Scoping Document for the 5 Wing Goose Bay Remediation Project

SCOPING DOCUMENT FOR THE 5 WING GOOSE BAY REMEDIATION PROJECT

Project Leaders: DIRECTOR GENERAL ENVIRONMENT / ASSISTANT CHIEF of AIR STAFF

Project Management Service Provider: DIRECTOR ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT

February 2008

Goose Bay Remediation Project Scoping Document

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1 Goose Bay Remediation Project ...... 1 1.2 Site Conditions...... 1 1.3 Federal Environmental Assessment Framework...... 2 1.4 Provincial Requirements...... 5 1.5 Purpose of this Document...... 5

2.0 SCOPE OF PROJECT...... 6 2.1 Works and Activities...... 6 2.2 Environmental Management Plan...... 7 2.3 Health and Safety Plan...... 7 2.4 Alternative Technologies...... 7 2.5 Schedule...... 8

3.0 SCOPE OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS ...... 9 3.1 Environmental Factors...... 9 3.2 Valued Environmental Components ...... 9

4.0 SCOPE OF ASSESSMENT ...... 11 4.1 Scope of Factors...... 11 4.2 EA Process...... 11 4.3 Assembling Environmental Baseline Information...... 12 4.4 Environmental Issues and VEC Identification...... 12 4.5 Effects of the Environment on the Project...... 12 4.6 Temporal and Spatial Boundaries...... 12 4.7 Analysis of Environmental Interactions...... 13 4.8 Assessment of Impacts/Effects ...... 13 4.9 Mitigation...... 13 4.10 Residual Effects and Determination of Significance ...... 14 4.11 Cumulative Impact Assessment...... 15 4.12 Monitoring and Follow-Up...... 15

5.0 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION/CONSULTATION...... 16 5.1 Environmental Assessment Consultation...... 16 5.2 Public Comment on this Document ...... 16

TABLES

TABLE 2.1 Potential Remediation Technologies ...... 8 TABLE 2.2 Preliminary List of Valued Environmental Components (VECs)...... 10 TABLE 4.1 Typical Mitigation Measures for Other Cleanup Projects ...... 13

FIGURES

FIGURE 1.1 General Site Location ...... 3 FIGURE 1.2 Generalized Locations of Contaminants...... 4

February 2008 Page i Goose Bay Remediation Project Scoping Document

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Goose Bay Remediation Project

The United States Air Force (USAF) constructed the military base at Goose Bay in the 1940s. From 1976 to 1987 Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC) and Transport Canada (TC) operated the Base on behalf of its tenants, the Canadian Forces (CF), USAF, and Allied Participants. In 1987, Goose Bay became a Canadian Forces Base (CFB) 5 Wing Goose Bay that continues to support Allied low level flight training.

CFB 5 Wing Goose Bay is located in central Labrador at the southwestern limit of Hamilton Inlet approximately 200 kilometres inland from the Labrador coast (Figure 1.1). The historical activities associated with operating the Base have resulted in numerous contaminated sites.

The overall purpose of the Goose Bay Remediation Project (GBRP) is reduction of human health and ecological risks from the existing contamination. The GBRP will address these issues through the following key objectives: • Complete site investigations to provide a comprehensive picture of site conditions; • To develop and implement a comprehensive remedial action plan for the entire site; • Oversee ongoing remedial work and options anlaysis at the Upper Tank Farm (UTF), the Survival Tank Farm (STF), and the South Escarpment (SES), concurrent to the investigation phase; and • Undertake “Due Diligence” remedial work where necessary.

The remediation of contaminated soils, sediments, groundwater and surface water will primarily occur on federally owned land at 5 Wing Goose Bay. In some instances, contamination has crossed the DND boundary onto provincial and private lands, and it is possible that more off-site contamination will be identified as the GBRP proceeds. The Project will address any off-site contamination that exists as a direct result of historic base operations.

The Department of National Defence (DND) (the Proponent) will act as the proponent for the GBRP and will be responsible for carrying out the Project.

1.2 Site Conditions

Due to the remote location of the Base and the fact that environmental standards were different than those considered acceptable today, most of the waste materials generated were disposed of on the property until about the 1990's. This was commonplace and considered acceptable at the time. It is these waste disposal activities and miscellaneous releases of a variety of contaminants (e.g. petroleum hydrocarbons), combined with normal Base operations over the last 60+ years, that are now manifested in the environmental contamination that is documented on the Base (Figure 1.2).

Contamination exists in soil, sediment, surface water, groundwater, and biota, both on the plateau (i.e. on the main Base) and in the surrounding environment at the toe of the escarpment and remote locations. The majority of contamination at the Base can be attributed to several sources. Major hydrocarbon plumes can be attributed to leaking underground and aboveground tanks, leaking or ruptured pipelines, and historical general management and containment practices. Heavy metals and other chemical contamination (e.g. polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs)) are due to historical waste disposal practices and the existence of numerous dumpsites.

February 2008 Page 1 Goose Bay Remediation Project Scoping Document

While contamination at several of the sites is well documented (e.g. type, location and volume of affected media), the degree of impact at many of the sites is unknown, as evidenced by the investigation status of various sites (e.g. range from the initial testing phase to full-scale remediation). The primary contaminant sources/ groups found at 5 Wing Goose Bay include: • Petroleum hydrocarbons (BTEX/TPH); • Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs); • Volatile organic compounds (VOCs); • Inorganics (metals); • Pesticides and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs); and • Non-hazardous and hazardous wastes in waste disposal sites.

A brief characterization of natural features at and near the Project site is presented in the Project Description (January 2007). That document also includes a brief description of land uses and the communities, including Aboriginal peoples in the area.

1.3 Federal Environmental Assessment Framework

The GBRP is subject to an Environmental Assessment (EA) pursuant to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA). A CEAA assessment is required for federal authority undertakings on federal lands, specific undertakings that may receive federal funding or activities for which federal authorization is required (e.g. Fisheries Act HADD Authorization). For the GBRP the EA is triggered since DND is the proponent of the Project and is therefore considered a Responsible Authority (RA) for this EA. Another trigger may apply should any of the proposed activities require an authorization by the Department of Fisheries and Ocean pursuant to Section 35 of the federal Fisheries Act. In addition, the Inclusion List Regulations, under the CEAA, state that the remediation of contaminated land in Canada is considered a Project and must undergo a Screening-level EA.

DND has initiated the federal EA process pursuant to the CEAA in relation to the Project. In accordance with the CEAA Regulations respecting the Coordination of Federal Authorities of Environmental Assessment Procedures and Requirements (the Federal Coordination Regulations), the FEAC circulated the DND project description to other federal departments to determine their involvement in the EA process for these projects. The following federal departments have self-identified as Responsible Authorities (RAs) or Federal Authorities (FAs) and will provide specialist advice to the EA: • Environment Canada - FA • Fisheries and Oceans Canada - FA • Health Canada - FA • Transport Canada – neither FA or RA • Indian and Northern Affairs Canada - no response; assume neither FA or RA • Industry Canada – neither FA or RA

In accordance with CEAA, a Notice of Commencement has been posted on the Public Registry of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (the Agency) as of 19 February 2007 (http://www.ceaa- acee.gc.ca; CEAR_ID# 07-01-26393).

February 2008 Page 2 Goose Bay Remediation Project Scoping Document

FIGURE 1.1 General Site Location

February 2008 Page 3 Goose Bay Remediation Project Scoping Document

FIGURE 1.2 Generalized Locations of Contaminants

February 2008 Page 4 Goose Bay Remediation Project Scoping Document

Provincial Requirements

Federal government departments or agencies often consult with provincial governments to determine relevant environmental approvals that could have a bearing on the proposed activities, especially when the activities on federal lands could result in potential off-site impacts. Consequently, the Newfoundland Department of Environment and Conservation was contacted by DND with regards to the proposed GBRP and the need for a provincial EA process. The response indicated that there is no requirement for a provincial EA.

Discussions with the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador concluded that there are no permits relating to the remediation of contaminated sites per se, and that a Provincial Environmental Assessment will not be required within the other document in 3.1 it states that the will gather information from provincial EA process.. Nonetheless, the discovery of fuel contamination migrating off DND land should be reported to the appropriate Provincial authorities and subsequent remediation must follow procedures as set out in the Newfoundland and Labrador Guidance Document for the Management of Impacted Sites (2005).

1.4 Purpose of this Document

Details of the scope of the Project and the factors to be considered in the EA are largely determined by the federal agency responsible for carrying out the EA (Responsible Authority; i.e., DND). Given the public interest in the Project and other considerations, DND has determined that public participation in the screening level EA for the GBRP is appropriate. DND, therefore, is carrying out consultation related to the scoping of the Project to establish the boundaries of an environmental assessment and focus the assessment on relevant issues and concerns.

To facilitate the consultation process on the scoping of the Project, DND has issued this Draft Scoping Document. The Draft discusses: • Scope of Project (Project Components); • Scope of Environmental Factors (Environmental Components); and • Scope of the Assessment.

DND will take the public input on the Draft Scoping Document into account when finalizing the scope. Once finalized, the Document will function as “roadmap” for the EA and provide guidance to the proponent, public and regulatory agencies with respect to the issues to be addressed and the approach to be used in the ultimate determination of potential effects of the Project.

February 2008 Page 5 Goose Bay Remediation Project Scoping Document

2.0 SCOPE OF PROJECT

The purpose of the GBRP is to reduce human health and ecological risks from the existing contamination. By accomplishing this, it is anticipated that there will be at least two potential benefits: • Reduction of the environmental liability of the Federal government; and • Improvement in the environmental conditions.

Numerous remediation activities will be conducted. Some of these will be very large in their scope; others will be relatively small. Common to each of these remediation activities is that there will likely be residual contamination left in the environment that is too expensive or time consuming to remove. In these cases, the sites will be managed by DND to promote long-term remediation and/or to ensure that risks are controlled and do not adversely affect human health or the environment.

In general, remediation technologies for implementation at Goose Bay will be selected on the basis of the following performance criteria: • Destruction or alteration of contaminants (e.g. thermal, biological or chemical treatment); • Mass transfer (e.g. physical extraction or separation) of contaminants from environmental media (e.g. soil vapour extraction); and • Immobilization of contaminants (e.g. containment, solidification).

Factors that will be considered in the selection of technologies for a specific site include contaminant type, contaminant phase (i.e. free phase, adsorbed, dissolved, solid, etc), contaminant volumes, contaminated media (soil/sediment {sand, silt and/ or clay} and groundwater/surface water), source of contamination, proximity to sensitive receptors and infrastructure, site-specific soil characteristics (e.g. organic content, grain size, permeability, soil porosity, etc.), depth to groundwater, and timeline and budgetary constraints.

2.1 Works and Activities

The Project Description (refer to CEAR Reference # 07-01-26393 on the Canadian Environmental Assessment Registry) refers to the all-inclusive scope of work and services that might reasonably be included in the GBRP and includes: • Pre-Remediation Activities - Development of site infrastructure • Remediation Activities - Product recovery - Soil and sediment remediation - Groundwater and surface water remediation • Post Remediation Activities - Equipment removal and decontamination - Removal of site facilities - Removal of hazardous material

February 2008 Page 6 Goose Bay Remediation Project Scoping Document

In addition the Project activities will require in one or more phases off-site resources such as • Potable water supply (e.g., showers, lunchrooms, washrooms, decontamination of vehicles and equipment); • Connection to the municipal sewer or portable washrooms. • Materials import (e.g., gravel, sand, clay/silt, rip rap, geomembranes, geotextiles, piping, fill, topsoil, plantings, sheet piling) • Fuel (e.g., vehicles and equipment). • Electrical power supply (at some of the sites).

Waste generation and off-site disposal of wastes will be minimized where feasible. The anticipated waste streams and proposed methods of disposal are as follows: • Non-hazardous domestic wastes (administration, lunch room, etc.) will be sent to the local licensed facility. • Contaminated combustible materials that are generated during the cleanup will be decontaminated, if possible, and removed from site and transferred to a waste facility licensed to accept them. • Maintenance wastes, such as oils and filters from excavating equipment that are generated on the contaminated site, will be recycled where possible, or disposed of in an appropriate disposal location. • Process wastes from remediation systems, will also be recycled where possible, or disposed of in an appropriate disposal location.

2.2 Environmental Management Plan

An Environmental Management Plan (EMP) for remediation will be developed and will become integral part of the Project. The EMP will outline the remediation activities to be undertaken at 5 Wing Goose Bay and the appropriate mitigation measures for the technology being applied in specific locations. Mitigative measures identified during the EA process will also be incorporated into the EMP (Refer to Section 5.7).

2.3 Health and Safety Plan

A Master Health and Safety Plan (MHASP) was developed for the Project that will cover all phases and elements of the Project. The MHASP will ensure adequate precautions are taken for the protection of workers and the general public. The Plan will be modified over the life of the proposed remediation activities at 5 Wing Goose Bay as new information becomes available for improved worker protection.

Each contractor and consultant retained for the project will be required to submit for review, a project-specific HASP for its workforce, and will be responsible for its implementation. The HASP will meet the requirements of the Master HASP. Audits will be completed to ensure compliance with the project-specific HASP.

2.4 Alternative Technologies

Alternative approaches to free-product recovery that is described in the project description encompass the following technologies: • Multi-Phase Vapour Extraction (Bioslurping) • Dual Phase Extraction (depress aquifer and actively pump product)

February 2008 Page 7 Goose Bay Remediation Project Scoping Document

• Barrier Walls/Interceptor Trench (create preferred flow and collection system for product) • Pump and dispose of free-product from wells or open excavations

After free product removal is complete, additional remediation will be required to manage residual contamination of soil, sediment, groundwater, and/or surface water, depending on the specific site characteristics. Table 2.1 summarizes the technologies that are being considered for implementation at Goose Bay to remediate contamination. The selected technology / technologies will be considered within the EA.

TABLE 2.1 Potential Remediation Technologies Treatment Category Soil and Sediment Groundwater and Surface Water In-Situ Biological Treatment Bioventing Enhanced Biodegradation Enhanced Bioremediation Natural Attenuation In-Situ Physical/Chemical Soil Flushing Air Sparging Treatment Soil Vapour Extraction (SVE) Bioslurping Solidification /Stabilization Dual Phase Extraction Passive / Reactive Treatment Walls In-Situ Thermal Treatment Thermal Treatment with SVE --- Ex-Situ Biological Treatment Biopiles Bioreactors Composting Constructed Wetlands Landfarming Slurry Phase Biological Treatment Ex-Situ Physical/Chemical Chemical Extraction Advanced Oxidation Processes Treatment Chemical Reduction / Oxidation Granulated Activated Carbon (GAC) / Liquid Solidification / Stabilization Phase Carbon Adsorption Ion Exchange Precipitation/ Coagulation / Flocculation Ex-Situ Thermal Treatment Thermal Desorption --- Containment Landfill Cap Physical Barriers Off-Site Disposal. Off Site Disposal Off Site Treatment On-Site Disposal Engineered Landfill ---

2.5 Schedule

The proposed Project schedule is shown below. It is anticipated that remediation will be complete in approximately 2020.

2004 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Project Commencement Site Assessments Remedial Options Analysis Interim Cleanup Environmental Assessment Site Engineering / Design Full Scale Cleanup Cleanup Completion

February 2008 Page 8 Goose Bay Remediation Project Scoping Document

3.0 SCOPE OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS

3.1 Environmental Factors

When establishing the factors to be assessed within the screening level EA, the CEAA definitions of environment and environmental effect must be considered.

"Environment" means the components of the Earth, and includes: • land, water and air, including all layers of the atmosphere; • all organic and inorganic matter and living organisms; and • the interacting natural systems that include components referred to in paragraphs (a) and (b).

"Environmental effect" means, in respect of a project: a) any change that the project may cause in the environment, including any change it may cause to a listed wildlife species, its critical habitat or the residences of individuals of that species, as those terms are defined in subsection 2(1) of the Species at Risk Act b) any effect of any change referred to in paragraph (a) on i) health and socio-economic conditions ii) physical and cultural heritage iii) the current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes by aboriginal persons, or iv) any structure, site or thing that is of historical, archaeological, palaeontological or architectural significance, or c) any change to the project that may be caused by the environment

The screening for the GBRP will include all of the above listed factors. To focus the analysis of potential environmental effects resulting from the project, the Valued Environmental Component (VEC) approach will be used on project-related activities that are likely to have an adverse effect on the environment.

3.2 Valued Environmental Components

A VEC is defined as a component of the environment that is considered important at an ecological, cultural, economic, historical, archaeological or aesthetic level. VECs are specific to the environmental setting to which a project or activity will take place and are an important focal point to the assessment. Within the screening an explanation will be provided for each VEC included in the analysis of potential environmental effects.

The preliminary scope of the factors to be considered in the assessment should include, but may not necessarily be limited to, potential effects (including cumulative effects) on the VECs listed in Table 2.2. This list is based on the current knowledge of which environmental components could be affected directly or via pathways. For example, if Project activities lead to a discharge of contaminated water, the water quality in the receiving water course can be directly affected. This contaminated water, however, can also represent a pathway through which contaminant levels in fish could increase. Environmental components that are present in the Project area have the potential to interact with the Project (directly or via pathways), and for which there is a public concern, will be established as VECs.

February 2008 Page 9 Goose Bay Remediation Project Scoping Document

TABLE 2.2 Preliminary List of Valued Environmental Components (VECs) Air Quality & Noise Geology & Hydrogeology Well Water Yields Groundwater Quality Surficial Geology and Soils Soil Quality/Contamination Surface Water Surface Water Drainage (on-and off-site) Surface Water Quality (incl. sediment quality) Terrestrial Ecology Vegetation Communities, Plant Life Wildlife Habitat and Species (game wildlife; furbearers; other) Landbirds (freshwater) Waterfowl Migratory Birds Species at Risk Wetlands Aquatic Environment – Freshwater Fish Habitat Fish Communities/Species Socio-Economic/Cultural Effects on Health, Heritage, Archaeology, (Traditional) Land Use that could result from the effects predicted for other VECs

February 2008 Page 10 Goose Bay Remediation Project Scoping Document

4.0 SCOPE OF ASSESSMENT

4.1 Scope of Factors

The Screening level EA will consider those factors required and described pursuant to Section 16 of CEAA: • Environmental effects: the environmental effects of - the Project; - malfunctions or accidents that may occur in connection with the project; and - any cumulative environmental effects that are likely to result from the Project, in combination with other projects or activities that have been or will be carried out; • Significance: the significance of the environmental effects referred to above; • Public comments: comments from the public that are received in accordance with this Act and the regulations; and • Mitigation: measures that are technically and economically feasible and that would mitigate any significant adverse environmental effects of the project.

Details on how these factors will be addressed as part of the EA are presented in the following discussion of the key components of the assessment process.

4.2 EA Process

The focus of the EA will be to identify the interactions (i.e. environmental effects) resulting from the Project on the existing environment and vice versa effect the environment may have on the Project. The potential impacts of these interactions are then assessed. Where adverse impacts are identified in the EA, mitigation will be designed to minimize potential effects on the environment and human health and safety.

This iterative approach to EA results in a well-designed Project that meets not only Project objectives, but also strives to meet community and regulatory objectives for sustainable development.

A schematic depiction of the overall approach to the EA for this Project is represented by the three-box model shown below.

ENVIRONMENT / PROJECT INTERACTION MONITORING

PROJECT / ENVIRONMENT INTERACTION MITIGATION

February 2008 Page 11 Goose Bay Remediation Project Scoping Document

4.3 Assembling Environmental Baseline Information

An analysis of baseline environmental data (i.e., both biophysical and socio-economic) have been, and will be, conducted in the context of the proposed Project. This will include a detailed review of recent studies conducted on the Project site to determine the most effective means of clean-up, supplemented with appropriate field programs.

A description of existing environmental conditions within the Project study area will be prepared to support the assessment of potential effects of various Project activities on the environment and the potential impacts of the environment on the Project.

An extensive amount of information has been collected for the GBRP. Conversely, there may be data gaps for specific components of the Project. Any relevant information that has been previously collected will be used during the conduct of the EA. Where necessary, additional baseline studies will be conducted to fill information gaps.

4.4 Environmental Issues and VEC Identification

The identification of issues and of VECs is a distinct step in the EA process. The objective is to focus the EA on the specific environmental issues and concerns of public, stakeholders, government agencies and Aboriginal peoples. These issues and concerns are typically identified through scoping and public consultation (see Section 5.0). Where a clear linkage or pathway between environmental components and Project activities is identified, and potential effects are a concern, the environmental component will become the VECs upon which the Assessment will focus. (A preliminary list of VECs for the EA on the GBRP has been presented in Section 3.2 of this Scoping Document.)

4.5 Effects of the Environment on the Project

An additional component that needs to be addressed in the EA is the effect of the environment on the Project. While this is typically taken into consideration at the engineering design stage, it is important to review all potential interactions to ensure that they have been adequately addressed in the design.

A more recent consideration that has gained relevancy for long-life projects is the potential change in the environment due to climate change. Regional climate modelling has demonstrated that projects with longer life spans may experience different environmental conditions than exist today. These would include changes in seasonal temperature variations, more extreme weather patterns (hurricanes, flooding), and increased sea levels and storm surges. This potential for future change must be considered at the design stage for long-life projects.

4.6 Temporal and Spatial Boundaries

The effect of a specific project activity on a VEC may differ in both space and time from the effect of any other activity. Certain project activities may have long-term consequences; others will be of short duration. Therefore, an important aspect of the EA process is the determination of VEC boundaries. Spatial boundaries for assessing potential effects will typically be established by determining the geographic extent of an effect from Project works and activities. They may be localized (e.g., site footprint) or may have a wider influence (e.g., airshed). Temporal boundaries for the EA will be specific to the issue or VEC being considered. Different temporal boundaries may be used for specific subject areas and for different issues within a subject area, to reflect. For example, noise effects will be short-term and limited to the construction phase. In contrast, the operation of any engineered feature (e.g., a new surface water drainage channel) may continue beyond the end of the construction period and would need to be assessed within the context of its operating life.

February 2008 Page 12 Goose Bay Remediation Project Scoping Document

Temporal and spatial study boundaries will be considered for the pre-construction/construction, operation, and decommissioning and abandonment phases of the Project. Spatial and temporal boundaries will be developed using scientific and technical information, input from the public, and professional experience of the EA team.

4.7 Analysis of Environmental Interactions

When all available information is assembled and VECs and interactions/linkages are identified, various analyses will be conducted to characterize or quantify these interactions. This analysis will assist in the assessment of the effects of the Project.

4.8 Assessment of Impacts/Effects

The potential impacts of the relevant Project components (e.g., groundwater and surface water control, contaminant removal and/or treatment, residual contaminant containment, etc) activities will be assessed for each VEC (see Section 3.2). In addition potential effects of malfunctions and accidents, cumulative effects, and the potential effects of the environment on the Project will be assessed.

Environmental effects will be categorized in terms of: whether they are adverse (negative) or positive, and, if adverse, their significance and, if significant, their likelihood. Predictions of potential environmental effects will be based on a combination of objective (measurable) and subjective (deduced) experience based on professional judgment and evaluation.

4.9 Mitigation

Mitigation is defined as the elimination, reduction or control of the adverse environmental effects of the project, and may include restitution for any damage to the environment caused by such effects through replacement, restoration, compensation or any other means.

Mitigation measures will be consistent with the requirements of all relevant legislation, regulations, guidelines, policies, management plans, specifications, and best management practices, where practical. Mitigation will be considered in a hierarchical manner with impact avoidance measures identified first, reduction measures second, and compensation last.

Mitigation measures will be outlined for all VECs within the physical, biological and socio-economic environment that are determined to have an adverse effect. All proposed components of mitigation will be described by phase, timing and duration. Examples of typical mitigation measures that have been applied to previous cleanup projects are provided in Table 4.1.

TABLE 4.1 Typical Mitigation Measures for Other Cleanup Projects Potential Issue Typical Mitigation Procedures Erosion and site runoff Implement erosion and sedimentation controls as outlined in the “Nova Scotia Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook” (1988). Suspension of sediments Install cofferdams or turbidity curtains. Divert surface waters. Worker exposure Develop a detailed worker Health and Safety plan that outlines safe handling procedures for contaminated materials. Develop worker decontamination procedures. Dust Conduct dust monitoring . Suspend operations. Apply dust suppression when and where required.

February 2008 Page 13 Goose Bay Remediation Project Scoping Document

TABLE 4.1 Typical Mitigation Measures for Other Cleanup Projects Potential Issue Typical Mitigation Procedures Groundwater contamination Conduct groundwater dispersion modelling and determine zones of influence. Monitor for levels of contaminants as determined in the EA. Develop measures to respond to groundwater quality concerns, such as implementation of additional pumping or diversion channels, barrier walls, or other control measures.

In addition to the procedures outlined in the EMP, potential Project related effects may be reduced by ensuring that facilities and activities are either located in areas or conducted in a manner to avoid impacts to the physical or biological environment. Initiatives that can be or have already been conducted to accomplish this, include: • Siting facilities away from sensitive receptors such as watercourses and sensitive habitats; • Sharing access routes where practical; • Use existing facilities, and developed areas, where practical; • Locating stockpile and waste storage areas away from sensitive receptors such as watercourses; • Accommodate adjacent land use, and activities in the Project design; • Timing specific activities to minimize potential effects on the local community, where practical; • Use erosion control measures to protect offsite resources; • Develop specific operating guidelines and contingency/response plans for Project personnel; • Develop detailed monitoring plans to provide indicators of the success or failure of the mitigation measures; and • Selection of highly effective and proven technologies.

4.10 Residual Effects and Determination of Significance

Residual effects include the adverse effects that may remain at each stage of the project after proposed mitigation or enhancement measures are implemented, including emergency response and contingency plans. The EA will contain sufficient information to enable the reviewers to understand and review the significance of Project effects. The terms used to describe the level of significance will be defined in the EA. The following criteria will be used to assess the significance of residual effects: • magnitude; • geographic extent; • timing, duration and frequency; • degree to which effects are reversible or can be mitigated; • ecological and social/cultural context;

Effects that are determined to be significant based on the above criteria will also be assessed with respect to the probability of occurrence (likelihood).

February 2008 Page 14 Goose Bay Remediation Project Scoping Document

The determination of significance and likelihood of residual environmental effects are at the core of the decision about the Project. It will influence the course of action the RA takes with respect to the Project. For this reason, the EA will include clear conclusions of whether the adverse environmental effects, taking into account any mitigation measures, are significant, not significant or uncertain.

In addition to the assessment of adverse effects, the EA will identify positive (beneficial effects). The significance of the positive effects however will not be assessed.

4.11 Cumulative Impact Assessment

It is a requirement that all CEAA regulated environmental assessments includes a cumulative effects assessment of the proposed Project and other projects in the area. It has been recognized that in some instances impacts on the environment from multiple projects or activities may act cumulatively. The EA will therefore identify and assess the cumulative adverse environmental effects of the project in combination with other past, present or reasonably foreseeable projects and/or activities within the study area.

Intra-project cumulative impacts will also be evaluated to determine if the various Project activities also have the potential to “stack up” and create internal cumulative effects (e.g., dust from multiple activities).

4.12 Monitoring and Follow-Up

In accordance with the requirements under CEAA (Section 38 (1)), DND will consider within the context of the EA whether a follow-up program is necessary under the circumstances of the GBRP. Such monitoring could involve, for example, monitoring of surface and groundwater quality for the purpose of: • Verifying the accuracy of the effect predictions, and • Determining the effectiveness of mitigation measures taken to limit any adverse environmental effects of the project.

If considered necessary, the specifics of the monitoring and follow-up programs would be determined as part of the EA.

February 2008 Page 15 Goose Bay Remediation Project Scoping Document

5.0 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION/CONSULTATION

DND has consulted with stakeholders in Labrador since at least 2004 regarding the issues at 5 Wing Goose Bay. Regular meetings have been held with the public, the Town of Happy Valley-Goose Bay, the Innu, the Inuit, the Métis, other federal government departments (Health Canada, Environment Canada, and Fisheries and Oceans Canada), and representatives of the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. The consultation will continue throughout the environmental assessment and throughout implementation of the Project. This will help to: • Improve understanding of the potential impacts of the proposed Project; • Identify remediation approaches and mitigation measures, to improve environmental and social acceptability; • Identify and attempt to resolve contentious issues; and • Assist with EA issues scoping; and • Provide for a transparent planning process.

5.1 Environmental Assessment Consultation

In addition to the consultation being undertaken as part of the development of this Scoping Document, additional opportunities will be offered to the public to participate in the development of the EA and to offer input to the Project. This consultation effort will provide an opportunity for the public to engage the EA team experts to gain further information about the technical details of the Project. It also provides an opportunity for the EA Team to gather local knowledge about the Project areas and the specific features of these areas.

As part of the EA, a detailed consultation plan will be developed after the initial scoping session to clearly outline further opportunities for the public to be involved in the process. The mechanisms for the additional consultation may include additional open house sessions, information programs, focus groups, workshops, Project dedicated phone numbers and websites, and meetings. Specific project information and notification of meetings and open houses will be conveyed through advertisements in local and regional newspapers, radio and television.

5.2 Public Comment on this Document

Comments are being sought on this Scoping Document to finalize the scope of the screening level EA process. The results of the scoping exercise will also assist in DND’s determination of any detailed study components and/or baseline studies that may be necessary.

In consideration of information contained in this document, the public is invited to provide its views and opinions on the scope of the Project, of the environmental components and of the environmental assessment process itself.

Persons wishing to submit comments may do so in writing to DND. Comments must be received no later than March 16, 2008. Mailed comments may be sent to the attention of:

Wing Environment Officer 5 Wing Goose Bay Building 271 CFB Goose Bay

February 2008 Page 16 Goose Bay Remediation Project Scoping Document

P.O. Box 7002, Stn. A Happy Valley-Goose Bay, Newfoundland and Labrador A0P 1S0 Fax: 709-896-6974

It is of note that the Canadian Environmental Assessment Registry (CEAR), which is operated by the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, lists details in relation to the CEAA Process, and provides contact information and a list of documents available through CEAR. Registry information can be accessed at www.CEAA.gc.ca, clicking the “Canadian Environmental Assessment Registry” and finally by entering “Goose Bay Remediation Project” in the appropriate field.

February 2008 Page 17