn if it comes into contact with an ignition source. The flammability limits for methane are 5% (lower flammability limit) and 15% (upper flammability limit). When the concentration exceeds the upper flammability limit it cannot burn because there is not enough oxygen present (e.g., in a closed, secure storage tank where the concentration is approximately 100% methane). When the concentration is below the lower flammability limit it cannot burn because there is not enough methane present (e.g., leakage of small amounts of LNG in a well ventilated area). 26 Carbon steel boil off gas (BOG) compressors will be in place to operate when there is high pressure in the vapour system and compressors are sequenced and automatically operate with sufficient capacity to maintain LNG tank vapour space pressure to prevent a high pressure condition that could lead to relief valve lifting and atmospheric venting. 27 Pad gas is provided when there is low pressure in the vapour system and operates in pressure control and is supplied form the natural gas send-out line that will automatically maintain vapour spec pressure to prevent a low or vacuum pressure condition.

Chapter 6 Page 6-23 Project Description Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013 piped to the vapor system for collection except LNG tank pressure relief valves that discharge directly to the atmosphere.

Atmospheric venting is considered an abnormal condition and avoided except for emergency conditions to prevent over pressurization in piping systems, tanks and vessels.

Vapourization Facilities & Operation

A vapourizer is needed to heat the LNG to a temperature of between 10 Celsius and 40 Celsius for use in natural gas-fired generators.

The facility design includes two 100% capacity stainless steel vertical shell and tube vapourizers connected to a glycol/water loop to provide heat needed to vapourize LNG. The common discharge of the vapourizers will have an emergency shutdown valve to isolate the vapourizer in case of emergency. Vapourizers will be insulated and heat traced and turn on if the ambient temperature falls below the freezing point of the 50% ethylene glycol-water mixture.

 A glycol water solution28 will operate as a closed loop system with the following main components: thermally insulated or buried welded carbon steel piping transfer loop (supply and return lines between heat source and LNG vapourizers); glycol/water circulation pumps; waste heat source - glycol /water heat exchanger and expansion/ surge tank.

 A blackstart heater will be used to warm the glycol/water ahead of the vapourizer to vapourize sufficient LNG to fuel 2.2 WW of power generation (at 40% efficiency)29. The Black Start Heater will also be used to provide heated glycol/water to the boil off gas heater when needed to warm the boil off gas vapours prior to compression of the glycol/water loop is otherwise cold.

The vapourizer and a black start heater will be located within the LNG Facilities area and the water/glycol–waste heat exchanger, expansion tank and circulating pumps will be located inside the power plant area.

The LNG Facilities will use a closed loop process where vapour is contained within the process during normal operations.

Interconnecting Piping

Facility piping includes boil off gas vapour lines, water-glycol system, stormwater sump pumps and discharge lines and the natural gas line to the power plant. All piping systems will be designed, rated, inspected and NDT (non-destructive testing) pressure tested for maximum allowable operating pressure in accordance with ASME B31.3, Process Piping and in accordance with provisions of CSA Z276 with respect to piping systems and components for flammable liquids and gases with service temperatures below -29 Celsius. Piping will be designed to the applicable seismic criteria, and the resultant stresses will be within those allowed in ASME B31.3, Process Piping.

28 Ethylene glycol-water solutions are commonly used in heat-transfer applications where the temperature in the heat transfer fluid can be below 0 Celsius in order to avoid freezing and damage from expansion and corrosion. 29 The LNG vapourizers depend on waste heat from the power plant for the thermal energy to vapourize LNG and the power plant intends to routinely start up using natural gas – consequently, a method must be provided to vapourize LNG to feed the power plant until the power plant can generate sufficient waste heat to sustain vapourization.

Chapter 6 Page 6-24 Project Description Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

The connection requirements of CSA Z276 for pipework will be incorporated into the piping design and into the specifications that govern welding, fabrication and erection of the piping system.

 Piping design - facility piping systems will be designed to specified off-loading rates and peak send out through the gas vapourizers to the gas distribution system.

 Send out metering – the LNG facility will include one ultrasonic meter with space and tie ins for one future meter.

 Gas distribution – natural gas will be piped from the vapourizers to the metering station and then to a gas distribution system comprised of thermally insulated above ground and buried carbon steel piping. The distribution system will meet relevant standards and codes. The buried pipe will be painted, wrapped and cathodically protected.

LNG Factilities – Site Security and Safe Guard Systems

The LNG Facility will be completely fenced on its east, south and west borders by a 7 foot high security fence topped with 1 foot of razor wire. The northern area with a common border with the power plant will not be fenced. The LNG highway tanker unloading area is separated from the process area with an internal boundary fence to divide the unloading area from the process area. Two motorized gates will be installed.

Closed–circuit television (CCTV) system will be used for monitoring facility, with the aid of lighting. All CCTV monitoring cameras are connected to the existing 24 hour control room for camera monitoring. Warning signs will be placed at regular intervals on the access way and the main entrance.

The following safety systems are included within the design of this portion of the Project:

 Fire and Gas hazard detectors – will be installed in the LNG storage tank area in specific locations where possibility of LNG spills, gas leaks, flame, excess heat and low temperature indicate unsafe conditions. Emergency manual call points will be provided, as well as sirens and beacons to alert personnel of emergency situations. Fire and gas detection control systems will automatically trigger an emergency shutdown for specific events.

 Emergency shutdown valves - are provided in the liquid and vapor lines to and from the unloading bays and LNG pump outlets to isolate the system in an emergency.

 Fire suppression systems – a number of fire suppression systems are integrated into the plant design including fire suppression extinguishers, fireproofing of critical structures located in process areas, designated restricted areas and management controls to minimize potential ignition sources in areas where flammable gas may be present.

 Process control – the LNG Facility and all equipment within the WTGS will be controlled and monitored from within the existing control room.

 Safe practice procedures – safe practice procedures will include operating procedures and safe work practices, procedural training and drills for plant personnel and preventative and corrective maintenance to make certain equipment is working properly and available in the event of an emergency.

Chapter 6 Page 6-25 Project Description Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

6.3.2 Gas-Fired Modular Generating Units and Related Facilities

Installation of up to three new modular 4.4 MW GE Jenbacher JMC624 gas fired generating units30 with two units to be installed on the Expanded Site Area at the outset for in-service in the 4th quarter of 2014 to replace two Mirrlees diesel generating units [WD1 and WD2] that are scheduled for retirement in 2014.

The initial two new gas-fired units will be modular units engineered, built, delivered and installed by GE (including related switchgear). Yukon Energy will provide the related site civil facilities (i.e., concrete slabs for units and connection of the units to the grid at S150, through the new substation on the Expanded Site Area). The initial work in 2014 will include site facilities required to accommodate three modular units (even though only two units will be installed in 2014). The Expanded Site Area will be designed to accommodate up to two additional modular units in the future.

A switchgear module designed to host all the protection and generation breaker equipment necessary to bring multiple generator modules to a common bus (single tie in to grid system) will be included in the GE deliverables. The module is composed of a 3000A bus and main breaker, 60HZ 60kV BIL, 50kA outdoor modular unit with breakers, switch/fuse, NGR, and grounding transformer. The unit also requires batteries, a charger, AC/DC panels and a 600V station service step-down transformer and distribution to feed multiple modular generation units. All components of the switchgear comply with IEEE standard C37.20.2-1999.

A fluid transfer station will also be provided. The unit proposed for this Project will be in an insulated and heated stand-alone containerized module to host pumping gear for all fluid transfer including fresh lube oil, waste oil and fresh glycol. This container will also include the hot water circulation pump for providing the LNG vapourizer with thermal energy for performing part of the regasification process.

6.3.3 Utility Trench

The utility trench will consist of a utilidor (duct bank) between the existing WTGS diesel plant and the facilities on the Expanded Site Area will be developed. Piping will be installed for the transfer of natural gas and the glycol mixture (supply and return lines) between the existing thermal generation site and storage facility, as well as for water supply to the Expanded Site Area for fire suppression (supply and return lines). The glycol water mixture is to transfer waste heat from the generators to the vapourizing units. The gas line is for future engine conversion in the existing Diesel Plant and boiler conversion (an initial 3 inch line is planned with enough space in the utilidor to add a new line when and if required).

In general, excavations within the Project Construction Footprint will be to a maximum depth of 4 metres, and for construction of the utility trench the pipe burial depth will be above the water table.

6.3.4 Substation & Distribution Line

Additional step up transformation is necessary to accommodate up to three modular generating units and will be installed in the Expanded Site Area as part of the Project. The addition of one larger transformer or two smaller ones, eliminates the need to decommission WD1 and WD2 in advance of the installing the

30 GE Jenbacher’s JMC624 H01 twin stage turbocharger each rated to generate 4375kw of electricity @ 4.16kV and 3907kw of usage heat @ 90C water.

Chapter 6 Page 6-26 Project Description Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013 new gas-fired engines to free up space on an existing transformer. The standard voltage of the existing transformer would also not be compatible with that of the gas-fired modules (6.9KV vs. 4.16kV respectively) and would have required modification of the modular units at an additional cost and potential reduction in operability.

An important component of substation construction is the installation of a ground grid to prevent electric shock and protect equipment from over voltages. Ground grids are installed at a depth such that the currents flowing in from the above grade steel structures or shield wire(s) are easily dissipated into the earth. This is accomplished by:

 Drilling ground rods (at strategic locations) to a depth where the soil resistivity is low; and

 Connecting the ground grid to the rods so that the grid can access the low resistivity soil. Typically the ground grid is installed at 36” below grade while the ground rods are driven into the soil to a depth of 10 feet. These depths are approximate and vary with design standards of various electric utilities.

A short length of distribution line is also required to tie in the new substation to Yukon Energy’s existing facilities in Whitehorse. The 34.5 kV line between the Expanded Site Area and the existing substation (S150) will be underground to the lot line of the existing Yukon Energy site and will then switch to underground cable for the remainder of the distance to the existing substation (S150). A SCADA communications line to connect the new assets to Yukon Energy’s existing communications system at the main System Control Centre (SCC) plant will also be included.

6.3.5 Decommissioning of Two Mirrless Units (WD1 and WD2)

WD1 and WD2 are at end of life and schedule to be retired in 2014 and 2015 respectively. Decommissioning will involve disconnection of the units from the electrical grid, salvage of engine parts (where feasible), recycling and/or landfill of the engine block/generator, removal of auxiliary systems (i.e., cooling line, compressed air system, oil handling, air handling stacks, switchgear, fuel lines and cables), and recycling or landfill of auxiliary equipment.

To maintain continued availability of the space for future generating units, mounting blocks will be fixed and cavities filled with reinforced concrete or non-shrink grout.

Decommissioning of the WD1 and WD2 units is planned to occur when feasible after the new generating units are in-service.

6.4 PROJECT PHASES AND SCHEDULING

6.4.1 Overview of Project Schedule

Yukon Energy is undertaking all required planning, environmental and socio-economic review and permitting, engineering design, procurement, contracting and other related activities to obtain authorizations and approvals necessary to allow construction of the Project to commence at the start of May 2014 to meet the in-service target of late 2014 for the first two natural gas-fired units.

Chapter 6 Page 6-27 Project Description Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

As noted in Section 6.1, this schedule is driven by forecast thermal generation requirements for the winter of 2014/15, both to provide new thermal generation capacity for reliable service during that winter and to save in excess of $4 million of thermal fuel generation costs charged to ratepayers in 2015. The overall Project development schedule is summarized as follows:

 Planning and Construction Phase (2013/2014)

o Design, long lead equipment purchase and contracting will occur during 2013.

o Construction on the Expanded Site Area and component delivery is planned to commence May 1, 2014 (or as soon thereafter as permitting and/or weather allows) with required site preparation activities (including clearing, grubbing and grading) followed by site civil construction and construction of the utility trench between the Expanded Site Area and the existing WTGS facilities.

o Installation of the required equipment/facilities and infrastructure is planned by October 2014 (including GE modules and related facilities, the LNG Facilities, and the new substation). Initial LNG deliveries will occur at the end of these activities.

o Commissioning is planned as soon as feasible in October/November so that in-service operation can commence in November/December 2014 for the first two GE modules and all of the LNG Facilities. Decommissioning of the WD1 and WD2 units is planned to occur when feasibleafter the new generating units have been installed.

 Operations/Modifications Phase (Late 2014-Ongoing)

o New natural gas-fired engines are assumed to have an economic life of 40 years, based on expected average annual utilization.

o The third GE gas-fired module (4.4 MW) will be purchased and installed when required to meet new capacity in the near future.

o Subsequent stages of the Project will occur thereafter at the WTGS (including the Expanded Site Area) in response to grid load growth and retirement of existing diesel unit supplying the grid.

o It is assumed that the Project facilities will continue after 40 years to be required for established backup capacity for the Yukon grid, and that therefore it is expected that components will be replaced as they reach end of life and the Project facilities will not be decommissioned.

There is currently no timetable or plan for final disposition or decommissioning of the main Project facilities. It is assumed that the Project facilities will continue after 40 years to be required for established backup capacity for the Yukon grid, and that therefore it is expected that components will be replaced as they reach end of life and the Project facilities and/or the WTGS will not be decommissioned. In short, it is difficult at this time to provide meaningful assessment of likely plans or their effects for rehabilitating the operational components and related infrastructure of the Project at the “end of operational life”. When such plans need to be developed, Yukon Energy will submit these plans as then required for

Chapter 6 Page 6-28 Project Description Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013 regulatory review and approval prior to implementation. Accordingly, this Project proposal does not provide any further assessment or discussion regarding decommissioning and/or reclamation.

6.4.2 Construction Phase

The construction phase comprises a variety of tasks and activities, including site preparation, sourcing of required materials, construction of supporting infrastructure as well as primary facilities, management of fuel and hazardous waste, and the management of necessary work crews.

Construction will be undertaken in accordance with the requriements of Part 3 of the Gas Processing Plant Regulation, which requires that prior to construction commencing Yukon Energy submit detailed designs of the facility and specifications for its components for review by the Chief Operations Officer, that an agent with sufficient expertise, knowledge and training be appointed to regularly monitor the construction of the facility and to halt any activity that may create a hazard to the public or personnel at the construction site or to the environment31.

The Project construction phase schedule is summarized as follows:

 Design, long-lead equipment orders, and contracting – The GE purchase order for two gas-fired modular units was undertaken in June 2013 (includes engineering, shipping, installation and commissioning of the units); it is being followed by a transformer tender and RFPs for project management and engineering services, and an engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) tender for the LNG Facilities. Other construction-related contracts will be tendered this fall.

 Initial site preparation and civil works – Starting May 1, 2014 (or as soon thereafter as permitting and/or weather allows), the Expanded Site Area will be prepared, e.g., land clearing, grubbing and grading for the construction footprint for the LNG Facilities, the modular gas-fired engine units, and all related facilities and site infrastructure (including the new substation) will require removal of all vegetation within the footprint and the burying or removal of a section of the White Pass and Yukon Route narrow gauge railway. It is not anticipated that any significant quantity of fill will need to be imported to the site for grading. The following related activities are noted:

o A storm water settling pond to settle out sediments and provide infiltration to ground will be required for the LNG Facilities.

o Excavations for the LNG storage facility (2 to 3 meters in depth) will be necessary to construct the berm. Shallow excavations and trenching will also be completed for the installation of utilities necessary to provide for the lighting, telecommunications and security on the site.

. The area for installation of the LNG storage tanks, vapourization equipment and the truck unloading location will require hard surfaces. For the storage tanks, this

31 Gas Processing Plant Regulation, Section 19 and 20.

Chapter 6 Page 6-29 Project Description Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

will be a poured concrete foundation. Asphalt or concrete surfaces will be used for the other equipment and unloading area on the site.

. There are no buildings that will be constructed on the site, with the exception of a potential warming shed to shelter the operator during LNG unloading operations. This would be within the site footprint and would be a small building with only electrical servicing. A portable toilet may be provided onsite for the convenience of the operator. There will not be any other wastewater produced on the site during Construction or Operations.

o The access road around the LNG storage facility will be constructed to the final grade with base material and paved.

o Improvement of drainage infrastructure currently in place will occur to manage surface water runoff for Robert Service Way within the City of Whitehorse easement. The drainage infrastructure will be expanded to manage surface water runoff during construction and operation of the new facilities.

o The utility trench between the existing WTGS diesel plant and the facilities on the Expanded Site Area will be developed.

o Following site paving and installation of permanent fencing, any areas that have been designated as vegetated in the final design will be planted with appropriate vegetation in accordance with the City of Whitehorse’s landscaping requirements set out in its Zoning Bylaw (2012-20). Lighting will be erected as needed for public and employee health and safety.

 Installation of Equipment – LNG Facilities equipment delivery is scheduled to commence in early May 2014, and engine module delivery is scheduled to commence in early July 2014. As soon as site civil construction allows, installation of the GE modules and related facilities, the LNG Facilities, the new substation and distribution line (with SCADA communications) will proceed (along with related mechanical and electrical contract work) with planned completion by October 2014. Initial LNG deliveries will occur at the end of these activities.

 Commissioning – Commissioning is planned as soon as feasible in October/November so that in-service operation can commence in November/December 2014 for the first two GE modules and all of the LNG Facilities. Commissioning work is likely to be done in segments based upon the construction schedule, and the need to have LNG Facilities commissioined prior to start of engine module commissioning. Decommissioning of the WD1 and WD2 units is planned to occur when feasible after the engine modules are in-service.

6.4.3 Operations and Maintenance Phase

Facility Operations

Operation of the facility may only commence with approval of the Chief Operating Officer pursuant to Part 4 of the Gas Processing Plant Regulation. An application for operation approval must include a report containing the results of pressure testing of the LNG facility, and the following manuals and programs

Chapter 6 Page 6-30 Project Description Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013 with provisions as specified in Part 4 of the Regulation: an operating and maintenance manual, an emergency precudures manual, a staffing plan, a training program.

LNG Deliveries and Operation of the Generation Modules

Project LNG delivery requirements for the WTGS will vary widely between seasons and years depending on grid loads and water availability for grid hydro generation (see Section 5.3.8 for background information).

Based on long-term average hydro generation and LNG requirements (assuming 40% fuel conversion efficiency) with Base Case forecast grid loads, annual average LNG requirements would range from 32 m3/day in 2015 to 47 m3/day in 2016; assuming 95 cubic metres per A-Train delivery, this implies 2.4 to 3.5 deliveries per week. These forecasts suggest average annual LNG deliveries well below the maximum capacity requirements based on 8.8 MW of installed gas-fired generation (about 83 m3/day) or 13.1 MW of installed gas-fired generation (about 124 m3/day).

Even with long-term average water flows, thermal generation varies greatly by season, i.e., from late May to late October (about five months) very low expected thermal generation (if any) would be expected on a long-term average basis. Accordingly, using long-term average hydro assumptions, LNG deliveries per week might be almost double the above average annual estimates during peak winter months and minimal at best from late May to late October. Further, actual LNG requirements will vary greatly between different years depending on water availability.

 Out of 28 water years of record, 5 years (18%) would have high water availability such that thermal generation requirements would be only 3% to 19% of the long-term average.

 Conversely, 5 of the 28 years (18%) would have low water availability (e.g., drought) such that thermal generation requirements would be 2 to more than 3 times the long-term average.

Inspection & Maintenance of Facilities

During operations, inspection and maintenance of facilities will be undertaken in accordance with provisions of CSA - Z276 (LNG) – Production, Storage and Handling (2011) standard and Part 4 of the Yukon Oil and Gas Act, Gas Processing Plant Regulation, including conduct of a complete annual inspection of the facility to determine whether it is in compliance with the Regulation, the conditions of the licence and the directions of the Chief Operation Officer and submission of a report to the Chief Operating Officer.

Records and Reporting

Records will be maintained in compliance with the requirements of CSA-Z276, the Oil and Gas Licence Administration Regulation and Part 6 of the Gas Processing Plant Regulation.

Access Road & Transmission Line Maintenance

Present contracts to clear and maintain the existing access road network will be expanded to include the new access road to the proposed facility.

Chapter 6 Page 6-31 Project Description Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Distribution lines are visually inspected on an ongoing basis by operations and engineering staff. Formal inspections of the above ground portions of the additional line will be made annually by staff. Routine maintenance of the distribution line hardware and brushing of the area (if required) will be added to the existing maintenance activities by Yukon Energy staff and contractors.

6.5 PROJECT COSTING

Estimated Yukon Energy capital cost for the initial Project associated with the first two gas fired units and work to completed prior to the end of 2014 is $34.4 million. This includes the LNG truck offloading, provision for four LNG storage tanks with a total of 8 days storage, LNG vapourization facilities and interconnecting piping and the two gas engines. This works out to $3.8 million per MW. Of that total, $2.7 million (8%) is allocated for planning and regulatory costs, $13.6 million (39%) is allocated to generation equipment and site development, $7.9 million (23%) is allocated to LNG storage equipment and site development, $2.5 million (7%) for grid connection costs and the remaining $6.2 million (18%) is for engineering services and owner’s construction costs. An additional $1.4 million (4%) of the Project costs is set aside for the removal of the two retiring diesel units (WD1 and WD2).

These costs are preliminary estimates based on preliminary quotes and preliminary engineering estimates.

As noted in Section 6.1, an estimated capital cost of $4.4 million (2013$) has been provided for the third natural gas-fired unit, which is anticipated to be installed within a few years after the first two units are in service. Yukon Energy does not at this time have firm pricing for the third GE natural gas-fired generating unit - the $4.4 million estimate is the best available information at this time.

6.6 TECHNOLOGIES

The proposed Project will be built using conventional construction technologies suited for northern climate conditions, and following all applicable construction and design practices for works of this nature, including building and electrical codes and adhering to industry best practices. The technologies employed in the Project for the LNG Facilities and the GE J624 modular gas-fired engines are industry standard in all material respects and proven in northern climate conditions. The Project will also adhere to all applicable national and territorial standards used in the design of all Project components

Stringent standards and regulations for design, construction and operation for LNG transport, storage and vapourizaton facilities have develped over the last 40 years to prevent accidents and minimize the adverse impacts of events. LNG facilities must meet all standards, codes and regulations enforced by federal, provincial/ territorial or municipal jurisdictions, including the following:

 Yukon Gas Processing Plant Regulation will apply to ensure that gas processing facilities in Yukon are designed, constructed and operated safely.

 The Canadian Standards Association has established the essential requirements and minimum standards for design, installation and safe operation of LNG facilities in CSA Z276-11 – Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) – Production, Storage and Handling .

Chapter 6 Page 6-32 Project Description Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

 Potential issues regarding safety of LNG have also been identified and addressed in various US codes that have been developed by the NFPA and under the Uniform Fire Code.

 The LNG industry also follows additional codes, rules, regulations and standards established by organizations such as the Society of International Gas Tanker and Terminal Operators, the Gas Processors Association and the NFPA.

The following is a list of typical standards and associations with design manuals/guidelines for the elements included in the Project:

 CSA-Z276 (LNG) – Production, Storage and Handling (2011)

 NFPA 59A Standard for Production, Storage and Handling of Liquefied Natural Gas

 NFPA 57 Standard for Liquefied Natural Gas Vehicular Fuel Systems

 NFPR 52 Vehicular Gaseous Fuel Systems Code

 CSA B51 – Pressure Vessel and Pressure Piping Code

 CSA B149.1 – Propane and Natural Gas Installation Code

 ASME B31.3 – Process Piping

 ASME Boiler and pressure Vessel Code (PBVC)

 CSA C22.1 – Canadian Electrical Code (CEC)

 CSA Z462-12 – Workplace Electrical Safety

 National Fire Code of Canada

 National Building Code of Canada (NBC) Canada Standards Association (CSA) A23.3 - Design of Concrete Structures

 American National Standards Institute (ANSI)

 Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE)

 Alberta Electric Utility Code, 3rd Edition, 2007

 American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM)

 Canadian Electrical Manufacturers Association (CEMA)

 National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA)

 National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 24: Standard for the Installation of Private Fire Service Mains and their Appurtenances (2013 Edition)

 American Concrete Institute (ACI)

 Steel Plate Fabricators Association - Welded Steel Pipe

Chapter 6 Page 6-33 Project Description Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

6.7 GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC ELEMENTS OF THE PROJECT

The Project concept for the construction phase and the operations and maintenance phase comprises a number of elements incorporated into the design based on environmental and socio-economic considerations.

6.7.1 Fuel & Hazardous Material Management

Construction

During construction risk of spills, containment and response are appropriately addressed by standard environmental protection practices, as described in Yukon Energy’s Whitehorse Hydro/ Diesel/ Substation Spill Response Plan (See Appendix 6A). As part of permitting and in advance of commissioning, Yukon Energy will update its existing spills management plan to include the new LNG facilities and equipment. Yukon Energy also requires its contractors to have an emergency response plan in place that is consistent with Yukon Energy’s Whitehorse Hydro/ Diesel/ Substation Spill Response Plan. Contractors will be required to produce a spills management plan that meets or exceeds Yukon Energy’s plan. Spill containment materials will be kept onsite.

Operation and Maintenance

LNG is natural gas cooled to an extremely cold temperature (approx. -162.2°C) when it turns into a liquid. The principal constituents of LNG (methane, ethane and propane) are not considered to be toxic and consequently there are no significant environmental health hazards associated with the accidental release of LNG. It is a colourless, odourless, non-corrosive, non-toxic, non-flammable cryogenic liquid at normal atmospheric pressure32. Health risks related to methane, ethane and propane relate to the fact that they are considered simple asphyxiants and can displace oxygen in a closed environmental. Other specific health and safety hazards related to LNG may result from its cryogenic temperature, flammability and vapour dispersion characteristics, and in addition to risk of asphyxiation, may include cryogenic burns and risk of fire/ explosion.

Activities during the operation phase (to the extent not already addressed by Yukon Energy’s existing standard environmental protection practices as included in Yukon Energy’s Whitehorse Hydro/ Diesel/ Substation Spill Response Plan) will meet the requirements of CSA - Z276 (LNG) – Production, Storage and Handling (2011) standard, the Yukon Oil and Gas Act, Gas Processing Plant Regulation and any other relevant standards or codes. Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System, as well as storage and handling requirements, will be applied in compliance with the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act to ensure workplace safety. Special waste regulations will be followed in accordance with the Environment Act.

6.7.2 Oil Spill Prevention and Containment

Possible, permanent equipment will be specified to be oil free. Alternatively, equipment will be designed to minimize the volume of oil it contains. Permanent equipment that must be filled with oil will be equipped with a containment system or provided with secondary containment.

32 YESAB Project Number 2013-0009 YESAB DO Report, page 37-40.

Chapter 6 Page 6-34 Project Description Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

6.7.3 Slope Protection and Drainage

Yukon Energy will follow standard best management practices and mitigation measures including provisions of Yukon Energy’s Environmental Management System Manual (EMS) and any requirements YG and/or City of Whitehorse have for storm water conveyance and controls on developed sites.

6.7.4 Emergencies, Accidents & Malfunctions

Yukon Energy will adhere to and exceed codes and standards set by the industry and regulators regarding LNG storage and transfer, such as CSA Standard Z276-11, applicable fire prevention codes, and any requirements in the Yukon Gas Processing Plant Regulation. Equipment will meet or exceed safety and industry standards.

Further detail on how emergencies, accidents and malfunctions will be addressed during Project construction and operation phases is provided in Chapter 7, Section 7.6.

6.7.5 Air Monitoring Parameters

Yukon Energy’s use and reliance on its thermal generation facilities is constrained by the terms and conditions of its Air Emissions Permit, as well as the requirements of relevant legislation that applies to the Project, including the Environment Act and the Air Emissions Regulations. The current Air Emissions Permit for the WTGS (and all other diesel generation facilities) expires as at December 31, 2014. Accordingly, this Project Proposal includes information as required to conduct a YESAA review of the associated air emissions activities for operation of the WGTS as modernized with up to three new gas- fired generating units.

The existing legal and regulatory context that applies to the operation of the WTGS is summarized in Appendix 8A.

6.7.6 Work Force Requirements

During construction it is estimated that there will be approximately 20 – 30 people employed with a maximum of 40 at any time. There will be approximately 10 workers on the site for construction associated with the generators, 5 to 10 workers associated with connection of the generators to the grid and 10 - 20 workers that will complete civil construction.

Staffing needs for the operations phase of the Project have yet to be confirmed, but will depend on and reflect the new Yukon Gas Processing Plant Regulation requirements.

6.7.7 Worker Safety and Environmental Briefings

Yukon Energy Corporation recognizes the responsibilities for health and safety are shared and accepts the responsibility of leadership of the health and safety program, for its effectiveness and improvement and for providing the safeguards required to ensure safe operations. In fulfilling this commitment to protect both people and property, management will provide and maintain a safe and healthy work environment in accordance with industry standards and in compliance with legislative requirements. Yukon Energy will

Chapter 6 Page 6-35 Project Description Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013 strive to eliminate any foreseeable hazards that may result in property damage, accidents, and/or personal injury/illness.

On every Project, all workers are given the necessary instruction and training to complete the tasks. Workers are adequately supervised while taking into account the nature of the work and the abilities of the workers. They will be provided with a list of emergency response plans and reporting protocols, and specific information on waste management practices to be utilized during the construction phase of the Project, including all liquid and solid wastes generated. All personnel will be required to undertake awareness training focusing on the Health, Safety, and Environmental (HS&E) Work Plans. Routine auditing of performance against HS&E requirements will be undertaken by contractors and independently by Yukon Energy during the construction phase. Operational HS&E Plans and Procedures will be developed for the Project in advance of taking initial fuel delivery and commissioning of the Project.

The Corporation’s internal responsibility system for health, safety and environmental management is naturally extended to contractors and consultants. A part of all site activities contractors will be required to comply with the HS&E Work Plans developed for the Project. Yukon Energy Corporation expects contractors and consultants to accept their responsibility to ensure that Project work is performed in a safe manner, and that it is in compliance with the Yukon’s Occupational Health and Safety Act, the Yukon’s Health and Safety Regulations and any other applicable territorial and/or federal laws or any other industry-specific requirements that may apply.

Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System as well as storage and handling requirements will be applied in compliance with the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act to ensure workplace safety. Special waste regulations will be followed in accordance with the Environment Act.

Chapter 6 Page 6-36 Project Description

CHAPTER 7 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC EFFECTS ASSESSMENT

Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

7.0 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC EFFECTS ASSESSMENT

Chapter 7 provides an assessment of the effects of the Project, focusing on the following:

 Overview of Approach;

 Identification and Selection of Valued Components (VCs);

 Assessment of Environmental Effects;

 Assessment of Socio-Economic Effects;

 Effects of the Environment on the Project; and

 Accidents and Malfunctions.

7.1 OVERVIEW OF APPROACH

This chapter provides an assessment of the environmental and socio-economic effects of the Project to determine whether, after the implementation of mitigation measures, the Project is likely to result in significant adverse residual effects (including significant adverse cumulative effects) on identified VCs. The effects assessment builds on the framework established in earlier chapters, including:

 The assessment approach as reviewed in Chapter 3;

 The public consultation and involvement program as described in Chapter 4;

 The results of an environmental and socio-economic setting provided in Chapter 5; and

 The Project Description as discussed in Chapter 6.

In accordance with environmental assessment practice, the assessment of the Project focuses on effects of the Project that are considered “likely” to occur, as well as detail on accidents and malfunctions that are not considered likely to occur but are required to be considered in the assessment. Both beneficial and adverse environmental and socio-economic effects are considered, where appropriate.

Based on the approach set out in Chapter 3, the expected effects of Project activities are assessed for each environmental and socio-economic VC, focusing initially on the expected geographic extent, duration and magnitude of each effect.

The closure and decommissioning phase has been excluded from the assessment due to the long operational horizon for the Project (up to 40 years) and the expectation that the facilities will continue (after replacements as required at that time) to be used in the future rather than be decommissioned.

The Project effects for any environmental or socio-economic VC may fall within three distinct geographic areas and for the purpose of assessment their significance, as regards geographic extent of the Project's effects, may be measured as low, medium or high based on the following described geographic ranges:

 Project Construction Footprint (Low Geographic Extent) - This describes the footprint areas needed for the Project construction and operation. Most of the Project effects during

Chapter 7 Page 7-1 Environmental and Socio-Economic Effects Assessment Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

construction are confined to the Project Construction Footprint and stem from the actual physical work performed during construction, as well as the physical presence of the Project infrastructure.

 Project Study Area (Moderate Geographic Extent) - This describes the broader Project Study Area for examining environmental and socio-economic effects occurring throughout the area, and is defined as a 500 metre radius surrounding the Project Construction Footprint. Most adverse socio-economic effects that extend beyond the Project Construction Footprint will occur within the Project Study Area.

 Beyond the Project Study Area (High Geographic Extent) - This is the area beyond the Project Study Area that covers the entire Yukon Territory. Certain positive socio-economic effects are expected to extend to this broader region (e.g., ratepayer cost savings), or at least to areas within Whitehorse beyond the Project Study Area (e.g., reduced noise effects, reduced greenhouse gas and particulate emissions effects). The assessment examines the extent to which any adverse effects of the Project extend within Whitehorse beyond the Project Study Area.

Three broad categories are considered for the duration of effects related to Project activities for the purpose of assessing significance of effects within any of the above three geographic areas:

 Short-term effects (low duration) - Tend to last not much longer than the specific construction, operations or maintenance activities undertaken. These effects are related to the construction activities of the Project Construction Footprint (e.g., clearing, excavating, construction of new facilities).

 Medium-Term effects (moderate duration) - Tend to be related to secondary effects of the new facilities and operating regime, where these changes induce a period of adaptation or reestablishment of ecosystem components. There are no medium-term effects arising from the Project.

 Long-term effects (high duration) - Tend to be related to the on-going existence of new Project components in the Project Construction Footprint, and to the operation of the Project components. For the purposes of assessing significance of effects, long-term effects are considered to be of high duration.

Within the context of the above geographic area and duration categories, three categories for the magnitude of effects (size of the effect, level of detectability or acceptability) are considered for the purposes of assessing the significance of effects related to Project activities:

 Low magnitude effects - No definable or measurable effect. Effect is within the range of natural/ historic variation, and is below thresholds of acceptable change, where thresholds have been established.

 Moderate magnitude effects - Effect is slightly outside the range of natural / historic variation, and is below thresholds of acceptable change, where thresholds have been established, and overall VC is still sustainable.

 High magnitude effects - Effect is above established thresholds of acceptable change or extends beyond the range of natural / historic variation, and the VC sustainability is threatened.

Chapter 7 Page 7-2 Environmental and Socio-Economic Effects Assessment Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Significance for the Project’s effects on any VC is determined using the approach and criteria set out in Chapter 3 based on scientific analysis of ecosystem effects including traditional and local knowledge, socio-economic research and professional judgment. Where required, limitations or uncertainty in the information base about potential effects on VCs are addressed further in Chapter 8 Monitoring and Follow-Up Programs.

7.2 IDENTIFICATION AND SELECTION OF VALUED COMPONENTS

As discussed in Chapter 3, a VC based approach is intended to ensure that potential significant adverse effects to important environmental and social components will be detected and mitigated through the assessment process. The Yukon Environmental and Socio-Economic Assessment Board (YESAB) Guides provide considerable guidance for scoping of VCs. Consistent with the YESAB Guides, VCs for this assessment were identified based on the following considerations:

 Focal species and habitat (e.g. defining landscape attributes required to meet the needs of biota, and also the management regimes that should be applied to them);

 Socio-economic context (e.g. component recognized as being important because of its integral connection to, or reflection of, the socio-economic system; commercial or economic value; and/or its role in maintaining quality of life in a community);

 Representation (i.e., seeking to maintain an appropriate representation of ecosystem networks and populations on the landscape over time, while recognizing and managing for natural temporal fluctuations in composition, distribution and abundance that occur);

 Special elements (e.g., rare or under-represented ecosystems, rare and/or threatened flora or fauna species, species listed under the Species at Risk Act (SARA) or considered for listing based on Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) recommendation, important harvested species, and unique landforms);

 Ecological processes (processes of social or environmental importance); and

 First Nation/Resident/Community values or concerns.

The selection of VCs helped to focus the assessment on components deemed to be of particular importance or of special interest to residents or to the ecosystem. The VC selection process also helped to define and describe effects pathways, and to identify temporal and spatial boundaries for the assessment of Project effects.

In this assessment, the analysis focuses on those environmental and socio-economic components that may potentially be affected by the Project. As such, the VCs selected for this assessment must be valued in environmental or socio-economic terms, and have some connection to or overlap with the Project that could create a pathway for effects to occur. VCs were identified through:

 Consideration of the Project Description (as described in Chapter 6) and likely pathways of effect on the environmental and socio-economic setting (as described in Chapter 5);

 Consideration of the environmental and socio-economic setting, including studies undertaken on the terrestrial and aquatic environments; heritage resources studies; socio-economic fieldwork

Chapter 7 Page 7-3 Environmental and Socio-Economic Effects Assessment Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

and data collection; a consideration of traditional knowledge (TK) and local knowledge and plans and policies applicable to the Project Study Region; and

 Consultation with interested parties (as described in Chapter 4).

As reviewed in Chapter 3 (Section 3.3.1), Project effects on baseline VC conditions are predicted separately for each environmental and socio-economic VC by comparing (a) “what would be expected without the Project” (the baseline), and (b) “what would be expected with the Project”.

7.3 ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS

Assessment of Project effects and mitigation measures were conducted with regard to the following environmental VCs:

 Vegetation Diversity; and

 Wildlife Diversity and Habitat.

This section provides background on the selection of the environmental VCs and the assessment of impacts.

7.3.1 Selection of Environmental Valued Components

This section provides a description of the process of establishing the environmental values used to determine the VCs to be carried forward and considered in the effects assessment.

Environmental values initially considered include aspects of both the aquatic and terrestrial environment that are of relevance in the Project Study Area and that theoretically could be affected by the Project. The environmental interests that were initially considered in the VC selection process and potential Project effect pathways are outlined in Table 7-1.

Chapter 7 Page 7-4 Environmental and Socio-Economic Effects Assessment Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Table 7-1: Environmental Interests Initially Considered in VC Selection Process

Key Interest Identified by Potential for Concern

Soil Stability & Baseline studies; Permanent loss of soils due to short-term erosion and Quality professional sedimentation as a result of construction works judgment exposing soils (e.g., excavations, land clearing and grubbing and construction traffic).

Soil compaction due to equipment movement may alter soil structure and stability.

Surface Water Proximity of Project Change in stormwater flow, quality, quantity and Quality & Quantity to regionally patterns due to permanent impervious surfaces that significant feature alter stormwater flow or alter natural flow patterns.

Groundwater Proximity of Project Potential decrease in groundwater recharge due to soil Quality & Quantity to regionally compaction from construction equipment on site and significant feature increase in area of impermeable surfaces (access driveway and storage facility).

Fish population, Proximity of Project Changes arising from surface water conditions. Abundance, to regionally Diversity & Habitat significant feature

Vegetation Baseline studies; Permanent removal of vegetation due to land clearing Diversity professional and excavations for project. judgment Opportunity for establishment of non-native and invasive species in areas where vegetation has not successfully re-established after construction.

Wildlife Diversity & Baseline studies; Direct loss of wildlife habitat and habitat connectivity/ Habitat professional corridor function due to construction activities. judgment Disturbance of wildlife during construction due to noise, light and vibration effects.

Disturbance to nesting birds and loss of nesting habitat.

Direct loss of wildlife due to collisions caused by truck traffic to transport liquefied LNG to the storage facility.

Chapter 7 Page 7-5 Environmental and Socio-Economic Effects Assessment Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Potential Project effects pathways were identified and used to focus the assessment of environmental effects. The scope and scale of activities and availability of standard best management practices and mitigation measures were also considered to determine whether there was a pathway of effect from the Project to the identified environmental interests. As a result of this analysis of pathways and best management practices, the following interests were not selected as VCs for the reasons set out below: Soil Stability and Soil Quality and related effects on Groundwater Quality and Quantity, Surface Water Quality and Quantity, and Fish Population, Abundance, Diversity and Habitat:

 There are no anticipated effects on groundwater or drinking water supplies at the City of Whitehorse Selkirk wells or in the Riverdale area due to construction or operation of the Project as flow from the Yukon Energy property to the Selkirk wells is practically impossible.

o Municipal wells are across the hydraulic divide created by the Yukon River and consequently there is no plausible effect pathway from the Project to municipal supply wells.

o The area within 300 metres down gradient of the Project site (i.e., following the direction of groundwater flow) was considered as a potential zone for contamination1. The nearest sensitive receptor to the Project Construction Footprint is the Yukon Energy offices well (located approximately 360 metres at the closest point to the Project site). This is beyond the radius of any potential contamination from a major spill during construction or operations.

o It is noted that existing operation of the Whitehorse Rapids Generating Facility includes bulk diesel fuel storage, handling of multiple light vehicles and deliveries of diesel fuel to the Whitehorse Thermal Generating Station and risks related to spills or leaks on site are presently managed under the Spill Response Plan established by Yukon Energy (see Appendix 6B). A reduction in diesel fuel deliveries to the Whitehorse Thermal Generating Facility will reduce potential for spills or leaks in areas closer to potential wells.

 The Expanded Site Area is approximately 40 metres from the water within the power canal and the utility trench is approximately 30 metres from the power canal at the closest point. The Project will not require any in stream work or disturb any riparian vegetation.

 The power canal is surrounded by a large berm to contain impounded water and this physical barrier will prevent any sediment associated with the Project from entering the Yukon River and affecting water quality, fish population, abundance, diversity and habitat.

 Due to the relatively flat terrain the risk of sedimentation due to a construction or operations is considered low. During construction there will be exposed soils from land clearing, grubbing and excavations within the Project Construction Footprint, however, as these Project activities will be of short-term duration and confined to a small spatial extent they are expected to have a

1 The 300 metre potential zone of contamination was considered based upon minimum “worst case” distance from a drinking water well provided in the Yukon Drinking Water Regulation, under the Health and Safety Act; this is the minimum distance between a water well or sewage lagoon or pit. Alberta Environmental also recommends a 300 metre setback from a PHC contaminated site to eliminate consideration of the Aquatic Life Protection Pathway, i.e., the transport of PHC from a soil source through groundwater to an adjacent surface water body.

Chapter 7 Page 7-6 Environmental and Socio-Economic Effects Assessment Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

negligible effect related to erosion and sedimentation when standard best management practices and mitigation measures are considered.

 Best management practices for erosion and sediment will reduce sedimentation and erosion impacts to surface water quality and quantity on the local landscape from exposed soils and include the following:

o Minimizing the area and disturbance within the Project Construction Footprint to the extent possible. In particular, fencing will be installed at the perimeter of the construction area to avoid causing excessive damage and disturbance to the vegetative mat. Re- vegetation and stabilization measures will be completed within one year of cessation of construction activities.

o Excavated material will be stored more than 10 metres from waterways and kept in stable condition until final disposal or use on site.

o Stormwater will be managed to address the effect of reduced infiltration on the site; the Project design incorporates a stormwater pond for retention and infiltration. The pond will be constructed early in the Construction phase of the Project to manage runoff during Construction as well as throughout Operation of the Project and will also provide additional containment for potential contamination related to leaks or spills associated with construction equipment and machinery on site. Existing ditches along Miles Canyon Road will also be used to manage and direct the flow of water within the Project Construction Footprint.

o Water will be directed to the stormwater pond and/or ditches using methods such as silt fencing and additional ditching. The pond and drainage ditches will allow groundwater recharge as well as settling of any sediment.

o The final grade within the Project Construction Footprint will be positively graded to direct surface water from impermeable surfaces (asphalt access road, concrete pads, for storage areas and modules, etc) to the stormwater pond.

 Excavations within Project Construction Footprint will be to a maximum depth of 4 metres, and for construction of the utility trench, pipe burial depth will be above the water table. Based on sampling results from piezometres established by Yukon Energy along Miles Canyon Road, groundwater at the Whitehorse Rapids Generating Facility is typically 4 to 5 metres below the surface along the power canal As such, it is not expected that groundwater intrusion will be an issue during construction or operation of the Project. However, in the event groundwater is encountered it will be pumped from the excavation site into the stormwater pond or ditches along Robert Service Way and Miles Canyon Road. The use of drainage ditches will remove the risk associated with degrading surface water quality and manage surface water volumes.

 Concrete poured on site during construction to establish foundations for the new modular equipment will be undertaken in such a way that contamination of the aquatic environment is avoided.

Chapter 7 Page 7-7 Environmental and Socio-Economic Effects Assessment Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

 Potential negative effects from contaminants entering the environment (including surface water features) associated with leaks or spills from equipment and machinery will be mitigated through application of standard best practices for equipment maintenance and repairs, as well as through the development of a spill management plan. All construction contractors will be required to provide spill management plans that meet or exceed the existing plan implemented by Yukon Energy at the Whitehorse Rapids Generating Station or otherwise follow Yukon Energy’s plan. Mitigation and assessment of potential leaks, spills or other accidents and malfunctions within the Project Construction Footprint during Construction and Operation phases of the Project are addressed in further detail in Section 7.6 (Accidents and Malfunctions).

 During construction and operations all waste generated on site will be classified and handled appropriately as per the Environment Act and Special Waste Regulation. Throughout the Construction and Operation phases of the Project, wastes will be diverted from the landfill to the extent possible.

A pathway of effect was determined for Vegetation Diversity and Wildlife Diversity related to the permanent removal of vegetation arising from clearing, excavation and construction activities on the Expanded Site Area. This includes disturbances to nesting birds and loss of nesting habitat within the Expanded Site Area and disturbance to wildlife and loss of wildlife in the Vicinity of the Expanded Site Area due to construction vehicle traffic and other activities. These effects are assessed in Section 7.3.2.

7.3.2 Assessment of Effects on Environmental Valued Components

This section provides assessment of Project effects and mitigation measures with regard to the following environmental VCs:

 Vegetation Diversity; and

 Wildlife Diversity and Habitat.

7.3.2.1 Vegetation Diversity

The Expanded Site Area (approximately 1.6 ha) is vegetated and will require clearing prior to construction activities being undertaken. Other construction activities will occur within or along the existing road network within the Project Construction Footprint. During Construction there is potential for dust generation, including dust or mud tracked onto the Project Construction Footprint by construction vehicles via on-site access roads and along Robert Service Way.

The Project Study Area is part of a highly fragmented ecosystem that includes several anthropogenic land uses including roads (Robert Service Way and Miles Canyon Road), the White Pass and Yukon Route (WP&YR) railway, recreational features and activities, drainage features, and utility infrastructure (the Whitehorse Rapids Generation Station and associated transmission lines).

The removal of vegetation within the Expanded Site Area has an extremely low likelihood of reducing the integrity of the Willow-shrub Birch Ecosystem as the area for removal is isolated as a result of the transportation and other infrastructure. Construction activities related to the installation of the Utility Trench will follow the existing road network connecting the Expanded Site Area to the existing Whitehorse Thermal Generating Facility and no impacts to native vegetation communities are anticipated.

Chapter 7 Page 7-8 Environmental and Socio-Economic Effects Assessment Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Appropriate measures will be undertaken to reduce dust production (e.g., sweeping and spraying access roads with water if dust generation is persistent) which will minimize impacts from dustfall on vegetation in the areas surrounding onsite construction activities. Implementation of standard best practices for introduction of invasive species, including containment of disturbance to the Project Construction Footprint, regular washing of construction equipment and prompt re-vegetation (within 1 year) of areas left unpaved will mitigate risks of invasive species introduction.

Re-vegetation and stabilization measures will be completed within one year of cessation of construction activities.

Considering the existing disturbed environment, and with the application of mitigation measures described, residual adverse effects of the Project during construction are expected to be moderate in magnitude, confined to the Project Construction Footprint (low in extent), of short-term duration and overall not significant. During operations residual adverse effects of the Project after mitigation are expected to be small in magnitude, within the Project Construction Footprint (low in extent) and of long- term duration and overall not significant.

There are no projects of relevance to cumulative effects assessment on this VC.

7.3.2.2 Wildlife Diversity and Habitat

During construction of the Project approximately 1.6 ha of area will be cleared within the Expanded Site Area. Potential adverse effects may result due to removal of avian and other wildlife habitat due to clearing and excavation activities within the Expanded Site Area, and disturbance of wildlife during construction (i.e., light, noise and vehicle traffic). During construction and operation of the Project there is also potential for wildlife mortality due to vehicle collisions.

The Project Study Area is fragmented and disturbed due to various anthropogenic sources and activities including vehicle traffic along Robert Service Way and Miles Canyon Road, the presence of, and operational activities associated with, the Whitehorse Rapids Generating Station, other infrastructure (i.e., the airport), residential areas (e.g., Riverdale) and recreational activities. Due to existing anthropogenic disturbances and the character of the Project Study Area, it is very unlikely that it represents regionally important habitat for any particular species or species population, including any Species at Risk.

Best practices will be followed to protect species on site. In particular, to prevent disturbance or destruction of active bird nests (nests with eggs or young birds) for species protected under the Migratory Birds Convention Act to the extent feasible land clearing will occur outside the breeding bird season (May 1 to July 15). Where clearing is unavoidable during the period from May 1 to July 15, a nest survey will be completed by a qualified avian biologist two days prior to clearing to identify and locate active nests. If nests are observed, an appropriate buffer zone for the species will be marked around the nest and access will be restricted until the fledglings have left the nest.

During construction, the incremental increase in vehicle traffic related to the Project along the Alaska Highway and Robert Service Way will be minimal relative to existing volumes. The Project Construction Footprint is not located on a major wildlife migration corridor for non-avian wildlife, materially reducing the potential for wildlife collisions. Potential for vehicle collisions with wildlife will be minimized through

Chapter 7 Page 7-9 Environmental and Socio-Economic Effects Assessment Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013 observance of safe driving procedures for Yukon Energy employees and for construction contractors. The presence of temporary fencing around the Project Construction Footprint during construction will also minimize potential wildlife collisions and encounters. During operations, the incremental increase in vehicle traffic along the Alaska Highway and Robert Service Way related to Project activities will be minimal, with two to four trucks per week during normal operations2. Permanent fencing around the Project Construction Footprint during operations will exclude wildlife and further minimize potential for wildlife collisions and encounters.

Limited effects of noise and lighting on wildlife are possible somewhat beyond the Project Construction Footprint, with project design elements as set out below (in the sections on Socio-Economic Assessment), are expected to have minimal to no effect on wildlife.

Considering the existing disturbed environment, and with the application of mitigation measures described, residual adverse effects during construction are expected to be moderate in magnitude, confined to the Project Construction Footprint (low in extent), of short to medium term duration and overall not significant. During operations residual adverse effects after mitigation are expected to be small magnitude, within the Project Construction Footprint (low in extent) and of long-term duration and overall not significant.

There are no projects of relevance to cumulative effects assessment on this VC.

7.3.2.3 Summary Conclusions

Table 7-2 provides a summary of the potential Project effects and Significance Assessment on the above Aquatic and Terrestrial VCs.

2 Reflect long-term average thermal generation requirements in the next few years with Base Case loads, and A-Train haul trailers for LNG (with 95 m3 net capacity versus only 54 m3 net capacity with Tridem trailers). Under maximum engine capacity requirements (8.8 MW to 13.1 MW), truck deliveries could range between approximately 6 and 9 vehicles per week. Under high water conditions and/or summer season conditions, truck deliveries could be minimal (if at all) on a weekly basis. Incremental effects of the Project, however, remain minimal so long as continued operation of the WTGS is assumed, i.e., if diesel thermal generation was retained rather than conversion to LNG and gas-fired units, roughly equivalent truck volumes of diesel would be required as compared to the LNG volumes delivered with the assumed A-Train units.

Chapter 7 Page 7-10 Environmental and Socio-Economic Effects Assessment Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Table 7-2: Summary of Potential Project Effects and Significance Assessment on Aquatic and Terrestrial Valued Components VC adversely affected by the Residual Adverse Effect Determination of Significance Project Vegetation Impacts due to removal of vegetation Construction Diversity within the Project Construction Moderate magnitude, low extent and short- Footprint. term duration. (-) Not Significant

Operation Small magnitude, low extent and long-term duration. (-) Not Significant

Wildlife Diversity Impacts due to sensory disturbance Construction and Habitat and loss of habitat due to removal of Moderate magnitude, low extent and short- vegetation within the Project term duration. Construction Footprint; impacts due (-) Not Significant to vehicle collisions with wildlife. Operation Small magnitude, low extent and long-term duration. (-) Not Significant

7.4 ASSESSMENT OF SOCIO-ECONOMIC EFFECTS

Assessment of Project effects and mitigation measures were conducted with regard to the following socio-economic VCs:

 Recreation

 Human Health (dust, emissions, noise)

 Aesthetic Quality

 Transportation

 Economy (business and employment)

 Utility Ratepayers

This section provides background on the selection of the socio-economic VCs and the assessment of impacts.

Chapter 7 Page 7-11 Environmental and Socio-Economic Effects Assessment Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

7.4.1 Selection of Socio-economic Valued Components

This section provides a description of the Socio-economic values that were considered in the effects assessment to be of particular concern to individuals and communities in the region and that may potentially be affected by the Project.

Socio-economic interests initially considered in the VC selection process are outlined in Table 7-3.

Table 7-3: Socio-Economic Interests Initially Considered in VC Selection Process

Key Interest Identified by Potential for Concern

Recreation Baseline Project involves occupation of lands presently used at times for information recreation activities.

Land Use Professional Utility activities are a specific form of land use in Yukon judgment municipal land use planning.

Human Health Concern expressed Thermal generating units produce noise and emissions or air (dust, in consultation. contaminants when operating. emissions, Professional noise) judgment

Aesthetic Professional The Project is located adjacent to Robert Service Way at an Quality judgment; entry point to the City of Whitehorse.

Concern expressed in consultation.

Transportation Concern expressed Project will involve trucked delivery of goods during both in consultation. construction and operating phases.

Economy Interest/concern Project provides opportunities for businesses, employment. (business and expressed in employment) consultation.

Utility Concern expressed LNG requires new capital spending, with lower operating costs Ratepayers in consultation than diesel.

Heritage Professional Disturbance of lands; Presence of WP&YR railway. Judgment

Chapter 7 Page 7-12 Environmental and Socio-Economic Effects Assessment Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Potential Project effects pathways were used to focus the assessment of socio-economic effects. The scope and scale of activities and availability of standard best management practices and mitigation measures were also considered to determine whether there was a pathway of effect from the Project to the identified socio-economic interests. As a result of this analysis of pathways and best management practices, the following interests were not selected as VCs for the reasons set out below:

Land Use and Heritage:

 The lands for the expanded site are already zoned for Utility use, so there is no impact arising from changes to land use planning arising from the project.

 The site is within an established and disrupted environment with no identified nearby archeological resources. All excavation activities will follow standard archeological resources practices as required by the Historic Resources Act and Yukon Energy’s Environmental Management System (EMS) with respect to any items uncovered.

 The WP&YR railway section to be removed is not designated as any form of heritage resource in Canada, is not used or able to be used in the present condition. Moreover, the owner of the railway has agreed to lease the property to Yukon Energy for the Project. Nearby sections of the railway have already been removed and this removal has not threatened any heritage designations that exist for the railway in the United States.

A pathway of effect was determined for the remaining six socio-economic interests in Table 7-3. These effects are assessed in Section 7.4.2 below.

Issues related to safety and the ability of emergency response services to be equipped to respond to any emergencies that may arise as a result of the Project are addressed in Section 7.6 (Accidents and Malfunctions).

7.4.2 Assessment of Effects on Socio-Economic Valued Components

This section provides an assessment of Project effects and mitigation measures with regard to the following socio-economic VCs:

 Recreation

 Human Health (dust, emissions, noise)

 Aesthetic Quality

 Transportation

 Economy (business and employment)

 Utility Ratepayers

For at least some of the socio-economic components, potential Project effects of construction, operation and maintenance can extend to all scales for the assessment (the Project Construction Footprint, the Project Study Area and the Yukon Region), reflecting the extent of, for example, employment opportunities and ratepayer effects.

Chapter 7 Page 7-13 Environmental and Socio-Economic Effects Assessment Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

7.4.2.1 Recreation

Although there are numerous recreational activities that take place in the Project Study Area, the Project will give rise to no new access limitations outside the Project Construction Footprint. Impacts arising from potential changes to noise, dust, or traffic are addressed under the appropriate VCs.

Within the Project Construction Footprint, approximately 0.5 km of the 15 km Yukon River Loop trail will be affected by the Project. At present, the first 1 km of this trail runs along Robert Service Way from the Robert Service Campground to the Project Construction Footprint area. The trail then traverses the Project Footprint area for approximately 0.5 km before connecting to Miles Canyon Road. Effectively this portion of the trail is the actual Yukon Energy access road off Robert Service Way and the Miles Canyon Road. As a result of the Project, this 0.5 km of trail will need to be re-routed to remain adjacent to Robert Service Way, before connecting again to Miles Canyon Road. Yukon Energy is in discussions with the City of Whitehorse regarding realigning this portion of the trail. Yukon Energy has included this trail relocation as part of the Project.

Construction areas will be delineated with fencing and signage to ensure that during construction any continued recreational uses in the vicinity will occur in a manner that will maintain the safety of the public and the construction staff. All access to the Project Construction Footprint will be via existing transportation routes (Robert Service Way and Miles Canyon Road) and will not disrupt the recreational uses in the surrounding area. Similarly, transport of the LNG to the facility during operations will use existing transportation routes (Alaska Highway and Robert Service Way) and will not disrupt recreational uses in the area.

Considering the limited potential effects on recreation in the area, the implementation of signage, fencing, and the re-routing of the Yukon River Loop Trail, residual adverse effects of the Project during construction are expected to be moderate in magnitude (reflecting inability to use this section of Loop trail), confined the Project Construction Footprint (low in extent), of short-term duration and overall not significant. During operations phase (long-term duration) residual adverse effects of the Project after mitigation are expected to be small magnitude (the Loop trail will be fully functional with the newly established 0.5 km re-route), within the Project Construction Footprint (low in extent) and overall not significant.

As a result of the mitigation, there are no anticipated significant residual effects on recreational use in the area as a result of the construction or operation phases.

There are no projects of relevance to cumulative effects assessment on this VC.

7.4.2.2 Human Health (Dust, Emissions, Noise)

Elements of human health that have pathways of relevance to the Project include air quality (including both dust during construction, and criteria air contaminant emissions during operations), and noise.

Dust

With respect to dust, during construction there is the potential to have sporadic or occasional episodes of increased air borne particulates as a result of exposed soils from construction activities (e.g. land

Chapter 7 Page 7-14 Environmental and Socio-Economic Effects Assessment Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013 clearing, grubbing, excavations). Standard best management practices for management of fugitive dust will be implemented as mitigation, such as sweeping or using a water spray on site access roads during construction if dust generation is persistent. The nature of this Project, with respect to expected fugitive dust emissions, is similar to many other construction projects that are completed every year within the City of Whitehorse. These projects have not caused exceedances of Yukon Ambient Air Quality Standards (YAAQS) and with appropriate mitigation it is highly unlikely that the current Project will cause such exceedances (small magnitude). In addition, any adverse effect extends only during the construction period (short duration). With appropriate mitigation the effect of the emissions is not expected to be evident outside the Project Study Area (medium extent). As such, the impacts of dust are not expected to be significant.

There are no projects of relevance to cumulative effects assessment on this VC.

Emissions

A recent air dispersion analysis was completed by SENES (2011) in support of an air permit renewal for the Whitehorse Diesel Plant. This analysis examined a range of load and unit capacity scenarios to predict air quality within the Whitehorse area. The air dispersion modeling indicated that, with the existing diesels, all air quality standards would be easily met outside the facility property boundary for all scenarios. The maximum predicted concentrations at the property boundary “maximum point of impingement” (Max POI)3 were all less than 50% of the respective Yukon Air Quality Standard for all contaminants with the exception of particulate matter (PM2.5). Very brief exceedances (a day or few days within a year) of the particulate matter standard were predicted at the Max POI for the worst case diesel generator operation scenarios, which assumed the maximum diesel that could be expected during an extreme drought.

Air emissions of the Project during operations will be dependent on the extent of future operations (energy to be generated) and will be addressed by the ongoing air emissions permitting processes. During the operations phase with the Project, when backup or peaking power is required at the Whitehorse Thermal Generating Station (WTGS), the new natural gas generators will emit air contaminants. However, it is important to keep in mind that the existing diesel engines at the WTGS, and all alternatives to the Project as reviewed in Chapter 6 (e.g., new diesel units) also generate air emissions when they are required to be run.

In summary, therefore, the impact of the Project on ambient air quality is the result of running the new natural gas engines in comparison to running new diesel engines. And for each alternative, operation will tend to reduce materially the use of other existing diesel capacity retained to meet grid capacity reliability planning requirements:

 After Project commissioning, when backup or peaking power is required, enhanced energy efficiencies and reduced fuel costs will result in the new gas engines being operated preferentially until additional capacity is required from the remaining diesel engines.

3The Maximum Point of Impingement (Max POI) is the location at which the highest concentrations of contaminants are expected to occur from Yukon Energy diesel engine emissions.

Chapter 7 Page 7-15 Environmental and Socio-Economic Effects Assessment Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

 Similarly, if the new diesel engine alternative to the gas-fired engines was to be selected, enhanced energy efficiencies will tend to result in these new diesel units also being operated preferentially until additional capacity is required from the remaining diesel engines.

The air emissions of the Project's gas-fired engines are compared to three different alternatives in Table 7-4. The rationale for each alternative is reviewed below.

For assessment of Project emissions during operation, Yukon Energy used a comparison of the performance characteristics of the proposed gas generating units (GE Jenbacher JMC624) provided by the manufacturer, with equivalent data from manufacturers of new diesel generation equipment, focused particularly on the CAT 3616, a unit of approximately similar size (4.4 MW continuous rating) from a manufacturer that provides similar unit performance data (i.e., a “not to exceed” standard for maximum expected unit emissions performance). As a cross-check, Yukon Energy also completed a comparison of diesel versus gas unit performance on the most likely alternative to the selected GE gas units (the Wartsila 6.7 MW 16V34DF). The Wartsila comparison is based on comparing the emissions criteria of a 6.7 MW dual fuel (not bi-fuel) unit in diesel operating mode versus in gas operating mode.

 The Wartsila unit data is not directly compared to the GE units selected for the Project as the specifications are not equivalent for two reasons: (1) the Wartsila units are of a much larger size than the GE gas units (6.7 MW versus 4.4 MW) and (2) Wartsila produces emissions information based on expected “indicative” performance while GE and CAT manufacturers produce emissions information based on a firm “not to exceed” standard.

 It is not possible to directly compare what are “indicative” values (Wartsila) against what are effectively “not to exceed” values (GE and CAT). For this reason GE gas values are compared against CAT diesel values, while as a cross-check Wartsila gas values are compared against Wartsila diesel values to show the relative performance of gas versus diesel.

The GE gas units are also compared to the existing units for reference; however, this comparison is not reflective of future options, as the existing units cannot be retained in service indefinitely, as reviewed in Chapter 5 and Chapter 6 (i.e., WD1 and WD2 replacement is required by no later than the end of 2015).

Chapter 7 Page 7-16 Environmental and Socio-Economic Effects Assessment Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Table 7-4: Project Air Emissions (GE 4.375 MW) as Compared to Alternatives

Air Emissions Generation Option Unit CO NOx SO2 PM10 PM2.5 VOC

Project compared to Alternatives New LNG GE 4.375 MW [kg/MWh] 4.06 1.85 0.003 0.04 0.02 0.91 New Diesel CAT 4.4 MW [kg/MWh] 0.66 11.40 n/a 0.15 n/a 0.85 Change LNG to new diesel % 516% -84% -75% 7%

Alternative Reference Point - Wartsila Natural Gas Generation versus Diesel New LNG Wartsila 6.7 MW [kg/MWh] 2.27 2.54 n/a 0.07 n/a 0.81 New Diesel Wartsila 6.7 MW [kg/MWh] 1.03 14.41 n/a 0.16 n/a 0.50 Change LNG to new diesel % 120% -82% -55% 63%

Project Compared to Existing Generation New LNG GE 4.375 MW [kg/MWh] 4.06 1.85 0.003 0.04 0.02 0.91 Existing Diesel (weighted average) [kg/MWh] 0.59 8.14 0.013 0.16 0.12 n/a Change LNG to existing diesel % 586% -77% -79% -78% -85%

Chapter 7 Page 7-17 Environmental and Socio-Economic Effects Assessment Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

With respect to the major air emissions criteria noted in the Watson Lake YESAB review of LNG generation, Yukon Energy notes the following with respect to the proposed Project based on the analysis provided in Table 7-4:

 Nitrogen Oxide (NOx), Particulate Matter (PM), Sulfur Dioxide (SO2): The YESAB

conclusions out of the Watson Lake LNG Bi-Fuel project note that with gas generation, NOx, PM

and SO2 are expected to decline. This is consistent with Yukon Energy’s expectation for the

Whitehorse Project, as set out in Table 7-4. While not all manufacturers routinely supply SO2 emissions, the new gas engines are expected to outperform diesel in general, and GE gas values show a 79% reduction per kW.h as compared to the existing fleet of diesels. In addition,

manufacturers are able to provide particulate (PM10) values, but do not generally supply specific

PM2.5 values. Wartsila was able to indicate that approximately PM2.5 would not be expected to

exceed 50% of the PM10 value. The relative relationships (a decline with the introduction of gas

generation) are expected to be similar between PM10 and PM2.5. No further assessment is completed on these emissions variables given there is no adverse impact from the Project.

 Carbon Monoxide (CO): One characteristic of natural gas generation as compared to diesel is a potential increase in CO emissions. The Watson Lake LNG Bi Fuel YESAB Report noted that despite an increase in CO emissions in Watson Lake, the overall contribution of the power generation sector to CO levels in Watson Lake, and the level of CO in Watson Lake, remain well below Yukon standards. The same conclusion exists in Whitehorse. SENES (2011) prepared a summary of air quality monitoring data for Whitehorse indicating that the background average air quality, using the conservative 98th percentile level, was less than 15% of the Yukon Standard4. When the background conditions were modeled with the maximum Yukon Energy generation applied (drought conditions), at the absolute maximum point of impingement (the fence around the Yukon Energy property), the air quality index increased to less than 19% of the Yukon standard, or an increase of 4% of the standard5. Even applying a 600% increase (6 times multiplier, per Table 7-4) to the Yukon Energy impact due to usage of natural gas generation, measured using the highest generation scenario from 2011 (drought) at the maximum point of impingement, on top of the 98th percentile background conditions, the CO values remain well below 50% of the applicable standard. For this reason, the magnitude of impacts on CO emissions are expected to be small, occurring over the operating life of the Project (long-term) and occurring at the Project Study Area scale, and are not significant.

 Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC): Emissions of VOCs from stationary utility generation engines are very low. As set out in the SENES Air Quality Assessment conducted in 2008 (see Appendix 5D), the average emissions from stationary diesel engines equal approximately 0.4 grams per MW.h, or approximately 1760 grams/hour for operating diesel units relevant to the Project scale (4.4 MW). This is less than the hourly VOC emissions from one snow machine (2148 grams/hour) or less than seven snowblowers (at 275 grams/hour). Based on manufacturers ratings, VOC emissions from natural gas utility generation will be higher than for diesel units,

4 See Appendix 5C for the 2011 Yukon Energy YESAB Proposal, SENES(2011) is included in Appendix A to that submission; background air quality at 858 µg/m3, compared to a total standard of 5800 µg/m3 using an 8-hour standard per page 35. 5 1,086.7 µg/m3 per SENES (2011) page 42.

Chapter 7 Page 7-18 Environmental and Socio-Economic Effects Assessment Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

projected at 7% increase comparing GE units to CAT. The comparative values for the Wartsila comparators is an increase of 63%.

The Watson Lake YESAB review noted a concern with respect to increases in VOC emissions. This concern was based on two factors: (1) the emissions of VOCs with respect to a bi-fuel engine (as proposed for Watson Lake) were expected to increase 7.5 times as high as with diesel, and potentially up to 2000-6000 times as high, and (2) the emissions would include notable quantities of problematic substances such as benzene, which is a carcinogen. The situation with respect to the proposed Whitehorse Project is not equivalent to the Watson Lake situation. First, the increases in VOCs expected in the Whitehorse generation are well below the scale expected at Watson Lake (7% higher than with new diesel, versus 7.5 times as high) and second the combustion in Whitehorse units will be entirely natural gas from LNG sources, not a mixture of LNG and diesel fuel as is the case in Watson Lake. Natural gas that has been through the liquefaction process has had effectively all trace contaminants, such as benzene, removed as part of the liquefaction process as benzene freezes at temperatures well above the cryogenic requirements of LNG. Any benzene in the source natural gas will have been frozen out and collected at the liquefaction stage. If this were not done the benzene would become problematic for such matters as valve operation in the LNG transportation stage. Similar effects occur on all VOC contaminants which freeze at higher temperatures than the target cryogenic temperatures.

For this reason, the magnitude of impacts on VOC emissions are small, occurring over the operating life of the Project (long-term) and occurring at the Project Study Area scale, and are not significant.

In summary, the Project's use of natural gas rather than diesel (as well as the use of new and more efficient engines compared to existing diesel units) is expected to have the following emissions effects:

 Notable positive effects by reducing air emissions related to NOx, PM, and SO2 (particulate emissions of existing diesel units were noted in the SENES 2011 dispersion analysis as the only emission from the WTGS to exceed 50% of Yukon Ambient Air Quality Standards (YAAQS) at the Max POI); and,

 Small adverse effects by increasing air emissions related to CO and VOC which, in each instance, are small in magnitude and occurring at the Project Study Area scale, and are accordingly assessed to not be significant (for the reasons set out above).

Chapter 5 (Section 5.4.2) identifies in Table 5-16 existing projects6 and activities considered in the Cumulative Effects Assessment (CEA) and in Table 5-17, future projects7 and activities considered in the CEA (i.e., projects for which project proposals to YESAB have been submitted and that are currently undergoing YESAB assessment). Effects of these projects on air quality relate primarily to dust and vehicle emissions. An air emissions permit related to emission of criteria air contaminants (such as CO or

6 Annie Lake Trucking Ltd Gravel Quarry (YESAB Registry number 2011-0129) and the Concrete Batch plant on McLean Lake Road (YESAB Registry number 2010-0228). 7 Lot 1247 McLean Lake Road (YESAB Registry number 2013-0018), the Yellow Truck Excavating Gravel Quarry (YESAB Registry number 2013-0015) and the Whitehorse Copper Tailings Reprocessing and Reclamation project (YESAB Registry number 2011- 0064).

Chapter 7 Page 7-19 Environmental and Socio-Economic Effects Assessment Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

VOCs) has not been identified as a requirement for any of these projects. Given the short-term and small magnitude of Project effects related to dust and vehicle emissions and location of other projects a distance away along the Copper Haul Road, no cumulative adverse effects are expected.

The Project is expected to result in reductions in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and as a result these emissions have not been assessed further8.

Noise

With respect to noise, the nearest residence to the Project Construction Footprint is located approximately 500 m away, across the Yukon River in Riverdale. Baseline ambient noise levels were measured over a 5-day period in October 2012 at a monitoring location in close proximity to the nearest residence to the Project Construction Footprint, during a period when the existing Yukon Energy diesel generators were not running. Background noises were dominated by local traffic, the Yukon River, wind, dog and bird noises. Airplane traffic originating from the Erik Nielsen Whitehorse International Airport (Whitehorse airport) was a significant source of transient noise, typically lasting less than 5 minutes. The average daytime and nighttime noise measurements are indicative of a quiet residential neighbourhood.

During construction there will be increased noise produced by the Project on a somewhat continual daytime basis from the use of equipment on site that will include a loader, packer, dozer, excavator and trucks for earthworks; similar equipment for underground work and for surface finishes. Construction noise mitigation to minimize adverse effects will include compliance with applicable municipal requirements for construction hours and ensuring that all equipment maintains an operational muffler. The residual noise emissions for these activities are transient (i.e. these types of noise emissions no longer exist once construction equipment is no longer in use) and will be of similar character to existing traffic noise on Robert Service Way (low rating for magnitude). Additionally, the duration of these noise emissions will be limited to the period of construction (short duration) and the impact of the noise is not expected to be evident outside the Project Study Area. As a result, construction noise impacts are not expected to be significant.

During operations there will be noise generated by the Project as a result of operating the new natural gas engines. However, it is important to keep in mind that all Project alternatives considered in Chapter 6 (e.g., new diesel) also generate noise emissions when they are required to be run. As noted in Section 2, the current Project involves decommissioning of two existing diesel engines and replacing these engines with up to three new natural gas engines. After Project commissioning, when backup or peaking power is required, the new gas engines will be operated preferentially until additional capacity is required from the remaining diesel engines. The new natural gas engines will be located nearly twice as far from the nearest residential area as the existing diesel plant, and in closer proximity to commercially and public service zoned lands that are presently largely undeveloped under the approach path to the Whitehorse airport, where noise sensitive activities do not exist and are not expected to exist.

In addition, new natural gas engines will result in lower noise emissions than the existing diesel engines and lower than new replacement diesel engines.

8 Emissions from diesel generation from the National Inventory Report (Environment Canada) average approximately 697.5 tonnes of CO2e per GW.h, while natural gas emissions from combustion equal approximately 451 tonnes of CO2e per GW.h.

Chapter 7 Page 7-20 Environmental and Socio-Economic Effects Assessment Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

As a result of all of the above factors, the Project will have a positive effect on noise levels (i.e., noise levels are expected to decrease compared to operation of the existing diesel engines or operation of new diesel engine alternatives).

The result of the above factors reflects noise net impacts during the operations phase that have a magnitude that is positive, small, long-term duration and with an effect limited to the Project Study Area. As a result, noise impacts are not expected to be significant.

7.4.2.3 Aesthetic Quality

As set out in Chapter 5, the Expanded Site Area is currently associated with a mixture of disturbed areas (drainage ditches, infiltration basins), a railway right-of-way and willow / shrub vegetation communities. During construction the visual quality will be impacted by land clearing and other construction activities, as well as the presence of equipment on the site. The majority of the Expanded Site Area, which is approximately 1.6 ha in size, will be cleared and graded.

To mitigate visual quality effects, a fence will be installed that will partially screen the view of the facility and equipment from Robert Service Way and Miles Canyon Road. A vegetation buffer approximately 10 m in width will be maintained along the perimeter of the Expanded Site Area. Landscaping will be undertaken at the end of the construction phase and will comply with relevant City of Whitehorse zoning bylaws.

Visual quality effects are not expected to extend beyond the Project Study Area, as such the geographic extent is rated moderate. The facility will be seen by travelers along Robert Service Way, recreational users, and possibly by Riverdale residents that are closest to the Project Construction Footprint.

Although the Project will result in the establishment of a permanent energy production facility on the site, the Project is consistent with City of Whitehorse Zoning for the Construction Footprint. In addition, identified mitigation measures, once fully implemented, are expected to ensure the magnitude of the visual quality effect is low.

The Project facilities to be constructed on the Expanded Site Area will be equipped with lighting for security and safety reasons; these lights may cause additional light pollution in the area. To minimize this effect, all lighting installations at the storage site will be designed and installed to be fully shielded (full cutoff) and lighting levels shall be appropriate for applicable codes and regulations. Lighting shall be directed so that light trespass beyond the perimeter fence of the site is minimized. Lighting that is not necessary from an operational, safety, or security perspective shall be extinguished when the site is unoccupied. This may be achieved through the use of motion controlled lighting and switched lighting that can be controlled at the site or remotely.

Given the mitigation measures noted above, the magnitude of residual adverse effects to local residents and users of roads from light pollution are considered low and will be limited in geographic extent to the Project Study Area. Effect duration and frequency for light generated during operations is long-term.

In summary, there are no anticipated significant adverse residual visual quality effects from construction or operations of the Project.

Chapter 7 Page 7-21 Environmental and Socio-Economic Effects Assessment Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

7.4.2.4 Transportation

During construction there will be temporary disruptions to traffic on Miles Canyon Road and possibly Robert Service Way for access of trucks to the site delivering equipment, as well as moving materials (e.g., fill, concrete). It is estimated there will be a range of anywhere from 5 to 30 trucks per day on site during the various components of the construction phase. Some of these vehicles will be making periodic material deliveries, whereas a smaller component will be present on-site for the workday (e.g., service and passenger vehicles). The magnitude of potential adverse effects to traffic flow during construction is expected to be low; disruptions are expected to be similar to that which occur for the numerous road works Projects and other construction activities that occur throughout the City of Whitehorse on a regular basis. The effect is expected to be temporary (short duration), limited in geographic extent to the Project Study Area, and as such is not considered significant.

During operations, there will be trucks accessing the Facility via the Alaska Highway, Robert Service Way, and Miles Canyon Road on "average" over a year at two to four times per week to deliver LNG (see Section 6.4.3), with deliveries typically at about double this level during peak winter months and minimal from late May to late October. In extremely high fuel usage conditions (drought) the maximum potential fuel consumption by the units is 83 m3/day (8.8 MW) to 124 m3/day (13.1 MW), which is approximately equal to 0.9 to 1.3 A Train deliveries per day, or 1.5 to 2.3 Tridem deliveries per day. As of 2011, the average daily traffic volume on the Alaska Highway was 544 (Chapter 5, Table 5-12). The addition of approximately two to four trucks per week during the operations phase (long-term), or even 0.9 to 2.3 trucks per day during extreme conditions (less than a 0.5% increase over baseline conditions), is not anticipated to cause any significant delays (low magnitude) to traffic flow on Robert Service Way or Miles Canyon Road. As a result, no likely significant adverse effects to traffic flow during Project operations are identified.

7.4.2.5 Economy (business and employment)

Of the $34.4 million estimated Project total cost, $7.9 million is associated with labour costs. During construction there will be approximately 20 to 30 people employed with a maximum of 40 at any time. There will be approximately 10 workers on the site for construction associated with the generators, 5 to 10 workers associated with connection of the generators to the grid and 10 to 20 workers that will complete civil construction. The 10 workers for civil construction will in all likelihood be hired from the local human resource pool. Specialized labour will be required for installation of the fuel storage and handling equipment as well as the natural gas generators. Some of this specialized labour may not be available in the Yukon and therefore will be sourced from outside the Territory.

All of the concrete and asphalt used for the Expanded Site Area will be locally sourced from Whitehorse producers, providing further economic stimulus to local business.

There are no anticipated residual adverse effects on employment from the construction or operation of the Project. Overall the Project is expected to result in a modest employment and business opportunity benefit within the Territory.

Chapter 7 Page 7-22 Environmental and Socio-Economic Effects Assessment Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

7.4.2.6 Utility Ratepayers

The impact of the Project on utility ratepayer costs is the forecast impact on utility capital and fuel costs that results from running the new natural gas engines in comparison to running new diesel engines.

As noted in Section 5.4.1, and the discussion of Alternatives to the Project in Section 6.2.1, deferring the replacement of the diesel units would expose all grid customers to unreliable generation capacity as well as higher O&M costs, and replacement by thermal generation units would be required in any event as soon as feasible, i.e., by late 2015 at the latest. Expected diesel generation requirements would be supplied with existing diesel units at an approved average fuel cost of 28.7 cents/kW.h, e.g., $9.0 million fuel cost for forecast 2015 grid loads.

The feasible and best alternative to the Project identified in Section 6.2.1 is to replace the old diesel units with more efficient new diesel units. However, this option would still require high cost diesel, which is environmentally and economically inefficient compared to the Project.

In summary, annual utility fuel cost savings with the Project compared to new diesel generation approximate $3.4 million/year in 2015, increasing to $4.8 million/year by 2017, assuming Base Case loads and the new engine capacities assumed above for each year. As reviewed below, these savings are far in excess of any added annual capital costs included in rates for the Project compared with the new diesel engine alternative (e.g., the added cost of $0.6 million estimated below for the year 2017 after full development of both options).

 Capital Costs: Assuming that the first new diesel unit could be installed by the end of 2014 (on an equivalent schedule to the Project), over 70% of the new annual capital costs associated with the Project would be required in any event in order to provide required capacity for the integrated grid9.

o Annual depreciation and return costs (assuming 5.45% average return on rate base) in 2017 would approximate $2.5 million with the new diesel generation and $3.1 million with the Diesel-Natural Gas Conversion Project, i.e., a difference of $0.6 million per year.

o The Project, in contrast to the new diesel engine option, includes all new facilities, new transformation, and the establishment of LNG unload, storage and vaporization infrastructure in Whitehorse.

 Fuel Cost Savings: Fuel cost savings with gas-fired versus new diesel generation are estimated at 11.1 c/kWh for equivalent thermal generation, assuming gas-fired engine fuel costs at 13.5 cents/kW.h and new diesel engine fuel costs at 24.6 cents/kW.h:

9 Project capital costs as reviewed in Chapter 6 of $34.4 million to end of 2014 (for 8.75 MW) with additional $4.4 million for third engine (4.375 MW) within a couple of years (including planning costs, new LNG unload, storage and vaporization infrastructure, new transformer capacity and demolition costs to remove WD1 and WD2), compared with new diesel generation capacity capital cost estimated at $22.5 million to end of 2014 (6.7 MW), and additional $11.1 million allowed for second engine (additional 6.7 MW) in 2015 (including all required balance of plant work and demolition costs to remove WD1 and WD2).

Chapter 7 Page 7-23 Environmental and Socio-Economic Effects Assessment Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

o Gas-fired engine fuel costs assume engine efficiency at 40%, and LNG supply from Shell Canada at Calgary (per Yukon Energy's contract with Shell and an assumed AECO gas price of $4.5 per MMBtu) using diesel powered A-Train trailers.

o Diesel engine fuel costs assume engine efficiency at 40% (4.28 kW.h/l) and current Yukon Utility Board (YUB) approved General Rate Application (GRA) diesel fuel prices at Whitehorse ($1.0513/l).

Overall, the annual net savings to Yukon ratepayers from Whitehorse Diesel-Natural Gas Conversion Project (including both fuel and capital cost impacts) relative to the new diesel alternative reviewed above are estimated at about $2.8 million in 2015, increasing to $3.6 million in 2016 and $4.2 million in 2017. The benefits of the Project would increase as load and requirements for thermal generation increase.

 To the extent loads are reduced from Base Case forecasts, savings based on long-term average diesel generation would also be reduced - and to the extent loads increase, these savings will also increase.

 Assuming that the YUB adjusts rates for this period, these savings at forecast loads will flow through to utility ratepayers throughout Yukon.

With the Project it is estimated that the required cumulative rate increase by 2017 over 2013 approved rates would therefore be lower than the best alternative with the new diesel units. Consequently, the effect of the Project on ratepayers is positive, long-term and Yukon-wide in geographic extent.

Other Benefits:

In addition to material fuel cost savings compared to diesel generation, the Project also provides the following benefits that enhance Yukon Energy’s ability to address risks and other contingency events on the integrated grid:

 Economic analysis reflects long-term average diesel and natural gas/LNG use. LNG development will also reduce ratepayer exposure to severe and periodic drought related cost risks. For example, as reviewed in Appendix 5.B, with 2016 Base Case grid loads and no LNG-based gas engine generation, in the five consecutive worst drought years (based on water flows in the 1995-99 period), Yukon Energy would be exposed to diesel generation from 77.5 to 127.4 GWh/year. Gas engine capacity at approximately 9 MW, as proposed to be installed by late 2014, will enable Yukon Energy, at 2016 Base Case load, to reduce this diesel exposure during drought years such that diesel generation would be forecast to exceed 5 GWh/year in only 2 out of 28 years, with diesel generation in those two years ranging from 25 to 59 GWh/year.

 The Project's LNG development cost savings could be enhanced to the extent that lower natural gas prices are realized than the $4.5/MMBtu assumed in Yukon Energy's analysis, arrangements are made with Shell to facilitate lower cost delivery of LNG through provision of LNG to Yukon Energy at Fort Nelson, LNG powered trucks are implemented to reduce shipping costs, or district energy heat sales are realized from LNG.

Chapter 7 Page 7-24 Environmental and Socio-Economic Effects Assessment Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

 The main risks that could reduce the above estimated cost savings from forecast loads are lower diesel fuel prices, higher natural gas price and higher than assumed Yukon Energy capital costs; in contrast, load-related risks tend to be minimal for Base Case load scenarios10.

7.4.2.7 Summary Conclusions

Table 7-5 provides a summary of the potential Project effects and Significance Assessment on the above Socio-Economic VCs.

10 The base case scenarios are conservative in that these scenarios deal largely with new generation capacity otherwise required by 2017 related to non-industrial loads, DSM/SSE assumptions that tend to be relatively high as regards near term load impacts, and energy requirements that include only currently connected mine loads plus Whitehorse Copper Tailings).

Chapter 7 Page 7-25 Environmental and Socio-Economic Effects Assessment Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Table 7-5: Summary of Potential Project Effects and Significance Assessment on Socio-Economic VCs

VC adversely affected by Residual Adverse Effect Determination of Significance the Project Recreation Loss or interference with Construction recreational value in Moderate magnitude, low geographic extent and Construction Footprint area short-term duration. due to activities during (-) Not Significant construction and presence of infrastructure during Operation operations in the Project Small magnitude, low geographic extent and long- Footprint Area. term duration. (-) Not Significant Human Health Increase in dust Construction Small magnitude, moderate geographic extent and short-term duration. (-) Not Significant

Operation Decrease in NOx, PM, SO2. Effects related to NOx, PM and SO2 are positive and long-term. Increase in combustion- Effects related to CO and VOCs are small magnitude, related air emissions (CO and moderate geographic extent and long-term duration. VOCs). (-) Not Significant

Increase in noise levels in Construction some locations. Low magnitude, moderate geographic extent and short-term duration. (-) Not Significant None - Decrease in noise Operation levels relative to existing Positive, low magnitude, moderate geographic extent and/or new diesels. and long-term duration. Aesthetic Reduction in visual quality Construction & Operation Quality Low Magnitude, Moderate Geographic Extent and Long-term duration. (-) Not Significant Light pollution Operation Low Magnitude, Moderate Geographic Extent and Long-term Duration. (-) Not Significant

Chapter 7 Page 7-26 Environmental and Socio-Economic Effects Assessment Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

VC adversely affected by Residual Adverse Effect Determination of Significance the Project Transportation Congestion Construction & Operation Low Magnitude, Moderate Geographic Extent and Long-term Duration. (-) Not Significant Economy None - residual effects are Construction positive. Positive, Large Geographic Extent and Short-term Duration.

Utility None – residual effects are Operation Ratepayers positive. Positive, Large Geographic Extent and Long-term Duration.

7.5 EFFECTS OF THE ENVIRONMENT ON THE PROJECT

In environmental assessment practice, the effect that the environment will have on the project is often considered as part of the environmental assessment and appropriate measures are applied to ensure that there will be no significant adverse effects in this regard. During the operational phase of the Project, for example, potential effects of the environment could occur as a result of seismic events or forest fires.

With respect to seismic events, the Project will be developed in accordance with standard and specified engineering practices to address the potential for seismic events to impact the facility and operations. This includes applicable standards and codes such as CSA-Z276-11, ASME B32.3, Process Piping and the National Building Code of Canada which will be reviewed and incorporated into the facility design to ensure the facility is designed to resist seismic events and prevent failure of Project components.

For forest fire risks in the vicinity of the Whitehorse Rapids Generating Station, the Project is located in an area with substantial fire barrier protection (Yukon River on the East, Robert Service Way on the west) and within Whitehorse in a location with a high degree of fire vigilance and property values ensuring the highest degree of suppression activity if required. In addition, as reviewed below under Accidents and Malfunctions, the LNG product is being established as an alternative to diesel which would have to be similarly stored on the same site, LNG is not stored under pressure, and it has very limited flammability and explosive characteristics.

7.6 ACCIDENTS AND MALFUNCTIONS

YESAA11 and the various YESAB guides require that possible accidents and malfunctions associated with components of the Project be identified as a part of the environmental and socio-economic effects

11 Section 42(1)(c) of YESAA sets out that an examination is required of the significance of environmental and socio-economic effects of the project or existing project that have occurred or might occur in or outside of the Yukon, including the effects of malfunctions or accidents.

Chapter 7 Page 7-27 Environmental and Socio-Economic Effects Assessment Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013 assessment. In this assessment, possible accidents and malfunctions with regard to the Project were considered and mitigation has been planned to be applied to ensure there are no significant adverse effects in this regard.

Accidents and malfunctions have been presented in two parts. First, the typical and well-understood accidents and malfunctions that can arise from construction activities, energy production and thermal generating sources are presented. Second, non-typical aspects of the Project in respect of the use of a new fuel to Yukon (LNG) are provided.

Typical Utility-Scope Accident and Malfunctions

During the construction and operations phases of the Project, spills of hazardous materials could occur during re-fuelling of equipment or due to failure of Project substation or utility trench components. This may include hazardous materials such as diesel fuel used for equipment, glycol components of the heat distribution system contained in the utility trench, and transformer oil. Given the scale of the Project, quantities are expected to be very small compared to Yukon Energy’s experience and overall system, and risks of spills, containment and response are appropriately addressed by standard environmental protection practices, as described in Yukon Energy’s EMS. Yukon Energy also requires its contractors to have an emergency response plan in place that is consistent with Yukon Energy’s EMS and spill response procedure.

The thermal generation components of the existing site have been designed and operated for the storage and use of thermal fuels since first commissioned, for operation up to a scale well in excess of 10 GW.h per month if needed. This exceeds the average scale forecast with the Project (approximately 30 GW.h per year in 2015). For this reason, the Project is well within the capabilities and design standards for the overall site design, site supervision, and company experience.

Safety aspects of the Project arise for both construction activities and operations. During construction, job site will be in compliance with the Yukon’s Occupational Health and Safety Act, the Yukon’s Health and Safety Regulations and any other applicable territorial or federal laws or any other industry-specific requirements that may apply. Although avoidance of all job-related accidents is impossible to guarantee, compliance with the above regulations, industry-specific requirements and Yukon Energy’s job safety training will assist in reducing the frequency and number of job-related accidents. The site will be fenced and have appropriate signage for comparable construction jobs routinely undertaken in Yukon.

Operations and maintenance of these facilities will follow Yukon Energy’s well established safety practices. Access to the property will be fenced and gated, and safety signage will be posted where necessary (see Chapter 6, Section 6.7 for further details regarding site security features).

Consideration of Accidents and Malfunctions Related to Use of New Fuel

LNG has not previously been stored, nor natural gas used as a fuel in Yukon. The Yukon context and experience with LNG is summarized in the recent YESAB Designated Office Evaluation Report on the Watson Lake Bi-Fuel Project12. That report considered the full range of health and safety impacts related

12 YESAB Project Number 2013-0009.

Chapter 7 Page 7-28 Environmental and Socio-Economic Effects Assessment Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013 to LNG “transportation storage, handling and use”13 and concluded there were the following potential effects on health and safety:

1. Risks of spills or leaks leading to fire/explosion; and

2. Risk of cryogenic burns or asphyxiation.

The report ultimately concluded that the Watson Lake Project would “not result in significant adverse effects to health and safety that would necessitate the need for additional mitigation”14 beyond that proposed by the proponent (specifically, application of non-discretionary legislation and standards and codes as listed in the Designated Office Evaluation Report, and implementation of the Proponent’s commitments)15. The Project as proposed by Yukon Energy exists within the same regulatory context as the Watson Lake Project examined and recommended by the Watson Lake Designated Office. As such, the same non-discretionary legislation and standards and codes will apply to mitigate adverse effects on health and safety due to Project-related accidents and malfunctions, including the Occupational Health and Safety Act, the Occupational Health and Safety Regulations, the Occupational Health Regulations, the Environment Act, Spills Regulations and Storage Tank Regulations.

Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System, as well as storage and handling requirements, will also be applied in compliance with the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act to ensure workplace safety. Special waste regulations will be followed in accordance with the Environment Act.

Design, construction, operation and safety standards and regulations for LNG have been made increasingly stringent over the last 40 years to prevent LNG accidents and minimize impacts should they occur. LNG facilities are also subject to numerous regulations to ensure health, safety and security of the environment and the Canadian public are protected and must meet all standards, codes and regulations enforced by federal, provincial/ territorial or municipal jurisdictions (described in Chapter 6, Section 6.6). Yukon Energy will adhere to appropriate LNG storage and transfer protocols such as CSA standard Z276- 11 as well as applicable fire prevention codes, and will use equipment that meets or exceeds the safety and industry standards making a spill or unwanted ignition highly unlikely.

Further, the following four elements of LNG facility design (as required by CSA Standard Z276-11) will also ensure containment of LNG in the unlikely event of a spill or leak and provide for protection and safety of workers at an LNG facility, as well as the surrounding community: primary containment, secondary containment, safeguard systems and separation distance16. These measures are detailed in Chapter 6, Section 6.3.2.1.

Yukon Energy’s use and reliance on the proposed Project facilities will also be constrained by the terms and conditions of required permits, as well as the requirements of relevant legislation that applies to the Project. Both CSA Z276-11 and the Yukon Gas Processing Plant Regulation prescribe strict requirements and standards related to licencing, construction of an LNG facility, operation and maintenance of an LNG

13 YESAB Project Number 2013-0009 YESAB DO Report, page 37. 14 YESAB Project Number 2013-0009 YESAB DO Report, page 37. 15 YESAB Project Number 2013-0009 YESAB DO Report, page 60. 16 These elements were also relied upon for the significance determination for the Watson Lake Designed Office Evaluation Report for the Watson Lake Bi-Fuel Project – 2013-0009, see pages 57-59.

Chapter 7 Page 7-29 Environmental and Socio-Economic Effects Assessment

Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

8.0 MONITORING AND FOLLOW-UP PROGRAMS

The Executive Committee is required to consider the need for any monitoring and follow-up of environmental or socio-economic effects of any project or activity conducted under Section 42(2)(a) of the Yukon Environmental and Socio-Economic Assessment Act (YESAA). Environmental and socio- economic monitoring and follow-up can be undertaken for the following reasons:

 To ensure the implementation and success of any mitigation measures identified as required or preferred during the assessment process.

 To confirm the accuracy of baseline information or any assumptions made with regard to the Project during the assessment process.

 To test the accuracy of predictions made during the assessment process and ensure that effects are consistent with the conclusions in the assessment and any conditions of the approvals provided by the regulator. In the event that a monitoring program identifies concerns in this regard, adaptive management practices can be applied to ensure effects are consistent with the findings of the assessment and the conditions of the regulator’s approvals.

 To detect any unanticipated Project effects and implement mitigative or corrective measures as necessary to ensure that no significant adverse effects result from the construction or operation of the Project.

This chapter outlines monitoring and follow-up recommended with respect to the proposed Project. Generally, monitoring and follow-up are recommended in the following circumstances:

 Where the success of the proposed mitigation measures is determinative in the assessment finding that potential residual adverse effects are not likely to be significant. In these cases, monitoring and follow-up are recommended to confirm the findings of the assessment.

 Where there is uncertainty with respect to the assessment findings such that monitoring is required to ensure that there are no residual significant adverse effects of the construction or operation of the Project.

In all cases, it is the intent of Yukon Energy to ensure, in consultation with regulators, that where necessary monitoring is undertaken it is done in a focused manner and is aligned with the potential for specific corrective actions (adaptive management). Corrective actions may include further detailed investigation and implementation of mitigation options. In all cases, Yukon Energy will seek to ensure necessary mitigation measures are undertaken such that there remain no residual significant adverse effects related to the Project.

8.1 PROPOSED MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAMS

Most identified mitigation measures for biophysical effects of the Project relate to implementation of standard best practices and regulatory compliance.

Chapter 8 Page 8-1 Monitoring and Follow-Up Programs Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

This includes the following:

 Standard best management practices and mitigation measures to reduce and/or eliminate sedimentation and erosion impacts from surface water on the local landscape from exposed soils, including, as applicable, following provisions of Yukon Energy’s Environment Management System Manual (EMS) and any requirements Yukon Government (YG) and/or City of Whitehorse have for storm water conveyance and controls on developed sites.

 Standard best management practices and mitigation measures associated with leaks and spills from equipment, machinery or other sources on site, including following the Whitehorse Hydro/ Diesel/ Substation Spill Response Plan (provided as Appendix 6B).

 Standard best management practices and mitigation measures regarding the disposal of waste generated on site pursuant to the Environment Act and Special Waste Regulation; including, as applicable, following provisions of Yukon Energy’s EMS.

 Standard best management practices including containment of disturbance to Construction Footprint Area, regular washing of construction equipment entering and leaving the site; including, as applicable, following provisions of Yukon Energy’s EMS.

 Re-vegetation and stabilization measures will completed as soon as feasible (and within one year of cessation of construction activities); including, as applicable, following provisions of Yukon Energy’s EMS.

 Periodic inspections of the Expanded Site Area and neighbouring greenspace (south of the Expanded Site Area) will be undertaken during construction and early in operations phase to determine whether any invasive species management strategy must be implemented.

 Avoidance, to the extent feasible of clearing activities during the period from May 1 to July 15; and completion of a nesting bird survey by a qualified biologist two days prior to clearing to identify and locate active nests in the event that clearing cannot be avoided during the period from May 1 to July 15.

With regard to proposed measures to mitigate socio-economic effects of the Project the following measures are described in Chapter 7 of the Project Proposal:

 As necessary, during construction dust control will be applied on the access routes (e.g., watering, sweeping) and on site as necessary to reduce air borne particulates and fugitive dust emissions.

 Noise during construction will be minimized through compliance with applicable municipal requirements for construction hours and by ensuring all equipment is equipped with an operational muffler.

 The site will be fenced and a vegetation buffer will be maintained post-construction to screen the view from Robert Service Way or Miles Canyon Road.

 Light pollution during operations will be minimized through use of mitigation measures such as fully shielded (full cut-off) lighting and obtaining the minimum lighting levels required by applicable codes and regulations, and lighting will be directed so there is little to no light trespass

Chapter 8 Page 8-2 Monitoring and Follow-Up Programs Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

beyond the perimeter fence of the site. All but minimum security lighting will be extinguished when the site is unoccupied. If video surveillance of the site is warranted, then low-light equipment will be specified to avoid the requirement for supplemental lighting for surveillance purposes.

 Yukon Energy is in discussions with the City of Whitehorse to look at realigning the portion of the Yukon River Loop trail that runs along the eastern boundary of the Expanded Site Area.

 Movement of equipment on and off-site will be planned such that traffic disruptions are minimized.

Effects on Human Health (noise and air emissions during Operation Phase of Project), Economy, and Utility Ratepayers are all assessed in Chapter 7 (Effects Assessment) to have residual positive effects. However, proposed follow-up activities related to air emissions during operation of the Project are described in Section 8.2.1.

8.1.1 Proposed Monitoring Measures

Project effects during construction are expected to be confined to the Project Construction Footprint and are expected to be small or moderate in magnitude. Effects are well understood and expected to be mitigated using standard best practice or mitigation as outlined in the required authorizations for the Project and/or Yukon Energy’s EMS or Whitehorse Hydro/ Diesel/ Substation Spill Response Plan.

Activities in each phase are subject to relevant legislation, regulations and guidelines, the Project authorizations, as well as to commitments made in the Project Proposal. An environmental compliance monitoring program will be in place to ensure that commitments made to regulatory authorities and others are implemented throughout all phases of Project development.

Other proposed monitoring measures are as follows:

 As indicated above, periodic inspections of the Expanded Site Area and neighbouring greenspace (south of the Expanded Site Area) will be undertaken during construction and early in operations phase to determine whether any invasive species management strategy must be implemented.

8.2 FOLLOW-UP PROGRAMS

Follow-up programs are recommended in certain cases where there is a potential opportunity to reduce uncertainty identified in the effects assessment process.

In many cases conclusions can be reached that an effect is not significant (for example, effects that are clearly low in magnitude due to affecting very few individuals out of a population), but nonetheless uncertainty remains as to the precise magnitude of the effect and more specifically, any potential to reduce the adverse effects or enhance benefits. However, it is important to note that Follow-up programs are not integral to the determinations of significance made in Chapter 7. Rather, recommended follow-up programs can be undertaken as follows:

 As ready opportunities arise within Yukon Energy’s operations;

Chapter 8 Page 8-3 Monitoring and Follow-Up Programs Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

 In conjunction with programs or efforts of other agencies or undertaken by government departments; or

 Where there are potential benefits to be gained.

Specific, proposed follow up activities are noted in Section 8.2.1 and 8.2.2 below.

8.2.1 Follow-up related to Air Emissions

It is noted that Yukon Energy must report its emissions to the National Pollutant Release Inventory (NPRI) if its operational emissions meet the threshold for required reporting under that national reporting program. Calculation of annual emissions and reporting (as required) to the NPRI program is an annual exercise undertaken by Yukon Energy. The results of that reporting are available publically on Environment Canada’s NPRI website1.

Yukon Energy also conducts monitoring and reporting as required under its Air Emissions Permit No. 60- 010, including total annual thermal energy production, engine run time hours, and total emission masses of criteria air contaminants and GHGs. With regard to the WTGS, the Project Proposal in effect provides the information required to address the next extension of this permit beyond the end of 2014.

These programs will continue with the Project.

8.2.2 Notification and Project Liaison

Yukon Energy will designate liaison personnel to triage any concerns that may arise during construction, operation, and maintenance phases. The scope of liaison will include regulatory and environmental affairs, as well as work to maintain close communications with Kwanlin Dün First Nation, Ta’an Kwäch’än Council, the City of Whitehorse, other local and territorial organizations, and citizens as concerns may arise. Detail on these proposed efforts is provided in Chapter 4, Section 4.7.

1 Available at http://www.ec.gc.ca/inrp-npri/default.asp?lang=En&n=B85A1846-1.

Chapter 8 Page 8-4 Monitoring and Follow-Up Programs

Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

10.0 GLOSSARY & REFERENCES

10.1 GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS & TERMS

10.1.1 List of Acronyms

ACI: American Concrete Institute AECO: Alberta Energy Company ANSI: American National Standards Institute AHRS: Alaska Heritage Resources Survey API: American Petroleum Institute ASCE: American Society of Civil Engineers ASTM: American Society for Testing and Materials BOG: Boil off gas C: Celsius CAC: Criteria Air Contaminants CCME: Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment CCTV: Closed-circuit television CEA: Cumulative Effects Assessment CEAA: Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency CEC: Canadian Electrical Code CEMA: Canadian Electrical Manufacturers Association CO2e: Carbon Dioxide Equivalent COO: Chief Operating Officer COSEWIC: Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada CPAWS: Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society CSA: Canadian Standards Association CSTP: Carmacks-Stewart Transmission Project CO: Carbon monoxide DFO: Department of Fisheries and Oceans (Canada) DO: Designated Office DSM: Demand-Side Management EA: Effects Assessment EIA: Environmental Impact Assessment EIS: Environmental Impact Statement EMF: Electro-magnetic field EMO: Emergency Measures Organization EMR: Yukon Government Department of Energy, Mines and Resources EMS: Environmental Management System EPC: Engineering, procurement, and construction FISS: Fisheries Information Summary System FN: First Nation ft: Foot/feet (as a measurement)

Chapter 10 Page 10-1 Glossary & References Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

GEA: Gladstone Engineering Alliance Inc. GHG: Greenhouse Gas GIS: Geographic Information System GPS: Global Positioning System GRA: General Rate Application GWh: Gigawatt hour ha: Hectare HPW: Yukon Government Department of Highways and Public Works HS&E: Health, Safety, and Environmental IEEE: Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers km: kilometre kV: kilovolt KDFN: Kwanlin Dün First Nation

Leq: Energy equivalent sound level LNG Liquefied Natural Gas m: Metre m3/s: Cubic metre per second MCM Million Cubic Metres MMBtu: One Thousand British Thermal Units MOU: Memorandum of Understanding MW: Megawatt NAPS: National Air Pollution Surveillance NBC: National Building Code of Canada n.d.: No date NDT: Non-destructive testing NEMA: National Electrical Manufacturers Association NFPA: National Fire Protection Association NGO: Non-government organization

NO2: Nitrogen dioxide

NOx: Nitrogen Oxide NPRI: National Pollutant Release Inventory NTPC: Northwest Territories Power Corporation NTS: National Topographic System O&M: Operations and Maintenance OCP: Official Community Plan OP: Other Public PBVC: Pressure vessel code PIP: Public Involvement Program

PM2.5: Fine particulate matter PPB: parts per billion PPBV: parts per billion by volume PPM: parts per million Project Proposal: Project Proposal Submission

Chapter 10 Page 10-2 Glossary & References Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Proponent’s Guide: Proponent’s Guide to Information Requirements for Executive Committee Project Proposal Submissions RCMP: Royal Mounted Canadian Police Resource Plan: Yukon Energy’s 20-Year Resource Plan (2011-2030) RFI: Request for Information RMO: Resource Management Officer ROW: Right-of-Way RRC: Renewal Resource Council RSF: Rate Stabilization Fund RTC Registered Trapping Concession SARA: Species at Risk Act SCADA: Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition SCC: System Control Centre SEEA: Socio-Economic Effects Assessment

SO2: Sulfur dioxide SSP: Strategic Sustainability Plan TDS: Total Dissolved Solids Project: Whitehorse Diesel-Natural Gas Conversion Project TK: Traditional Knowledge TKC: Ta’an Kwäch’än Council μg/m3: microgram per cubic metre USACE: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers USGS: United States Geological Survey UTM: Universal Transverse Mercator Co-ordinate System VC: Valued Component VOC: Volatile Organic Compounds WAF: Whitehorse-Aishihik-Faro Grid WD: Whitehorse Diesel Unit WKA: Wildlife Key Areas WP&YR: White Pass and Yukon Route WRGS: Whitehorse Rapids Generating Station WTGS: Whitehorse Thermal Generating Station YAAQS: Yukon Ambient Air Quality Standards YCOGE: Yukoners Concerned about Oil and Gas Exploration YCS: Yukon Conservation Society YEC: Yukon Energy Corporation YECL: Yukon Electrical Company Limited YESAA: Yukon Environmental and Socio-Economic Assessment Act YESAB: Yukon Environmental and Socio-Economic Assessment Board YG: Yukon Government YUB: Yukon Utilities Board Yukon Energy: Yukon Energy Corporation

Chapter 10 Page 10-3 Glossary & References Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

10.1.2 List of Terms

Access: The ability to enter an area or reach a particular location

Access road: Any road within the construction footprint area leading to the offloading, storage, vapourization or generation facilities.

Adverse effects: Negative effects on the biophysical and/or human environment that may result from a proposed project.

Aesthetic: Pertaining to a sense of beauty. Judgments of aesthetic value are sensory, emotional, and intellectual.

Aggregate: Gravel; crushed rock used in construction.

Alternative means of carrying out a project: The various technically and economically feasible ways, other than the proposed way, for a project to be implemented or carried out.

Alternatives to a project: The functionally different ways, other than the proposed project, to meet the project need and achieve the intended purpose.

Ambient air quality: The quality of outdoor air in the surrounding environment. It is typically measured near ground level, away from direct sources of pollution.

Artifact: An object produced or shaped by human craft, especially a tool, weapon, or ornament of archaeological or historical interest.

Assessment: An evaluation by a designated office, a screening by the executive committee or a review by a panel of the Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Board established by Section 8 of YESAA.

Authorization: A licence, permit or other form of approval that is issued or given by: the Governor in Council, a government agency, an independent regulatory agency or a municipal government, or (b) a First Nation under its final agreement or a First Nation law, but does not include an access order issued under the Yukon Surface Rights Board Act or a consent given by a First Nation for access to settlement land in circumstances where an access order could be issued under that Act.

Aquifer: A body of rock or sediment that is sufficiently porous and permeable to store, transmit, and yield significant or economic quantities of groundwater to wells and springs.

Baseline conditions: Past and current conditions in which a Valued Component exists or has existed.

Bedrock: Solid rock underlying loose deposits such as soil or alluvium

Berm: Structures, generally made of earth, used to control erosion, sedimentation by reducing the rate of surface runoff. The berms either reduce the velocity of the water, or direct water to areas that are not susceptible to erosion, thereby reducing the adverse effects of running water on exposed top soil.

Chapter 10 Page 10-4 Glossary & References Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Board: The Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Board established by Section 8 of the Yukon Environmental and Socio-Economic Assessment Act.

Boreal Cordillera: The ecological region encompassing 444,000 square kilometres of the Yukon and northern British Columbia. This is a mountainous region that includes the majority of the Yukon’s population.

Brunisols: Soils of the Brunisolic order have sufficient development to exclude the soils from the Regosolic order, but lack the degrees or kinds of horizon development specified for soils of the other orders. The central concept of the order is that of soils formed under forest and having brownish coloured Bm horizons and/or various colours with both Ae horizons and B horizons having slight accumulations of either clay, or amorphous aluminum and iron compounds, or both.

Breeding bird survey: Standardized surveys conducted during the breeding season for a given area whereby observers record the species, distribution, and abundance of birds seen or heard along a travel route.

Brush: Includes trees, snags, stumps, shrubs, bushes and vines less than 12.5 cm in diameter measured at 30 cm above the highest ground contacting the base of the tree.

Buffer: An area between two different land uses that is intended to resist, absorb, or otherwise preclude developments or intrusions between the two use areas.

Commissioning: To put into active service.

Compliance monitoring: A broad term for a type of monitoring conducted to verify whether a practice or procedure meets the applicable requirements prescribed by legislation, internal policies, accepted industry standards or specified terms and conditions (e.g., in an agreement, lease, permit, license or other authorization). Mitigation monitoring is one type of compliance monitoring.

Contaminant: A form of pollutant or substance that may directly or indirectly affect humans or the environment in a negative or adverse manner.

Corridor: A narrow tract of land forming a passageway. A band of land within which one or more alternative routes can be identified.

Critical habitat: As defined in the federal Species at Risk Act, “critical habitat” means the habitat that is necessary for the survival or recovery of a listed wildlife species and that is identified as the species' critical habitat in the recovery strategy or in an action plan for the species.

Crown Corporation: A state-controlled company or enterprise.

Cumulative effects: The likely effects of the project in combination with the likely effects of other past, existing and proposed or reasonably foreseeable future projects and activities. To be considered a cumulative effect, the other past, existing and future projects being considered in the assessment must affect a VC that is also being affected by the principal project; in this way the projects act cumulatively upon a valued component.

Chapter 10 Page 10-5 Glossary & References Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013 dBA: A-weighted decibels, though originally intended for the measurement of low-level sounds, are now commonly used for the measurement of environmental noise and industrial noise.

Decision document: A decision document issued by a decision body under section 75, 76 or 77 of YESAA.

Decommission: To take out of active use (typically involves the dismantling and removal of the original structure(s) and associated facilities).

Deglaciation: the melting of ice.

Determination of significance: Taking into account the implementation of appropriate mitigation measures, a conclusion about whether adverse environmental effects are likely to be significant.

Dipole: a pair of equal and opposite electric charges or magnetic poles of opposite sign separated especially by a small distance.

Direct effect: The initial, immediate effects caused by a specific activity. This may include: a change that a project may cause in the environment; or a change that the environment may cause to a project.

Direction or nature of the effect: describes the nature of the residual effects and the difference or trend of the effect on the VC compared with what is expected to occur without the Project. Direction is described as positive, neutral, or negative/adverse.

Distribution system: The wood poles, conductors, and transformers that deliver electricity to customers. It transforms higher voltage to lower voltage, usable levels.

Disturbance: A disruption in the normal functioning of an organism or system.

Domestic resource use: The harvest of natural resources for personal use or consumption (i.e., not sold).

Drainage ditch: A region of land where water from rain or snowmelt drains downhill into a body of water, such as a river, lake, dam, estuary, wetland, sea or ocean. Each drainage basin is separated topographically from adjacent basins by a ridge, hill or mountain, which is known as a water divide or sometimes a watershed.

Duration of the effect: The length of time the effect will persist.

Easement: The permission or right to use a defined area of land for a specific purpose such as transmission line rights-of-way.

Ecological or socio-economic context: The ability of an ecological community, ecological unit or species to be resilient to or otherwise adapt to change, or the ability of a community, population or sub- population to be resilient to or otherwise adapt to change.

Eco-region: An integrated map unit characterized by a unique combination of landscape physiography and eco-climate. Subdivisions of an ecozone.

Chapter 10 Page 10-6 Glossary & References Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Ecosystem: A functional unit consisting of all living organisms (plants, animals, microbes, etc.) in a given area, and all non-living physical and chemical factors of their environment, linked together through nutrient cycling and energy flow. An ecosystem can be any size (e.g., a log, pond, forest) but always functions as a whole unit.

Ecozone: Areas of the earth’s surface representative of very generalized ecological units that consist of a distinctive assemblage of physical and biological characteristics.

Effects monitoring: The monitoring of environmental and socio-economic effects, or of the effectiveness of mitigation measures.

Elevation: An indication of the vertical distance of a point above or below sea level, expressed in metres.

Emission: A substance discharged into the air; the giving off of gases from industrial processes or engine exhaust from transport vehicles.

Endangered: As defined by COSEWIC: a species facing imminent extirpation or extinction.

Environment: The components of the earth and includes: (a) air, land and water; (b) all layers of the atmosphere; (c) all organic and inorganic matter and living organisms; and (d) the interacting natural systems that include the components referred to in (a) to (c).

Environmental component: Fundamental element of the biophysical environment, including the air, water, soil, terrain, vegetation, wildlife, fish, birds and land use that may be affected by a proposed project, and may be individually assessed in the effects assessment.

Environmental Management System (EMS): Part of an organization’s overall management practices related to environmental affairs. It includes organizational structure, planning activities, responsibilities, practices, procedures, processes and resources for developing, implementing, achieving, reviewing and maintaining an environmental policy. This approach is often formally carried out to meet the requirements of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 14000 series.

Environmental monitoring: Periodic or continuous surveillance or testing, according to a predetermined schedule, of one or more environmental components. Monitoring is usually conducted to determine the level of compliance with stated requirements, or to observe the status and trends of a particular environmental component over time.

Erosion: Physical and chemical breaking down and transportation of geologic material.

Eutric: A great group of soils in the Brunisolic order. The soils may have mull Ah horizons less than 5 cm (2 inches) thick, and they have Bm horizons, in which the base saturation (NaCI) is l00%.

Executive Committee: The Executive Committee of the Board established by section 8 of YESAA.

Existing conditions: See “Baseline conditions.”

Chapter 10 Page 10-7 Glossary & References Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Expanded Site Area: Area located west of the Whitehorse Rapids Generating Station power canal and adjacent to Robert Service Way. Approximately 0.9 ha of Public Utility zoned land to be acquired from Yukon Government and approximately 0.6 ha of railway right of way.

Fine particulate matter (PM2.5): Particles found in the air (including dust, dirt, soot, smoke, and liquid droplets) that are less than 2.5 micrometres in diameter (one micrometre is 1/1000 of a millimetre).

First Nation: (As defined by the Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Act) A Yukon First Nation, within the meaning of the Umbrella Final Agreement, and includes the Gwich’in Tribal Council, in relation to consultation, or the Tetlit Gwich’in, in relation to any other matter.

Flora: The plant life of a specific area or locality.

Flow: Motion characteristic of fluids (liquids or gases); any uninterrupted stream or discharge.

Fluvial: Of or found in a river.

Footprint: The surface area occupied by a structure or activity.

Fragmentation: See Habitat fragmentation.

Frequency of the effect: When and how often the effect will occur.

Furbearer/ furbearing mammals: Referring to those mammal species that are trapped for the useful or economic value of their fur.

Generating Station: A generating station is a structure that produces electricity. It can be run many different ways, including by burning coal or natural gas, or by using water (hydro) or wind power, as examples.

Geographic or socio-economic extent of the effect: The spatial extent of the effect, i.e., how far from the project location the effect(s) are observable.

Geotechnical: Of or pertaining to practical applications of geological science in civil engineering, mining, etc.

Gigawatt: A Gigawatt is the unit of electrical power equivalent to one billion watts or one million kilowatts.

Glaciofluvial: Pertaining to the meltwater streams flowing from wasting glacier and especially to the deposits and landforms produced by streams.

Glaciolacustrine: Sediments pertaining to, derived from, or deposited in glacial lakes.

Government agency: A federal agency, territorial, or self-governing first nation agency.

Grass swale: Stable turf, parabolic or trapezoidal channel used for water quality of to convey storm water run-off, which does not rely on the permeability of the soil as a pollutant removal mechanism.

Greenhouse gas: Gaseous components of the atmosphere that contribute to the "greenhouse effect". Some greenhouse gases occur naturally in the atmosphere, while others result from human activities.

Chapter 10 Page 10-8 Glossary & References Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Naturally occurring greenhouse gases include water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and ozone. Certain human activities, however, add to the levels of most of these naturally occurring gases.

Grid power: An electrical power transmission system over a large area is often referred to as the grid. Redundant paths and lines are provided so that power can be routed from any power plant to any load center, through a variety of routes, based on the economics of the transmission path and the cost of power. Power that is supplied from such a system is referred to as grid power.

Groundwater: The portion of sub-surface water that is below the water table, in the zone of saturation.

Habitat: The area or environment where an organism or ecological community normally lives or occurs. It is the space uniquely suited to required functions (e.g., breeding) through the arrangement of food, water, shelter, and cover.

Habitat fragmentation: The process of environmental change resulting from the emergence of discontinuities in an organism’s preferred habitat. Habitat fragmentation can be caused by geological processes that alter the layout of the physical environment or by human activity such as land conversion, which can alter the environment.

Habitat Protection Area: An area identified as requiring special protection under Yukon's Wildlife Act. It is an area where disturbance to wildlife, or to the plants on which it depends, could lead to the decline of a species or population. It may be an area where a wildlife species is concentrated at certain times of year, a habitat type that is rare in the Yukon or a site that is particularly fragile. Habitat Protection Areas can provide the buffering and linkage of core protected areas described in the Yukon Protected Areas Strategy.

Hand clearing: clearing vegetation in sensitive areas using tools carried by hand such as chain saws, brush saws, axes or similar equipment.

Hectare (ha): A metric unit of square measure equal to 10,000 square metres or 2.471 acres.

Heritage resource: (a) a moveable work or assembly of works of people or of nature, other than a record only, that is of scientific or cultural value for its archaeological, palaeontological, ethnological, prehistoric, historic or aesthetic features; (b) a record, regardless of its physical form or characteristics, that is of scientific or cultural value for its archaeological, palaeontological, ethnological, prehistoric, historic or aesthetic features; or (c) an area of land that contains a work or assembly of works referred to in paragraph (a) or an area that is of aesthetic or cultural value, including a human burial site outside a recognized cemetery.

Heritage site: A heritage site is a location where a landmark of natural or cultural importance is legally protected. Heritage resources in the Yukon are protected under the Historic Resources Act and are defined as (i) historic sites, (ii) historic objects, and (iii) any work or assembly of works of nature or human endeavour that is of value for it archaeological, palaeontological, pre-historic, historic, scientific, or aesthetic features.

Impact: A positive or negative effect of a disturbance on the environment or a component of the environment.

Chapter 10 Page 10-9 Glossary & References Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Indirect effect: An effect caused by a given action but occurring later in time or further removed in distance.

Infrastructure: The basic features needed for the operation or construction of a system or community (e.g., roads, utilities etc.).

Interested publics/other publics: Any person or organization having an interest in the outcome of an assessment, for a purpose that is not frivolous or vexatious.

Invasive Species: noxious weeds or other vegetation that are not native to a particular habitat. These species may be harmful to the existence of other plants or may be unwanted, wild or feral plants that may be harmful to human, animal or property.

Kilovolt (kV): A volt is the unit of electrical force or potential that causes a current to flow in a circuit. One kilovolt (kV) is equal to 1,000 volts.

Kilowatt (kW): The unit of power equivalent to 1,000 watts.

Kilowatt Hour (kWh): The unit measure of electrical power equivalent to use of 1,000 watts for a period of one hour [e.g., ten 100-watt light bulbs switched on for one hour would use one kWh (or 1,000 watts for one hour)].

Land Use Permit: A Land Use Permit allows a specific activity over a specified period of time. It does not give any exclusive rights or tenure to the land.

Energy equivalent sound level (Leq): a sound level that if constant over a specified period of time, would contain the same sound energy as sound of varying levels over that same period of time (Cowan, 1994)

Likelihood: The condition of being likely or probable.

Local knowledge: Information held by community members, such as farmers, hunters, fishers and naturalists, who are familiar with the environment in a specific geographic area.

Magnitude of effect: The predicted size, severity or degree of change the residual effect has on a component of the biophysical or socio-economic environment.

Maximum Point of Impingement: The maximum point of impingement is defined as any point on the ground or on a receptor, such as nearby buildings, located outside the company's property boundaries at which the highest concentration of a contaminant emitted from a facility is expected to occur. The location of the Max POI will differ for different averaging periods.

Megawatt (MW): A watt is the unit used to measure electric power. A megawatt (MW) is 1,000,000 watts.

Maintenance: Periodic service required to ensure equipment and facilities are in good working order.

Mitigation (mitigative measures): measures for the elimination, reduction, or control of adverse environmental or socio-economic effects, which include: (a) Avoiding effects altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action. (b) Minimizing effects by limiting the degree of magnitude of the

Chapter 10 Page 10-10 Glossary & References Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013 action and its implementation. (c) Rectifying the effects by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment. (d) Reducing or eliminating the effects over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action. (e) Compensating for effects by replacing or providing substitute resources or environments.

Monitoring: Any on-going process or program for measuring the actual effects of constructing or operating a development.

Whitehorse Land Use Planning Region: One of eight planning regions in the Yukon.

Organic material: Refers to any material that is capable of decay or of being decomposed or is the product of decomposition, and is usually the remains of a recently living organism, and may also include still-living organisms. Also called organic matter.

Overburden: The soil (including organic material) or loose material that overlies bedrock.

Panel of the Board: A panel established under subsection 65(1), paragraph 93(1)(a) or subsection 95(1), 103(1) or 105(1) of YESAA.

Permafrost: Permafrost is defined on the basis of temperature, as soil or rock that remains below 0°C throughout the year, and forms when the ground cools sufficiently in winter to produce a frozen layer that persists throughout the following summer.

Phase: Describes the distinct time periods in which project related effects accrue. There are three phases associated with the project: Construction, Operation and Maintenance, and Decommissioning.

Physiography: A description of the natural features of the surface of the earth.

Plan: Any program, policy or proposal that is not a project or existing project.

Power grid: A network of electric power lines and associated equipment used to transmit and distribute electricity over a geographic area; or, the network of transmission lines that link all generating plants in a region with local distribution networks to help maximize service reliability.

Probability: The chance or possibility that a specific event will occur.

Project: An activity that is subject to assessment under section 47 or 48 and is not exempt from assessment under Section 49 of YESAA. For the purposes of this project proposal it is the Whitehorse Diesel – Natural Gas Conversion Project.

Project Construction Footprint: The geographic area needed for construction and operation of the expanded physical infrastructure associated with the Whitehorse Diesel – Natural Gas Conversion Project.

Project Study Area: A broader Project Study Area for examining potential environmental and socio- economic effects defined for most VCs as a 500 metre radius surrounding the Project Construction Footprint (see Figure 2-2).

Proponent: Proponent, in relation to a project or other activity, means a person or body that proposes to undertake it, or a government agency, independent regulatory agency, municipal government or First

Chapter 10 Page 10-11 Glossary & References Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Nation that proposes to require — under a federal or territorial law, a municipal by-law or a First Nation law — that it be undertaken.

Range: The geographical area where a species can be found.

Raptor: A bird of prey (for this study, includes eagles, hawks, falcons, owls and osprey).

Ratepayer: A person who pays a regular charge for the use of a public utility, as gas or electricity, usually based on the quantity consumed.

Rare: Infrequently occurring in time and space or uncommon.

Recreational: Where the primary intent is enjoyment.

Registered Trapping Concession (RTC): A parcel of land on which the holder is given exclusive rights to harvest furbearing animals.

Regulatory: Relating to a regulation or pertaining to legal requirements.

Residual effects: Effects of a project that are expected to remain after mitigation measures have been implemented.

Re-vegetation: The re-establishment and development of self-sustaining plant cover on disturbed sites. This may require human assistance such as ground preparation and reseeding or the natural vegetation of the area will be encouraged to re-grow in the area.

Right-of-way (ROW): Area of land cleared and maintained to accommodate a linear feature such as a road or a transmission line.

Scoping: The iterative process of identifying issues of concern related to the project, including the selection of Valued Components (VCs), identification potential pathways of effects along with the spatial and temporal boundaries for assessing effects of the project.

Sedimentation: Deposition of suspended solids in surface water.

Settlement land: (As defined by the Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Act) Land that is category A settlement land, category B settlement land or fee simple settlement land under a final agreement or under section 63 of the Yukon Surface Rights Board Act, or land that is to be treated as such by virtue of a self-government agreement, and includes Tetlit Gwich’in Yukon land, but does not include water or mines and minerals defined to be non-settlement land.

Significance: A measure of the residual effects after the application of mitigation measures.

Socio-economic effects: Includes effects on economies, health, culture, traditions, lifestyles and heritage resources.

Soil liquefaction: The process by which saturated, unconsolidated soil or sand is converted into a suspension. It is commonly observed in quicksand, quick clay, turbidity currents, and as a result of earthquake shock in unconsolidated sediments. It can be caused when flowing water reduces the friction

Chapter 10 Page 10-12 Glossary & References Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013 between sand particles (as from an underground spring), or when a sudden change in pressure or repeated shock acting on water saturated or supersaturated sediments (as in an earthquake).

Species: A group of inter-breeding organisms that can produce fertile offspring.

Species at risk: Plants or animals that are in danger of extinction or extirpation throughout all or a portion of their range.

Stand: A community of trees sufficiently uniform in species, age, arrangement, or condition to be recognized as a separate group from the forest or other growth in the area.

Substation: An assemblage of equipment for switching and/or transforming or regulating the voltage of electricity.

Surficial geology: The geology of surficial deposits, including soils; the term is sometimes applied to the study of bedrock at or near the earth's surface.

Temporal: Pertaining to time.

Tendering: Providing different groups and companies with an opportunity to bid on a job. The general principle is that the qualified bidder with the lowest price gets the job. “Open tendering” means that anyone can bid. “Restricted tendering” means that only some types of companies can bid.

Terrain: A tract of land.

Terrestrial: Living on or in the ground, or related to the ground.

Territory: (As defined by the Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Act) (a) in relation to a first nation for which a final agreement is in effect, that first nation’s traditional territory and any of its settlement lands within Yukon that are not part of that traditional territory; (b) in relation to the first nation known as the Tetlit Gwich’in, the areas described in Annex A of Appendix C to the Gwich’in Agreement; and (c) in relation to any other first nation, the geographic area within Yukon identified on the map provided by that first nation under the Umbrella Final Agreement for the purpose of delineating the first nation’s traditional territory.

Threatened species: As defined by COSEWIC, a species likely to become endangered if limiting factors are not reversed.

Threshold: A limit of acceptability. Threshold measurements enable both project proponents and regulators to evaluate the acceptability of a project-related effect on a specific component of the environment by comparing the effects of the project against a pre-determined limit of acceptability. Thresholds may be refined over time, as understandings of populations and ecological interactions evolve.

Topography: The relief features or surface configuration of an area.

Traditional knowledge: The accumulated body of knowledge, observations and understandings about the environment, and about the relationship of living beings with one another and the environment, that is rooted in the traditional way of life of first nations. Note: Often referred to as Aboriginal Traditional

Chapter 10 Page 10-13 Glossary & References Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Knowledge (ATK), which is knowledge held by, and unique to Aboriginal peoples. It is a living body of knowledge that is cumulative and dynamic and adapted over time to reflect changes in the social, economic, environmental, spiritual and political spheres of the Aboriginal knowledge holders. Sometimes used interchangeably with Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK), however TEK is generally considered to be a subset of ATK and is primarily concerned about knowledge about the environment.

Traditional resource use: Hunting, trapping, fishing and food gathering by Aboriginal peoples whether for subsistence purposes or otherwise.

Traditional territory: Lands designated under the Umbrella Final Agreement that provide rights for subsistence hunting and fishing activities; allocation of 70 percent of traplines; representation on land use planning bodies; membership on the Yukon Water Board, Development Assessment Board, Surface Rights Board, Fish and Wildlife Management Board and the Renewable Resources Councils.

Transformer/Switching Station: A transformer/switching station is a facility that transforms electricity from a generating station to the higher voltages needed to carry it on the existing transmission system, or a facility that transforms electricity from the transmission system to the lower voltages needed to distribute it to customers.

Transmission line(s): A structure consisting of a series of towers and wires used to carry electrical power, generally at high voltage.

Uncertainty: The possible error or range of error that may exist within assumptions.

Understory vegetation: An underlying layer of vegetation, especially the plants that grow beneath a forest's canopy.

Unemployment rate: The proportion of individuals in the active labour force that do not have a job. The classification of unemployed does not account for the underemployed, or those individuals working part time but desiring a full time position. As well, the classification does not include discouraged workers: those individuals who wish to work but have ceased looking because they do not believe they will find a job.

Ungulate: Hoofed mammals, including elk, moose, deer, and caribou.

Utility Trench: A non-drainage trench for routing pipes and cables.

UTM Grid: A grid system based upon the Transverse Mercator projection. The UTM grid extends North- South from 80oN to 80oS latitude and, starting at the 180o Meridian, is divided eastwards into 60, 6o zones with a half degree overlap with zone one beginning at 180o longitude. The UTM grid is used for topographic maps and geo-referencing satellite images.

Valued Component: Described in YESAB guides as an element of a project area that is valued for environmental, scientific, social, aesthetic, or cultural reasons. For the Project, VCs were identified in the process of scoping the Project and through the Public Involvement Program (PIP).

Vegetative/treed buffer: An area that protects or reduces impacts to a natural resource from human activity; a strip of land along roads, trails or waterways that is generally maintained to enhance aesthetic values or ecosystem integrity.

Chapter 10 Page 10-14 Glossary & References Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

Vegetative mat: The living vegetative layer found at ground level. This includes root, rhizome and mycelium structures and the material contained in the H (humus) and A1 (soil horizon with organics) soil horizons.

Waterfowl: Ducks, geese and swans (or other birds that frequent water).

Watershed: The area within which all water drains to collect in common channel or other watercourse.

Watt-hour: A watt-hour is a unit of energy. One watt-hour is the amount of electrical energy equivalent to a one-watt load drawing power for one hour.

Wildlife habitat: Any area providing food, shelter, cover, air and space, or any one of the aforementioned, to wildlife such as mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians and/or invertebrates.

Yukon Environmental and Socio-Economic Assessment Act (YESAA): An Act to establish a process for assessing the environmental and socio-economic effects of certain activities in Yukon.

Yukon Southern Lakes Ecoregion: Located in the Upper Yukon – Stikine Basin Climatic Zone between the St. Elias Coast Mountains to the West and Cassiar Mountains to the East (Wahl et al. 1987).

Chapter 10 Page 10-15 Glossary & References Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

10.2 REFERENCES

The following references apply to information contained or referenced in Chapters 1 through 9.

10.2.1 List of References

 AECOM. 2012a. City of Whitehorse Groundwater Exploration 2012, Testhole TH04-12. Unpublished data.

 AECOM. 2012b. Water Sampling Analysis Report, Project 60275519. October, 11, 2012. Unpublished data.

 American Meteorological Society. n.d. Glossary of Meteorology – Ice Fog. Available from http://amsglossary.allenpress.com/glossary/search?id=ice-fog1; last accessed August 5, 2013.

 Applied Ecosystem Management Ltd. 1999. Ecological Resources of the Yukon River Corridor (Final Report).

 Applied Ecosystem Management Ltd. 2000a. City of Whitehorse Significant Wildlife Areas. Final Report (Ver 2.0).

 City of Whitehorse. n.d. Millennium Trail and Rotary Centennial Bridge map. Available from http://www.city.whitehorse.yk.ca/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=232; last accessed August 5, 2013.

 City of Whitehorse. 2007. City of Whitehorse 2007 Trail Plan. Prepared by Inukshuk Planning & Development in association with Malloch Graham + Associates. URL: http://www.city.whitehorse.yk.ca/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=246; last accessed August 5, 2013.

 City of Whitehorse. 2010. Planning Together: 2010 Official Community Plan. Available from http://www.whitehorse.ca/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=728; last accessed August 5, 2013.

 Cornell Lab of Ornithology. 2012. Bank Swallow. Available from http://www.allaboutbirds.org/guide/Bank_Swallow/lifehistory; last accessed August 5, 2013.

 Cowan, J.P. 1994. Handbook of Environmental Acoustics. John Wiley & Son Inc. New York, NY.

 DFO (Department of Fisheries and Oceans). 2012. Yukon FISS Atlas. Available from http://cmnmaps.ca/FISS_Yukon/; last accessed August 5, 2013.

 EBA (EBA Engineering Consultants Ltd., A Tetra Tech Company). 2013. Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation Yukon Energy Corporation Liquid Natural Gas Storage Facility in Whitehorse, Letter Report, January 9, 2013.

 Ecofor. 2012. Heritage Resources Overview Assessment Lot 1191 and Lot 1267. Confidential report.

 Environment Canada. 2011. National Air Pollutance Surveillance Program. Available from http://www.ec.gc.ca/rnspa-naps/; last accessed August 5, 2013.

Chapter 10 Page 10-16 Glossary & References Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

 Environment Canada. 2012. National Climate Data and Information Archive. Available from www.climate.weatheroffice.gc.ca; last accessed August 5, 2013.

 Federal Environmental Assessment Review Office. 1994. A Reference Guide for the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act: Determining Whether a Project is likely to Cause Significant Adverse Environmental Effects.

 G.J. Bull & Associates Inc. July 2005. Porter Creek Lower Bench Proposed Development Preliminary Climate and Air Quality Assessment Final Report. In association with Pottinger Gaherty Environmental Consultants Ltd. Prepared for Yukon Government.

 Gartner Lee Limited. 2001. Surface Water Inventory of the City of Whitehorse. Prepared for Environment Canada Northern Affairs Program, Water Resources.

 Gartner Lee Limited. 2003. Yukon Groundwater and Ground Source Heat Potential Inventor. Prepared for Energy Solutions Centre Inc. December 2003. Available from http://www.energy.gov.yk.ca/pdf/yukon_groundwater_heat_potential_study2003.pdf; last accessed August 5, 2013.

 Gartner Lee Limited. 2006. Porter Creek Bench Environmental and Special Places Background Report. October 2006.

 Government of Canada. 2005. Assessable Activities, Exceptions and Executive Committee Projects Regulations. Current to June 25, 2013. Available from http://laws- lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-2005-379/; last accessed August 5, 2013.

 Government of Yukon. 2009a. Energy Strategy for Yukon. January, 2009. Whitehorse, YT.

 Government of Yukon. 2009b. Yukon Government Climate Change Action Plan. February, 2009. Whitehorse, YT.

 Hennessey, R. and Streicker, J. 2011. Whitehorse Climate Change Adaptation Plan. Northern Climate Exchange, Yukon Research Centre, Yukon College, Whitehorse, YT.

 Levelton (Levelton Consultants Ltd). 2011. Emissions Testing at Yukon Energy’s Whitehorse Rapids Generating Station (WRGS). Prepared for Yukon Energy Corporation. September 6, 2011.

 LGL Limited. 2012. Yukon State of the Environment, Interim Report.

 Mougeot (Mougeot GeoAnalysis). 1998. Soil and Terrain Features of the Yukon River Corridor. Developed fo Gartner Lee Environmental Consultants. Whitehorse, YT. September, 1998.

 Payne, T. & Associates. 2011. Yukon River Instream Chinook Salmon Passage and Spawning. Prepared for Yukon Energy. February, 2011.

 SARA Registry (Species at Risk Act). 2012. 2012 SARA Registry COSEWIC Status Reports. Available from http://www.sararegistry.gc.ca/sar/index/default_e.cfm; last accessed August 5, 2013.

 SENES (SENES Consultants Ltd.). 2011. Air Quality Assessment Update in Support of Permit Renewal for Diesel Generation Operations. Prepared for Yukon Energy Corporation. October 20, 2011.

Chapter 10 Page 10-17 Glossary & References Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

 SENES. 2013. Draft Air Quality Assessment in Support of LNG Generator Operations, Whitehorse, Yukon. Prepared for Yukon Energy Corporation. Vancouver, BC.

 Statistics Canada. 2012. Table 282-0086 – Labour force survey estimates, supplementary unemployment rates by sex and age group, annual. Available from http://www5.statcan.gc.ca/cansim/a05?lang=eng&id=2820086; last accessed August 5, 2013.

 Ta'an Kwäch'än Council. 2008. A Short History of the Ta'an Kwäch'än. Available from http://www.taan.ca/history1.html; last accessed August 5, 2013.

 USEIA (U.S. Energy Information Administration). 2013. Annual Energy Outlook 2013 with Projections to 2040. Available from http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/pdf/0383(2013).pdf; last accessed August 5, 2013.

 Wahl, H.E., Fraser, D.B., Harvey, R.C., and Maxwell, J.B. 1987. Climate of the Yukon. Climatological Studies No. 40. Environment Canada, Atmospheric Environment Services. Minister of Supply and Services Canada.

 Whitehorse General Hospital. n.d. Hospital Usage Statistics. Available from http://www.whitehorsehospital.ca/wghabout/fastfacts/; last accessed August 5, 2013.

 YESAA (Yukon Environmental and Socio-Economic Assessment Act). 2003. Yukon Environmental and Socio-Economic Assessment Act S.C. 2003, c.7. Available from http://laws- lois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/Y-2.2.pdf; last accessed August 5, 2013.

 YESAB (Yukon Environmental and Socio-Economic Assessment Board). 2005. Proponent’s Guide to Information Requirements for Executive Committee Project Proposal Submissions (v. 2005.11). Whitehorse, YT.

 YESAB. 2006a. Assessor’s Guide to the Assessment of Environmental Effects (v. 2006.01). Whitehorse, YT.

 YESAB. 2006b. Assessor’s Guide to Socio-economic Effects Assessment (v. 2006.06). Whitehorse, YT.

 YESAB. 2006c. Assessor’s Guide to the Assessment of Cumulative Effects. (v. 06.01). Whitehorse, YT.

 YESAB. 2013. Watson Lake Bi-Fuel Project Designated Office Evaluation Report. Project Number 2013-0009. July Watson Lake, YT.

 Yukon Bureau of Statistics. 2011a. Population Projections, 2021. Yukon Executive Council Office. Available from http://www.eco.gov.yk.ca/pdf/Projections2011.pdf; last accessed August 5, 2013.

 Yukon Bureau of Statistics. 2012b. Yukon Employment: September 2012. Yukon Executive Council Office. Available from http://www.eco.gov.yk.ca/stats/pdf/employment_sep12.pdf; last accessed August 5, 2013.

 Yukon Ecoregions Working. 2004. Ecoregions of the Yukon Territory – Biophysical Properties of Yukon Landscape. Edited by Smith, C.A.S., Meikle, J.C. and Roots, C.F. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Research Branch. PARC Technical Bulletin 04-01. Summerland, British Columbia.

Chapter 10 Page 10-18 Glossary & References Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

 Yukon Energy (Yukon Energy Corporation). 2004. Job Site Spill Contingency Plan, Reporting Procedures. Revision February 1, 2004. Prepared by the Director, Health, Safety & Environment.

 Yukon Energy. 2005. Environmental Management System Manual. Issued 2003, revised December 2005. Whitehorse, YT.

 Yukon Energy. 2012a. Overview of 20-Year Resource Plan: 2011-2030. July 2012. Available from http://yukonenergy.ca/downloads/db/1184_2012%20Resource%20Plan%20Overview.pdf; last accessed August 5, 2013.

 Yukon Energy. 2012b. YEC 2012/2013 General Rate Application. Available from http://yukonutilitiesboard.yk.ca/proceedings/yec-2012-general-rate-application/; last accessed August 5, 2013.

 Yukon Environment. 2009. Wildlife Key Area Maps: 105D, Set 1-4. Available from http://www.environmentyukon.ca/maps/view/detail/2/27/298/; last accessed August 5, 2013.

 Yukon Environment. 2012. Yukon State of the Environment Interim Report: An Update for Environmental Indicators. Available from http://www.env.gov.yk.ca/publications- maps/documents/state_of_the_environment_report2012.pdf; last accessed August 5, 2013.

 YECL (Yukon Electrical Company Limited) and ATCO Gas. 2013. Watson Lake Bi-Fuel Project YESAB #2013-0009: Response to Information Request Received During Seeking Views and Information Phase.

 Yukon Government. 1998. OIC 1998/207 Environment Act: Air Emissions Regulations. Available from http://www.gov.yk.ca/legislation/regs/oic1998_207.pdf; last accessed August 5, 2013.

 Yukon Government. 2002. Business Corporations Act. Available from http://www.gov.yk.ca/legislation/acts/buco.pdf; last accessed August 5, 2013.

 Yukon Government. 2002. Environment Act. Available from http://www.gov.yk.ca/legislation/acts/environment.pdf; last accessed August 5, 2013.

 Yukon Government. 2009. Climate Change Action Plan. Available from http://www.env.gov.yk.ca/publications-maps/documents/YG_Climate_Change_Action_Plan.pdf; last accessed August 5, 2013.

 Yukon Government. 2009. Energy Strategy for Yukon. Available from http://www.energy.gov.yk.ca/pdf/energy_strategy.pdf; last accessed August 5, 2013.

 Yukon Highways and Public Works. 2011. Yukon Traffic Count Summery 2011. Prepared by Transportation and Programming and Transportation Engineering Branch. Available from http://www.hpw.gov.yk.ca/pdf/traf2011.pdf; last accessed August 5, 2013.

 Yukon Info. 2013. Online. Available from http://www.yukoninfo.com/; last accessed August 5, 2013.

 YUB (Yukon Utilities Board). 2002. Yukon Public Utilities Act. Revised Statutes of the Yukon. Available from http://yukonutilitiesboard.yk.ca/pdf/General/149_pua.pdf; last accessed August 5, 2013.

Chapter 10 Page 10-19 Glossary & References Whitehorse Diesel - Natural Gas Conversion Project YESAA Project Proposal - August 2013

 Yukon Waters Act. 2003. Available from http://www.gov.yk.ca/legislation/acts/waters.pdf; last accessed August 5, 2013.

Personal Communication

 Audette, C. 2012. Environment Canada, Centre for Atmospheric Research Experiments. Personal communication Oct. 23, 2012.

 Barker, O. 2012. Senior Fisheries Biologist, Yukon Department of Fisheries. Personal communication October 3, 2012.

 Mulder, R. 2012. Biodiversity Information Specialist, Yukon Conservation Data Centre. Personal communication Oct. 10, 2012.

Chapter 10 Page 10-20 Glossary & References