METRO VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT CLIMATE ACTION COMMITTEE

REGULAR MEETING

Wednesday, June 7, 2017 1:00 p.m. 2nd Floor Boardroom, 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Columbia

A G E N D A1

1. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA

1.1 June 7, 2017 Regular Meeting Agenda That the Climate Action Committee adopt the agenda for its regular meeting scheduled for June 7, 2017 as circulated.

2. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES

2.1 May 3, 2017 Regular Meeting Minutes That the Climate Action Committee adopt the minutes of its regular meeting held May 3, 2017 as circulated.

3. DELEGATIONS

4. INVITED PRESENTATIONS

4.1 Anton Philip van Harreveld, MSc, founder and chairman of the Odournet Group of companies Subject: European Union Standard Method of Odour Measurement

4.2 Robyn Wark, Team Lead, Senior Relationship Manager, Sustainable Communities, BC Hydro Subject: BC Energy Step Code

1 Note: Recommendation is shown under each item, where applicable.

June 1, 2017

Climate Action Committee - Page 1 Climate Action Committee Regular Agenda June 7, 2017 Agenda Page 2 of 4

5. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEE OR STAFF

5.1 Carbon Price Policy for Metro Vancouver Projects and Initiatives Designated Speakers: Conor Reynolds, Senior Project Engineer, Parks, Planning and Environment Department, James McQueen, Senior Economist, Financial Services Department That the MVRD Board approve the Carbon Price Policy as presented in the report dated May 17, 2017, titled “Carbon Price Policy for Metro Vancouver Projects and Initiatives”.

5.2 Federal Electric Vehicle Initiatives Designated Speaker: Eve Hou, Air Quality Planner, Parks, Planning and Environment Department That the MVRD Board: a) Send a letter to the Minister of Transport and to the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development requesting that: i. local governments be engaged and consulted on the national zero- emission vehicle strategy; ii. the national zero-emission vehicle strategy include a nation-wide incentive program for electric vehicles, increased funding for electric vehicle infrastructure and a zero emissions vehicle (ZEV) requirement; and b) Direct staff to apply for funding through the FCM Municipalities for Climate Innovation Program to support electric vehicle infrastructure and uptake in Metro Vancouver.

5.3 UBCM Resolutions on Electric Vehicle Charging in Stratified Multi-Unit Residential Buildings Designated Speaker: Eve Hou, Air Quality Planner, Parks, Planning and Environment Department That the MVRD Board: a) Submit the resolutions attached to the report dated May 17, 2017, titled, “UBCM Resolutions on Electric Vehicle Charging in Stratified Multi-Unit Residential Buildings” to the Union of British Columbia Municipalities (UBCM) to facilitate electric vehicle charging in stratified multi-family dwellings through changes to the BC Strata Property Act and the BC Utilities Commission Act; and b) Direct staff to identify appropriate BC local governments and forward this report to them prior to the UBCM Convention in September 2017, for their consideration.

Climate Action Committee - Page 2 Climate Action Committee Regular Agenda June 7, 2017 Agenda Page 3 of 4

5.4 Metro Vancouver Submission on the Review of the Federal Environmental Assessment Process Designated Speaker: Laurie Bates-Frymel, Senior Regional Planner, Parks, Planning and Environment Department That the MVRD Board convey to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change support for, and feedback on, the appointed Expert Panel’s recommended changes to the federal environmental assessment process as expressed in Attachment 3 to the report dated May 15, 2017, titled “Metro Vancouver Submission on the Review of the Federal Environmental Assessment Process”.

5.5 Odour Management and Measurement in Metro Vancouver Designated Speaker: Ray Robb, Division Manager, Environmental Regulation and Enforcement, Legal and Legislative Services Department That the MVRD Board receive for information the report dated May 25, 2017, titled “Odour Management and Measurement in Metro Vancouver”.

5.6 Caring for the Air 2017 Report Designated Speaker: Julie Saxton, Acting Program Manager, Bylaw and Regulation Development Parks, Planning & Environment Department That the MVRD Board receive for information the report dated May 11, 2017, titled “Caring for the Air 2017 Report”.

5.7 Manager’s Report Designated Speaker: Roger Quan, Director, Air Quality and Climate Change, Parks, Planning and Environment Department That the Climate Action Committee receive for information the report titled “Manager’s Report”, dated May 18, 2017.

6. INFORMATION ITEMS

7. OTHER BUSINESS

8. BUSINESS ARISING FROM DELEGATIONS

9. RESOLUTION TO CLOSE MEETING Note: The Committee must state by resolution the basis under section 90 of the Community Charter on which the meeting is being closed. If a member wishes to add an item, the basis must be included below.

Climate Action Committee - Page 3 Climate Action Committee Regular Agenda June 7, 2017 Agenda Page 4 of 4

10. ADJOURNMENT/CONCLUSION That the Climate Action Committee adjourn/conclude its regular meeting of June 7, 2017.

Membership: Corrigan, Derek (C) – Burnaby Gill, Tom – Surrey Steves, Harold – Richmond Reimer, Andrea (VC) – Vancouver Harris, Maria – Electoral Area A Storteboom, Rudy – Langley City Buhr, Karl – Lions Bay Jackson, Lois – Delta Villeneuve, Judy – Surrey Dupont, Laura – Port Coquitlam Masse, Robert – Maple Ridge Williams, Bryce – Tsawwassen

Climate Action Committee - Page 4 2.1

METRO VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT CLIMATE ACTION COMMITTEE

Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Metro Vancouver Regional District (MVRD) Climate Action Committee held at 1:04 p.m. on Wednesday, May 3, 2017 in the 2nd Floor Boardroom, 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Columbia.

MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair, Mayor Derek Corrigan, Burnaby Vice Chair, Councillor Andrea Reimer, Vancouver Mayor Karl Buhr, Lions Bay Councillor Laura Dupont, Port Coquitlam Councillor Tom Gill, Surrey Director Maria Harris, Electoral Area A Mayor Lois Jackson, Delta Councillor Robert Masse, Maple Ridge Councillor Harold Steves, Richmond Councillor Rudy Storteboom, Langley City Councillor Judy Villeneuve, Surrey Chief Bryce Williams, Tsawwassen (arrived at 1:24 p.m.)

MEMBERS ABSENT: None

STAFF PRESENT: Roger Quan, Air Quality and Climate Change Director, Parks, Planning and Environment Carol Mason, Chief Administrative Officer Agata Kosinski, Assistant to Regional Committees, Board and Information Services

1. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA

1.1 May 3, 2017 Regular Meeting Agenda

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Climate Action Committee adopt the agenda for its regular meeting scheduled for May 3, 2017 as circulated. CARRIED

2. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES

2.1 March 1, 2017 Regular Meeting Minutes

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Climate Action Committee adopt the minutes of its regular meeting held March 1, 2017 as circulated. CARRIED

Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the MVRD Climate Action Committee held on Wednesday, May 3, 2017 Page 1 of 6

Climate Action Committee - Page 5 3. DELEGATIONS

3.1 Dave Schick, Manager, Policy, Government and Public Affairs, Chevron Burnaby Refinery

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Climate Action Committee hear the delegation, Dave Schick of Chevron Burnaby Refinery. CARRIED

Dave Schick, Manager, Policy, Government and Public Affairs, provided the Committee with an overview of Chevron's co-processing initiative. The presentation expressed support for Metro Vancouver's proposed HTL pilot; notably the biocrude generated from the HTL pilot that is intended to be used as feedstock at the Burnaby Refinery to produce lower carbon intensity renewable fuels.

Presentation material titled “Chevron Burnaby Refinery Co-Processing Initiative” is retained with the May 3, 2017 Climate Action Committee agenda.

4. INVITED PRESENTATIONS No items presented.

5. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEE OR STAFF

5.1 2017 Update on Liquid Waste Sustainability Innovation Fund Projects Report dated April 24, 2017, from Fred Nenninger, Policy, Planning and Analysis, Director, Liquid Waste Services, providing an update on five projects funded under the Liquid Waste Sustainability Innovation Funds.

Fred Nenninger, provided a presentation updating the Committee on the status of the Liquid Waste Sustainability Innovation Funds. The presentation highlighted the following projects: water reclamation from wastewater effluent using disc filters; phosphorus recovery demonstration unit; behaviour change pilot project, aimed at reducing grease in sewers; a smart sewers system with wireless in-situ sensors that detect odour and corrosive compounds; and the hydrothermal processing pilot facility.

In response to questions, members were informed about budgetary considerations, the equipment lifespan costs, and the market demand for phosphorus.

1:24 p.m. Chief Williams arrived at the meeting.

Presentation material titled “2017 Update on Sustainability Innovation Fund Projects” is retained with the May 3, 2017 Climate Action Committee agenda.

Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the MVRD Climate Action Committee held on Wednesday, May 3, 2017 Page 2 of 6

Climate Action Committee - Page 6 It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Climate Action Committee receive for information the report dated April 24, 2017, titled “2017 Update on Liquid Waste Sustainability Innovation Fund Projects”. CARRIED

5.2 2017 Update on Regional District Sustainability Innovation Fund Projects Report dated April 24, 2017, from Roger Quan, Air Quality and Climate Change Director, Parks, Planning and Environment, providing an update on seven projects funded under the Regional District Sustainability Innovation Funds.

Roger Quan, provided a presentation updating the Committee on the following seven project: “Rate Our Home” project; roof to creek natural drainage and habitat learning landscape; improving ecological health and carbon sequestration potential at Burns Bog; strata energy advisor pilot program; transit oriented affordable housing fund; the regional park solar-powered conversion project; and the City of Langley urban agriculture demonstration.

Presentation material titled “2017 Update on Sustainability Innovation Fund Projects” is retained with the May 3, 2017 Climate Action Committee agenda.

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Climate Action Committee receive for information the report dated April 24, 2017, titled “2017 Update on Regional District Sustainability Innovation Fund Projects”. CARRIED

5.3 2017 Update on Water Sustainability Innovation Fund Projects Report dated April 24, 2017, from Inder Singh, Director, Policy, Planning and Analysis, Water Services, providing an update on six projects funded under the Water Sustainability Innovation Fund.

Inder Singh, provided a presentation updating the Committee on the following projects: Barnston/Maple Ridge Pump Station energy recovery; climate change impacts and adaptation strategy; watershed invasive plant removal and control project; water conservation research and campaign; mountain lake tapping; and assessing densification impact on water demand.

In response to questions, members were informed about weather forecast methodology, garden centres native plant education strategy, and upper mountain lake water supply potential.

Presentation material titled “2017 Update on Sustainability Innovation Fund Projects” is retained with the May 3, 2017 Climate Action Committee agenda.

Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the MVRD Climate Action Committee held on Wednesday, May 3, 2017 Page 3 of 6

Climate Action Committee - Page 7 It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Climate Action Committee receive for information the report dated April 24, 2017 titled “2017 Update on Water Sustainability Innovation Fund Projects”. CARRIED

5.4 Update on Metro Vancouver’s Grow Green Website and the “Growing Green in Metro Vancouver” Forum Report dated April 10, 2017, from Marcin Pachcinski, Division Manager, Electoral Area, Planning and Analytics and Environment, and Josephine Clark, Regional Planner, Parks, Planning and Environment, providing the Climate Action Committee with an update of Metro Vancouver’s “Grow Green” website and a summary of the “Growing Green in Metro Vancouver” forum.

Marcin Pachcinski and Josephine Clark, provided the Committee with a presentation on the Grow Green website developed by Metro Vancouver through the support of the Sustainability Innovation Fund and in collaboration with UBC Botanical Garden. The presentation highlighted the Grow Green website content; the digital, physical, and media publicity strategy promoting the site; the Growing Green demonstration garden and forum held at, and in conjunction with, the UBC Botanical Gardens.

Members suggested further consideration be given to more education on the website about the threat of invasive species, and further publicity to educate both the public and retailers about the benefits of using local and native species.

Presentation material titled “Update on Grow Green: A Sustainability Innovation Fund Project” is retained with the May 3, 2017 Climate Action Committee agenda.

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Climate Action Committee receive for information the report dated April 10, 2017, titled “Update on Metro Vancouver’s Grow Green Website and the “Growing Green in Metro Vancouver” Forum.” CARRIED

5.5 Smart Drive Challenge Results and Next Steps Report dated April 18, 2017, from Eve Hou, Air Quality Planner, and Conor Reynolds, Senior Project Engineer, Parks, Planning and Environment, updating the Committee on the results of the Smart Drive Challenge, a Sustainability Innovation Fund project initiated in 2015.

Eve Hou and Conor Reynolds, provided the Committee with a presentation on the results of the Smart Drive Challenge. The presentation outlined the study participation numbers; the geographic representation; the demographics; the study period challenges; the results; and the next steps for this study.

Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the MVRD Climate Action Committee held on Wednesday, May 3, 2017 Page 4 of 6

Climate Action Committee - Page 8 In response to questions, the members were informed about the plug-in device that measures driving patterns, and the results comparison with other jurisdictions and the longer-range control group.

Presentation material titled “Smart Drive Challenge: Preliminary Results” is retained with the May 3, 2017 Climate Action Committee agenda.

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Climate Action Committee receive for information the report titled “Smart Drive Challenge Results and Next Steps”, dated April 18, 2017. CARRIED

5.6 Manager’s Report Report dated April 18, 2017, from Roger Quan, Air Quality and Climate Change Director, Parks, Planning and Environment, updating the Committee on the status of the work program elements including the Emotive Campaign at the Vancouver International Auto Show and future upcoming events; BC SCRAP-IT Program Electric Vehicle Incentives; changes to the energy efficiency requirements in the BC Building Code – The BC Energy Step Code; and building energy benchmarking.

The members of the Committee subsequently proposed the motion to ask that the Board endorse the City of Richmond’s motion to both the Lower Mainland Local Government Association and the Union of BC Municipalities (UBCM).

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the MVRD Board: a) endorse the following City of Richmond resolution, as presented in the correspondence dated April 11, 2017, titled “Building Energy Benchmarking Policy”: “that the province be requested to develop a requirement that buildings above a certain size threshold benchmark their energy performance and report this information to the province annually, and that the resulting data be available to local governments to inform their climate policy and programs”; and b) write a letter to the Lower Mainland Local Government Association and the Union of BC Municipalities, communicating the Board’s endorsement. CARRIED

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Climate Action Committee receive for information the report titled “Manager’s Report”, dated April 18, 2017. CARRIED

Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the MVRD Climate Action Committee held on Wednesday, May 3, 2017 Page 5 of 6

Climate Action Committee - Page 9 6. INFORMATION ITEMS

6.1 Woodstoves Are Good for the Soul, Bad for the Heart – bulletin release received from McGill University, Montreal dated February 27, 2017.

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Climate Action Committee receive for information the report titled “Woodstoves Are Good for the Soul, Bad for the Heart”, dated February 27, 2017. CARRIED

7. OTHER BUSINESS A member of the Committee inquired about the air quality permit application process, and subsequently requested that a report be provided to the Committee outlining the process involved, the number of applications received per year, and the possible impact of industry on the surrounding air quality and the aquifers.

Request of Staff Staff was requested to report back to the Climate Action Committee outlining the current air quality permit application process, identifying the number of applications received, the process involved in awarding or rejecting applications, and the subsequent industrial impact on local air quality and aquifers.

8. BUSINESS ARISING FROM DELEGATIONS No items presented.

9. RESOLUTION TO CLOSE MEETING No items presented.

10. ADJOURNMENT/CONCLUSION

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Climate Action Committee conclude its regular meeting of May 3, 2017.

CARRIED (Time: 3:02 p.m.)

______Agata Kosinski, Derek Corrigan, Chair Assistant to Regional Committees

21535121 FINAL

Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the MVRD Climate Action Committee held on Wednesday, May 3, 2017 Page 6 of 6

Climate Action Committee - Page 10 5.1

To: Climate Action Committee

From: Conor Reynolds, Senior Project Engineer, Parks, Planning and Environment Department James McQueen, Senior Economist, Financial Services Department

Date: May 17, 2017 Meeting Date: June 7, 2017

Subject: Carbon Price Policy for Metro Vancouver Projects and Initiatives

RECOMMENDATION That the MVRD Board approve the Carbon Price Policy as presented in the report dated May 17, 2017, titled “Carbon Price Policy for Metro Vancouver Projects and Initiatives”.

PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to seek MVRD Board approval of the attached Carbon Price Policy.

BACKGROUND Metro Vancouver’s commitment to taking action on climate change has been confirmed with the adoption of the 2015-2018 Board Strategic Plan, which provides strategic direction to “Incorporate strategies and actions into all Metro Vancouver functions to mitigate and adapt to climate change”, and to develop a regional climate action strategy. In addition, Metro Vancouver’s Corporate Climate Action Plan includes an action to “establish an internal price for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions at a level which would encourage lower GHG emitting projects”.

As a mechanism to work toward meeting this commitment, staff have developed the Carbon Price Policy to provide clear direction and guidance on how to account for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in Metro Vancouver business decisions, especially when evaluating proposed options for a future project or initiative. This policy is presented in this report for MVRD Board consideration and approval.

CHOOSING A CARBON PRICE Using carbon pricing enables Metro Vancouver to consider GHG emissions at the outset of a project or initiative, when a range of options are being evaluated and compared, and project budgets are being prepared. Metro Vancouver staff research has identified a Carbon Price of $150/tonne CO2e (total emissions of greenhouse gases expressed as carbon dioxide equivalents) based on: • a review of carbon taxes imposed by governments on fossil fuel purchases (currently as high as $175/tonne CO2e); • Canadian economic analysis that suggests a price of $200/tonne CO2e by 2030 is needed to achieve the GHG reductions that Canada has committed to; • an evaluation of the financial risk Metro Vancouver might face if external carbon taxes were to rise significantly; • the Social Cost of Carbon, which is a measure of the global societal damage of each additional tonne of CO2e emitted.

Climate Action Committee - Page 11 Carbon Price Policy for Metro Vancouver Projects and Initiatives Climate Action Committee Regular Meeting Date: June 7, 2017 Page 2 of 5

The value of $150/tonne CO2e is being proposed by staff as being appropriately conservative, accounting for potential future costs and damages that Metro Vancouver and its residents might face. However, the price also effectively constrains the cost per tonne that Metro Vancouver is willing to pay for GHG reductions in excess of business as usual activities, which reduces the financial burden on residents.

Carbon Taxes A carbon tax is typically applied by a provincial or federal government, and is added to all fossil fuels at their point of purchase. This results in GHG emissions reductions because it makes it more expensive to use those fuels. The BC carbon tax is currently $30/tonne CO2e, but is expected to rise in accordance with the federal proposal for a national carbon tax of $50/tonne CO2e by 2022 (Reference #1). Carbon taxes elsewhere in the world vary in their magnitude with Sweden having the highest at $175/tonne CO2e, Switzerland at $115/tonne CO2e, while Denmark, France, UK and Ireland are all in the range of BC’s carbon tax at $30/tonne CO2e.

Reducing Financial Risk A Carbon Price can be set at the level of anticipated future carbon taxes, in order to serve as a mechanism to account for financial risk associated with a proposed project option. Using carbon pricing this way is similar to accounting for expected future prices of other critical factors in decision making, such as the cost of energy, labour, and materials. Both public and private organizations have adopted internal carbon pricing in this manner, to help them quantify the impact of future carbon taxes on investment decisions (Reference #2). Many Canadian companies in the energy sector have voluntarily adopted carbon pricing as a means to plan investments, with carbon prices ranging from approximately $15 to $160/tonne CO2e. Future carbon taxes in the realm of $100-$200/tonne CO2e are plausible, especially when considering the long life spans of local government infrastructure. Economic analyses suggest that if Canada chooses to meet its GHG emissions reduction commitments using carbon pricing alone, it would need an economy-wide emissions price that starts now at $30/tonne CO2e and rises by about $15 each year to reach $200/tonne CO2e by 2030 (Reference #3).

Social Cost of Carbon Pollution The “social cost of carbon” (SCC) is another approach to determining the price that should be put on the emissions of a tonne of CO2e. This is based on a monetary estimate of the climate-related damages our society is expected to bear. In March 2016, prior to the announcement about Canada’s federal approach to pricing carbon pollution, Environment and Climate Change Canada released an update to its Social Cost of Greenhouse Gas Estimates (Reference #4). The SCC represents “an imperfect but important tool for estimating the benefits associated with reductions in GHG emissions”. For 2020, the Canadian SCC estimates range between $45/tonne CO2e (central estimate) and $190/tonne CO2e (upper estimate).

CARBON PRICE POLICY FOR METRO VANCOUVER A working group made up of staff from all Metro Vancouver departments was formed to draft the Carbon Price Policy. The Carbon Price Policy formalizes how and under what circumstances GHG emissions (or emissions reductions) are monetized and accounted for in the options analysis process for Metro Vancouver projects and initiatives. It will also support the implementation of several other Metro Vancouver policies, including the Corporate Energy Management Policy and the Fleet Planning and Acquisition Policy, adopted by the MVRD Board in 2014 and 2016 respectively.

Climate Action Committee - Page 12 Carbon Price Policy for Metro Vancouver Projects and Initiatives Climate Action Committee Regular Meeting Date: June 7, 2017 Page 3 of 5

The Carbon Price Policy (Attachment #1) states that Metro Vancouver’s Carbon Price will be established at a rate of $150/tonne CO2e, and will be used to quantify the value of GHG emissions (or emission reductions) as part of options analysis for new Metro Vancouver projects and initiatives. The federal carbon tax is expected to reach one third of this level ($50/tonne CO2e) by 2022. Since much of Metro Vancouver’s infrastructure is expected to last for decades, prudent life cycle cost analysis needs to account for potential future carbon prices.

The Regional Finance Advisory Committee (RFAC), the Regional Engineers Advisory Committee (REAC), and REAC’s Climate Protection Subcommittee have been consulted on the proposed carbon price and the proposed policy language.

RFAC members requested additional clarification on how to prioritize which option to pursue in the event that there are a number of options that all reduce GHG emissions at a cost under $150 per tonne. As a result, the use of life cycle cost analysis has been emphasized in the policy. RFAC members noted that as Metro Vancouver moves towards long term financial planning there will be a need to incorporate more external considerations into financial decisions, and that carbon pricing is an effective mechanism to do this for climate change.

REAC members emphasized the need for practical examples of the application of the Carbon Price Policy, both in situations where it might have an impact on the outcome of a decision, and where it would simply add valuable information (but not necessarily change a decision). They offered the input that it is most effective to account for GHG emissions early in the decision making process, when the issue is being explored and options are being compared, rather than during final procurement (at which point the decision has usually been made about what path to follow in response to an issue).

Feedback received was taken into account in the development of this Metro Vancouver policy.

Application of the Internal Carbon Price The Carbon Price Policy applies to all life cycle GHG emissions associated with a proposed Metro Vancouver project or initiative, including CO2e from energy use as well as quantifiable fugitive emissions1 such as methane. Applicable emissions and activities are listed in detail in the policy (Attachment #1). When a decision is being made about whether to undertake a project, or when choosing between multiple options, the life-cycle cost of GHG emissions will affect the financial bottom line (i.e., the net present value of the project).

Option analysis involves identifying and evaluating alternative solutions to meet corporate needs. During the project development process, life cycle cost analysis is used to evaluate the financial viability of each alternative, accounting for each stage within a project’s life from project initiation, through operation and maintenance, to final decommissioning (if that information is available). The Carbon Price for applicable GHG emissions will be incorporated into the life cycle cost analysis for each alternative. The total project life cycle cost will be used to rank the financial component of the options under consideration.

In accordance with the Carbon Price Policy, staff have developed a Carbon Price Schedule (Attachment #2) that provides information on how external carbon taxes will be accounted for in the

1 fugitive emissions are generally unintended or irregular releases, such as leaks, and are distinct from typical emission sources such as stacks, vents, chimneys, etc.

Climate Action Committee - Page 13 Carbon Price Policy for Metro Vancouver Projects and Initiatives Climate Action Committee Regular Meeting Date: June 7, 2017 Page 4 of 5

application of Metro Vancouver’s Carbon Price. Any changes to the existing BC Carbon Tax or future federal carbon taxes will be accounted for to ensure that the total Metro Vancouver Carbon Price is constant at $150/ tonne of CO2e on applicable emissions.

Implementation of the Carbon Price Policy will be undertaken in a phased manner, and coordinated with the implementation of policies such as the Corporate Energy Management Policy and the Fleet Planning and Acquisition Policy. The Carbon Price Policy, as well as the associated Carbon Price Schedule, will be reviewed on a regular basis.

ALTERNATIVES 1. That the MVRD Board approve the Carbon Price Policy as presented in the report dated May 17, 2017, titled “Carbon Price Policy for Metro Vancouver Projects and Initiatives”. 2. That the Climate Action Committee receive for information the report dated May 17, 2017, titled “Carbon Price Policy for Metro Vancouver Projects and Initiatives” and provide alternative direction to staff.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS If the MVRD Board approves the Carbon Price Policy (Alternative 1), the cost of GHG emissions will be included in financial business casing. Use of the proposed carbon price in Metro Vancouver’s options analysis framework may result in additional capital expenditures, due to the fact that the low-GHG emissions option could cost more than the business as usual approach. However, use of life cycle costs analysis shows that fuel and maintenance costs for the low-GHG option tend to be lower over the life-cycle, which will offset costs partially or – in some cases – completely. Illustrative examples of how the Carbon Price is incorporated into life cycle costs analysis, and how it could impact decisions about Metro Vancouver’s proposed projects or initiatives, are provided in Attachment #3.

The incremental costs associated with such low-GHG emitting options would be incorporated into the capital planning process. During policy implementation, staff expect to evaluate any budgetary impacts on a case by case basis. The carbon price of $150/tonne CO2e effectively puts a “cap” on the cost per tonne of reducing GHG emissions, and provides a mechanism that allows Metro Vancouver to consistently evaluate the climate impacts of projects and initiatives.

SUMMARY / CONCLUSION Metro Vancouver’s proposed Carbon Price Policy enables a value for GHG emissions of $150/tonne CO2e to be used in financial calculations during the options analysis phase of Metro Vancouver project and initiative development. The Policy provides the means for incorporating consideration of climate change mitigation into Metro Vancouver business cases. The Policy also helps to mitigate the financial risk of potential increases in provincial or federal carbon taxes in the future, given that the service life of Metro Vancouver infrastructure can be as much as 50-100 years.

Staff recommend Alternative 1, that the MVRD Board approve the proposed Carbon Price Policy.

Attachments: 1. Metro Vancouver’s Carbon Price Policy (orbit #18741222) 2. Carbon Price Schedule (orbit #18839036) 3. Illustrative Examples: Application of the Metro Vancouver Carbon Price (orbit #21691618)

Climate Action Committee - Page 14 Carbon Price Policy for Metro Vancouver Projects and Initiatives Climate Action Committee Regular Meeting Date: June 7, 2017 Page 5 of 5

References: 1. Environment and Climate Change Canada, 2016, “Pan-Canadian Framework on Clean Growth and Climate Change” 2. World Bank, 2016, “State and Trends of Carbon Pricing 2016” 3. Jaccard, Hein and Vass, 2016, “Is Win-Win Possible? Can Canada’s Government Achieve Its Paris Commitment… and Get Re-Elected?” 4. Environment and Climate Change Canada, 2016, “Technical Update to Environment and Climate Change Canada's Social Cost of Greenhouse Gas Estimates” 5. BC Ministry of Environment, 2016, “2016/2017 B.C. Best Practices Methodology for Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Emissions”

19952940

Climate Action Committee - Page 15 5.1 ATTACHMENT 1 BOARD POLICY

CARBON PRICE Effective Date: Approved By: MVRD Board

PURPOSE To establish a price on Applicable Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions, and to enable the value of those GHG emissions to be incorporated into Life Cycle Cost Analyses for Metro Vancouver projects or initiatives. The objectives of the Carbon Price Policy are to: • Incorporate consideration of climate change mitigation (i.e., GHG emissions reduction) into options analyses for all Metro Vancouver projects or initiatives; and • Provide a mechanism to reduce financial risk of increased operating costs associated with rising external carbon taxes over the lifetime of a Metro Vancouver project or initiative.

DEFINITIONS “Applicable Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions” are GHG emissions associated with Metro Vancouver projects or initiatives, in particular GHG emissions related to energy use and utility processes, and GHG emissions reductions (or avoided GHG emissions) related to ecological carbon storage/sequestration.

“Carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e)” is the common metric used to quantify and compare different types of GHG emissions, and is expressed in tonnes. “Carbon Price” is the total dollar value (including any provincial and federal carbon taxes) assigned by Metro Vancouver to one tonne of CO2e. “Life Cycle Cost Analysis” is the process to establish the net present value of all costs and revenues associated with a Metro Vancouver project or initiative over its expected life.

POLICY When undertaking options analysis for a Metro Vancouver project or initiative, the Carbon Price will be used to calculate the value (expressed as a cost) of Applicable GHG Emissions associated with each option. This value will be included in the Life Cycle Cost Analysis for each option. Carbon Price Metro Vancouver will use a total Carbon Price (inclusive of any applicable external carbon taxes) of $150 per tonne of CO2e in Life Cycle Cost Analyses. Financial Services, in coordination with the Air Quality and Climate Change Division, will develop and annually review a Carbon Price Schedule. This Carbon Price Schedule will provide the incremental cost per unit of purchased energy (e.g., litres of gasoline, GJ of natural gas), as well as the cost per unit of other Applicable GHGs (e.g., tonne of fugitive methane). The carbon price will be adjusted to account for any changes to provincial and federal carbon taxes, to ensure that the total carbon price per tonne of Applicable GHGs is constant at $150 per tonne of CO2e.

18741222 Carbon Price Policy Page 1 of 2

Climate Action Committee - Page 16 BOARD POLICY

Application This policy applies to all options analyses that use Life Cycle Cost Analysis for Metro Vancouver projects or initiatives, including (but not limited to): • Planning, design, procurement, construction, operation, maintenance, and decommissioning (where applicable) of facilities, vehicles, and equipment owned or operated by Metro Vancouver or by third parties on Metro Vancouver’s behalf; • Acquisition of park land, where protection of the land by Metro Vancouver results in quantifiable GHG emissions reductions compared to business as usual; and • Management of process emissions from Metro Vancouver facilities.

The Carbon Price will be used to calculate the value of Applicable GHG Emissions associated with: • Energy purchased by Metro Vancouver or by third parties on Metro Vancouver’s behalf for the operation of utilities, fleet, and facilities (including natural gas, liquid petroleum products, propane, and electricity); • Fugitive methane and nitrous oxide emissions released from wastewater treatment processes and municipal solid waste management processes; • Avoided GHG emissions due to the displacement of fossil fuels with energy recovered from Metro Vancouver facilities; • Avoided GHG emissions attributable to the protection and/or restoration of park land such as forests and bogs; and • Other sources related to Metro Vancouver’s activities.

Related Document: Carbon Price Schedule

18741222 Carbon Price Policy Page 2 of 2

Climate Action Committee - Page 17 5.1 ATTACHMENT 2

CARBON PRICE SCHEDULE Version 1.0: May 17, 2017

Background This Carbon Price Schedule provides data and information in support of the implementation of Metro Vancouver’s Carbon Price Policy. In accordance with the Carbon Price Policy, Financial Services, in coordination with the Air Quality and Climate Change Division, will annually review the Carbon Price Schedule. The incremental costs will be adjusted to account for any changes to external carbon taxes, to ensure that the total Metro Vancouver Carbon Price is constant at $150 per tonne of CO2e on applicable emissions. Carbon Price Schedule This Carbon Price Schedule provides the incremental cost per tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions (Table 1).

The BC Carbon Tax (currently set at $30 per tonne CO2e) is included in the purchase price of fossil fuels within the province. The fuels that are most relevant to Metro Vancouver projects and initiatives are gasoline, natural gas, diesel and propane. The Government of Canada’s “Pan-Canadian Framework on Clean Growth and Climate Change” outlines a pathway for an increasing price on 1 carbon . This may result in increases to the BC Carbon Tax to $40 per tonne CO2e in 2021 and to $50 per tonne CO2e in 2022. The Total Metro Vancouver Carbon Price will comprise the sum of the external BC Carbon Tax and an Incremental Metro Vancouver Carbon Price. If the BC Carbon Tax is increased in response to federal carbon price policy, the Incremental Metro Vancouver Carbon Price will be adjusted to maintain the Total Metro Vancouver Carbon Price at $150 per tonne CO2e. Table 1 demonstrates this process.

Table 1. Carbon Price for Metro Vancouver, accounting for External Carbon Taxes Year Confirmed BC Proposed Carbon Incremental TOTAL Metro Carbon Tax Price Metro Vancouver Vancouver Carbon (Pan-Canadian Carbon Price for Price Framework) Life Cycle Costs Analysis 2017 $30 - $120 $150 2018 $30 $10 $120 $150 2019 $30 $20 $120 $150 2020 $30 $30 $120 $150 2021 $30 $40 $120 $150 2022 $30 $50 $120 $150 Future $30 $50 $120 $150

1 Government of Canada, 2016. “Pan-Canadian Framework on Clean Growth and Climate Change”. Available at: https://www.canada.ca/en/services/environment/weather/climatechange/pan-canadian-framework.html

18839036 Carbon Price Schedule Page 1 of 1

Climate Action Committee - Page 18 5.1 ATTACHMENT 3

ATTACHMENT 3. Illustrative Examples: Application of the Metro Vancouver Carbon Price

CONTEXT FOR EXAMPLES The Metro Vancouver Carbon Price is to be applied during options analysis for Metro Vancouver projects or initiatives that result in GHG emissions. The Total Metro Vancouver Carbon Price is $150/tonne CO2e

and applies to all future years. This includes the BC Carbon Tax (currently $30/tonne CO2e), which implies

an Incremental Metro Vancouver Carbon Price of $120/tonne CO2e on applicable emissions.

By using the Carbon Price of $150/tonne CO2e consistently for every life cycle costs analysis, it is possible to identify which option is preferable once the environmental damage of GHG emissions are taken into account. However, the lowest GHG emitting option may not always be more expensive than the “business as usual” case. In many cases – especially those involving energy efficiency upgrades, some of which are becoming more and more affordable – the lowest GHG option might be the least expensive option.

Examples 1 and 2 illustrate that while the Carbon Price is helpful in showing the value of GHG emissions associated with a project, it is not needed to choose the more energy efficient option provided the decision is based on life cycle cost analysis instead of a simple capital cost comparison. The effective “break even” Carbon Price for a GHG reduction project should be less than the threshold of $150/tonne

CO2e. Example 3 shows that the effective “break even” Carbon Price can be an indicator of the cost effectiveness of a particular option for achieving GHG reductions. Finally, Example 4 shows how the Carbon Price can be used to demonstrate the value – in monetary terms – of the avoided GHG emissions associated with the protection of a forested property.

EXAMPLE 1: COMPARING ELECTRIC VEHICLES TO CONVENTIONAL GASOLINE VEHICLES FOR FLEET

Scenario: Metro Vancouver’s Board-adopted Fleet Planning and Acquisition Policy states that: “Metro Vancouver will ensure that fleet planning and acquisition will meet operational service requirements while minimizing fleet greenhouse gas emissions and taking into account life cycle costs”. Metro Vancouver’s corporate fleet includes passenger vehicles that are available to staff for business purposes. In many cases, their usage patterns reveal that electric vehicles are a viable alternative to conventional gasoline engine vehicles. In this scenario, life cycle cost analysis is used to evaluate the costs and benefits of buying an electric car instead of a car with a conventional gasoline engine.

OPTION 1 (business as usual) OPTION 2 Option Conventional Vehicle Electric Vehicle (e.g., Nissan Sentra) (e.g., Nissan Leaf) Project Life 8 years (15,000 km/year) 8 years (15,000 km/year) Capital Cost $19,500 $28,000 (incl. rebate) Annual GHG Emissions 2.5 tonnes CO2e 0.037 tonnes CO2e Life Cycle Cost (Net Present Value) ($35,300) ($31,500) Life Cycle Cost (NPV including Carbon Price) ($38,300) ($31,540) Effective “Break Even” Carbon Price (N/A; business as usual) $0/tonne CO2e Total Life Cycle GHG Reduction (N/A; business as usual) 19.7 tonnes CO2e

Climate Action Committee - Page 19

Analysis: Choosing a plug-in electric vehicle over a conventional gasoline equivalent will result in considerable fuel savings and significant GHG reductions of almost 2.5 tonnes CO2e per year. Standard life cycle cost analysis shows that the plug-in electric vehicle has a positive business case compared to business as usual, which implies that the EV should be purchased.

Impact of Carbon Pricing: In this scenario, the business case for the electric vehicle is positive without incremental carbon costs, so the application of the Carbon Price does not change the decision (i.e., the effective “break even” Carbon Price is $0/tonne CO2e). If the Provincial incentive of $5,000 on the capital cost of the electric vehicle had not been available, the net present value of these vehicles would have been about the same ($35,700 for the Nissan Leaf). In that alternative scenario, the Carbon Price could have provided additional justification to purchase the electric vehicle, and achieve approximately 19.7 tonnes of GHG reductions over the project life.

EXAMPLE 2: NATURAL GAS BOILER REPLACEMENT IN AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMPLEX

Scenario: A hot water boiler in one of Metro Vancouver’s affordable housing complexes has reached its end of life, and is due to be replaced. Business as usual practice is to replace boilers with mid-efficiency models, as they have a lower capital cost, but an option is to install a high-efficiency boiler that is more expensive to purchase and install, but would use less natural gas and produce fewer GHGs over the lifetime of the equipment.

OPTION 1 (business as usual) OPTION 2 Option Mid-Efficiency Boiler High-Efficiency Boiler Project Life 25 years 25 years Capital Cost $45,000 $70,000 Annual GHG Emissions 51.5 tonnes 45.1 tonnes Life Cycle Cost (Net Present Value) ($272,000) ($269,000) Life Cycle Cost (NPV including Carbon Price) ($381,000) ($364,000) Effective “Break Even” Carbon Price (N/A; business as usual) $0/tonne CO2e Total Life Cycle GHG Reduction (N/A; business as usual) 160 tonnes CO2e

Analysis: Choosing a high-efficiency boiler means a higher capital cost of approximately $25,000 in this example (even accounting for incentives), but results in considerable savings in fuel costs each year as well as GHG reduction of approximately 7 tonnes CO2e/year. Standard life cycle cost analysis shows that the high-efficiency boiler has a slightly better business case over the 25 year expected life, compared to the business as usual mid-efficiency boiler, even though current natural gas prices in BC are so low. When carbon pricing is included in the life cycle cost analysis, the high-efficiency boiler has an even lower life cycle cost relative to the mid-efficiency boiler.

Impact of Carbon Pricing: In this scenario, the business case for the high efficiency boiler is marginally positive without incremental carbon costs, so the application of the Carbon Price does not change the decision. In these scenarios, the Carbon Price provides additional justification to install the high-efficiency boiler. The impact of choosing the high-efficiency option is a lifetime reduction of 160 tonnes CO2e in GHG emissions over the boiler life, and substantial reductions in natural gas costs.

Climate Action Committee - Page 20

EXAMPLE 3: TWO POTENTIAL EFFLUENT HEAT PROJECTS FOR DISTRICT ENERGY

Scenario: Metro Vancouver is evaluating opportunities at two wastewater treatment plants to install heat pumps to recover energy from treated effluent. In each case the energy would be sold to a district energy provider, displacing their use of natural gas and resulting in reduced regional GHG emissions. The district energy provider would cover the operating and maintenance costs of running the heat pump over the life of the project. Metro Vancouver is deciding whether to make a capital investment in each of these projects to achieve regionally significant GHG reductions, which could potentially be used to balance a substantial portion of its corporate GHG emissions.

POTENTIAL PROJECT #1 POTENTIAL PROJECT #2 Option Heat pump at WWTP #1 Heat pump at WWTP #2 Project Life 25 years 25 years Capital Cost $17,000,000 $13,000,000 Annual GHG Emissions Reductions 2,800 tonnes CO2e 5,400 tonnes CO2e Life Cycle Cost (Net Present Value) ($17,000,000) ($13,000,000) Life Cycle Cost (NPV including Carbon Price) ($6,500,000) $7,600,000 Effective “Break Even” Carbon Price $243/tonne CO2e $95/tonne CO2e Total Life Cycle GHG Reduction 70,000 tonnes CO2e 137,000 tonnes CO2e

Analysis: In this scenario, both of the options are capital investments with a negative business case when based solely on the financial bottom line (without Carbon Price). Because the WWTP #2 option displaces substantial amounts of natural gas, incorporating the Carbon Price into the life cycle cost analysis results in a positive net present value for that project. A project with a “break even” carbon price that is lower than the Total Metro Vancouver Carbon Price of $150/tonne is considered to have a positive business case. The project with the lowest “break even” carbon price is the most cost effective option for achieving

GHG reductions. If Metro Vancouver adopts a value of $150/tonne CO2e for its Carbon Price, it would not be high enough to generate a positive net present value for the WWTP #1 option.

Impact of Carbon Pricing: Applying the Carbon Price changes the business case for one of the options to a positive net present value. The Carbon Price provides a rationale to consider committing budget to the installation of the heat pump at WWTP #2 and achieving approximately 137,000 tonnes of GHG reductions over the project life.

EXAMPLE 3: ESTIMATED VALUE OF AVOIDED GHG EMISSIONS FROM PARK LAND PROTECTION

Scenario: Natural features such as forests and bogs conserve, sequester and store carbon, offsetting greenhouse gas emissions from other sources. Opportunities to protect and/or restore these features, and their carbon storage/sequestration potential, can be considered in the land acquisition evaluation process. In August 2015, Metro Vancouver acquired the forested Grant Hill Properties in the District of Maple Ridge, which otherwise would have been purchased and likely cleared and subdivided by a private landowner. The GHG emissions reduced (or avoided) as a result of protecting this forested land were quantified and verified by a third party and claimed by Metro Vancouver as carbon credits.

Climate Action Committee - Page 21

PROJECT Option Acquisition of a 13.5 hectare Forested Property for Regional Parks System Project Life In perpetuity (Carbon project limited to 20 years) Purchase Price (not including taxes/disbursements) $755,000

Annual GHG Emissions Reductions Year 1: 1815 tonnes CO2e Year 2: 350 tonnes CO2e Year 3: 295 tonnes CO2e Years 4-20: average of ~150 tonnes CO2e/year Life Cycle Cost (Net Present Value) $755,000 Life Cycle Cost (NPV including Carbon Price) ($20,000) Effective “Break Even” Carbon Price $153/tonne CO2e Total Life Cycle GHG Reduction 4,900 tonnes CO2e

Analysis: Avoiding GHG emissions is just one of the many benefits of protecting valuable ecosystems and incorporating them into our Regional Parks system. Verified GHG reduction credits associated with avoided forest conversion can be used to partially balance Metro Vancouver’s corporate energy-related GHG emissions under the Provincial Carbon Neutral Local Government Framework, but cannot be sold to external parties. However, it is possible to put a value on these emissions reductions using the price established in the Carbon Price Policy.

Impact of Carbon Pricing: Using the proposed carbon price of $150/tonne CO2e, the value of the avoided GHG emissions associated with protecting the forested property is almost the same amount as the purchase price of the property. It should be noted that consideration of climate change is just one element of a complex set of criteria for park land acquisition decisions. Primary considerations include protecting sensitive ecosystems, connectivity with existing protected areas, and providing opportunities for residents to experience nature.

21691618

Climate Action Committee - Page 22 5.2

To: Climate Action Committee

From: Eve Hou, Air Quality Planner Parks, Planning and Environment Department

Date: May 29, 2017 Meeting Date: June 7, 2017

Subject: Federal Electric Vehicle Initiatives

RECOMMENDATION That the MVRD Board: a) Send a letter to the Minister of Transport and to the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development requesting that: i. local governments be engaged and consulted on the national zero-emission vehicle strategy; ii. the national zero-emission vehicle strategy include a nation-wide incentive program for electric vehicles, increased funding for electric vehicle infrastructure and a zero emissions vehicle (ZEV) requirement; and b) Direct staff to apply for funding through the FCM Municipalities for Climate Innovation Program to support electric vehicle infrastructure and uptake in Metro Vancouver.

PURPOSE This report provides information on the existing Pan-Canadian Framework on Clean Growth and Climate Change process with respect to electric vehicles (EVs), existing Federal funding through the Federal of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) grant program and its applicability for EV infrastructure in this region, and best practices for Federal EV policies from around the world.

BACKGROUND At the March 1, 2017 meeting of the Climate Action Committee, staff was directed to report back on incentive programs for electric vehicles at the Canadian federal level. At a national level, there are existing policies and regulations that support some degree of electrification, such as carbon tax and vehicle fuel economy standards, but this support is indirect and, alone, insufficient to meet Canada’s greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction targets. The Federal Government recognizes the need for more direct support for electric vehicles and is thus undertaking several important initiatives. This report responds to the Committee’s request of staff and outlines the Federal Government’s role in supporting electric vehicles in Canada, and provides context on programs in other countries.

FEDERAL ELECTRIC VEHICLE INITIATIVES Staff have reviewed and summarized existing Federal initiatives related to electric vehicles as follows.

Pan-Canadian Framework on Clean Growth and Climate Change In December 2016, the Federal Government adopted the Pan-Canadian Framework on Clean Growth and Climate Change - a national plan to achieve Canada’s GHG reduction targets. As part of the Framework, the Federal Government commits to: 1) Developing a zero-emission vehicle strategy by 2018 in partnership with provincial governments and industry;

Climate Action Committee - Page 23 Federal Electric Vehicle Initiatives Climate Action Committee Regular Meeting Date: June 7, 2017 Page 2 of 5

2) Accelerating the deployment of EV charging and alternative refueling infrastructure for light- and heavy-duty vehicles.

To accelerate the deployment of infrastructure, the Federal Government has committed $62.5 million in 2016, and $120 million over four years beginning in 2018 to deploy EV infrastructure and natural gas and hydrogen refueling stations, as well as to support technology demonstration projects. How these funds will be disbursed is not clear at the time of writing.

The zero-emission vehicle strategy is currently under development, and there is a lack of detail on its scope. The Federal Government issued a news release on May 26, 2017 (attached), which describes how the strategy will build on existing initiatives. It is staff’s understanding that the strategy will not contain a supply-side regulation, such as a zero emission vehicle (ZEV) mandate, as described below. The news release also describes the formation of a national advisory group, although it is not clear how or when local governments will be engaged in this process.

Municipalities for Climate Innovation Program (MCIP) Additionally, in 2016 the Federal Government created a 5-year $75 million program to help municipalities prepare for and adapt to climate change, and reduce emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs). This program, known as the Municipalities for Climate Innovation Program (MCIP), is delivered by the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM). The two most relevant funding streams currently (or very soon to be) available which could be used for local government EV-related initiatives include:

• Plans and studies grants: Grants of up to $175,000 to develop plans and studies to reduce GHG emissions or adapt to climate change. These funds are available now. o These funds could be used to develop local EV plans and strategies (such as a Regional DC Fast Charger network plan), develop a model bylaw for EV charging in new developments, or conduct research on EV-related issues such as on-street charging.

• Demonstration project grants: Grant funding for municipalities to implement climate change initiatives. Funding will be available for up to 80% of costs to a maximum of $1 million. Emphasis will be on capital projects with measureable greenhouse gas emissions reductions. These funds are expected to be available mid-June 2017. o These funds could be used to support building out the electric vehicle charging infrastructure in Metro Vancouver. Specific projects could include: . Powering up local government: Funding for staff, public and fleet charging at municipally-owned facilities across Metro Vancouver. . Metro Vancouver charging as a service: Demonstrate a Metro Vancouver- owned charging-as-a-service model in multi-unit residential buildings. o These funds could also be used to demonstrate leading edge EV applications, such as electric school buses.

NATIONAL ELECTRIC VEHICLE PROGRAMS AROUND THE WORLD A review was conducted of activities by national governments around the world to support transition to electric vehicles. In general, these policies can be grouped according to the barriers most commonly addressed by national governments - cost, charging infrastructure, and supply.

Climate Action Committee - Page 24 Federal Electric Vehicle Initiatives Climate Action Committee Regular Meeting Date: June 7, 2017 Page 3 of 5

Cost Typically national governments support electric vehicle uptake by reducing the cost of EV ownership through incentives. Most commonly, this is in the form of rebates on the cost of purchasing a new EV. A few countries, notably the US, provide an income tax credit as an alternative. A few countries provide increased rebates when an older, more polluting vehicle is scrapped. Most of the incentive amounts reviewed were in the $5,000 USD range, although some countries have incentives as high as $12,000 USD. In BC, electric vehicles are eligible for rebates of up to $5,000 CDN; however, most Canadian provinces do not currently provide rebates for EV purchases1.

In many countries, EV buyers receive other tax savings, such as waived or reduced import tax, sales tax or one-time registration fees. These savings can be significant. A few countries will waive or reduce Value Added Taxes (VAT) charged on import vehicles if they are plug-in electric. In places like Hong Kong, the VAT can be as much as the cost of the vehicle itself.

Finally, many countries charge annual road use taxes, ownership or registration fees. These annual fees have been waived or reduced in some countries for electric vehicles.

The table below shows which countries are implementing the various policy measures at a national level, and where available, the maximum incentive amounts in $USD.

Vehicle Rebates Income Tax Credit Scrappage Rebates Waive or Reduce Waive or Reduce (max amount in (max amount in (max amount in Sales Tax / VAT / Annual Road/ $USD) $USD) $USD) One-Time Ownership/ Registration Costs Registration Fee China ($9,800) Belgium ($10,000) Japan ($2,700) Iceland Portugal Japan ($1,100) Portugal ($875) France ($4,300) Ireland Greece Korea ($12,000) USA ($7,500) Romania ($5,500) Norway Italy Germany ($4,520) Portugal Netherlands Hungary ($5,220) BC ($4,444) Switzerland Norway Ireland ($5,500) Hong Kong Sweden Monaco ($12,600) Switzerland Netherlands ($5,500) Portugal ($5,500) Romania ($5,500) Spain ($8,600) UK ($7,450)

BC ($3,700)

Charging Infrastructure The federal government role in supporting EV infrastructure varies country-to-country, but may be grouped as follows: • Targets: Many countries have targets on the number of publicly accessible EV charging stations, often expressed as a ratio of chargers to EVs. China, for example, is aiming for a 1:1 ratio or 4.8 million charge points by 2020. In Metro Vancouver, there are currently about 300 public charge points for 3,000 EVs – a 1:10 ratio.

1 Only BC, Ontario and Quebec provide rebates on the purchase of new electric vehicles.

Climate Action Committee - Page 25 Federal Electric Vehicle Initiatives Climate Action Committee Regular Meeting Date: June 7, 2017 Page 4 of 5

• Direct Provision: Some national governments directly provide EV infrastructure. This is most common for DC Fast Chargers along inter-city highway routes. • Funding: Most national governments support EV infrastructure through provision of funding. In some cases, funding is provided to provincial or municipal government for distribution, as is the case in China. In other situations, national governments provide funding directly to the consumer, such as in the UK where grants are provided to cover 75% of the cost of charging. Some countries, such as the Netherlands, have used public-private partners to develop the charging infrastructure network.

Supply Ensuring an adequate supply and variety of electric vehicles through regulation is an area that several governments are exploring. Studies show that reaching GHG reduction targets in BC will require supply-side measures2.

Zero emission vehicle (ZEV) mandates which require manufacturers to sell an increasing percentage of EVs each year, have been adopted by 10 states in the US and 1 province in Canada (Quebec); however, such a mandate has yet to be adopted nationally by any country. Currently, a number of national governments are considering regulating the availability of electric vehicles, either through ZEV mandates or through phasing out fossil fuel vehicles, but none have been adopted to date.

China is the first country to propose a ZEV mandate. The Chinese government is looking to require that zero-emission vehicles represent 8% of new car sales as soon as 2018, ramping up to 12% by 2020. This is significantly more aggressive than Quebec and California mandates, which require 3.4% in 2018, 6.9% in 2020 and 15% and 15.5% in 2025, respectively. China’s proposed mandate would represent 1.6 million EVs to be sold in China next year and over 2.4 million in 2020.

A number of countries have proposed banning registrations of new fossil fuel vehicles after a certain date. Norway and the Netherlands are contemplating a ban starting in 2025 and Germany is considering a ban beginning 2030.

ALTERNATIVES 1. That the MVRD Board: a. Send a letter to the Minister of Transport and to the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development requesting that: i. local governments be engaged and consulted on the national zero-emission vehicle strategy; ii. the national zero-emission vehicle strategy include a nation-wide incentive program for electric vehicles, increased funding for electric vehicle infrastructure and a zero emissions vehicle (ZEV) requirement; and b. Direct staff to apply for funding through the FCM Municipalities for Climate Innovation Program to support electric vehicle infrastructure and uptake in Metro Vancouver. 2. That the MVRD Board receive the report dated May 29, 2017, titled “Federal Electric Vehicle Incentives” for information and direct staff to take an alternative course of action.

2 Wolinetz, M., Axsen, J., “How policy can build the plug-in electric vehicle market: Insights from the REspondent- based Preference And Constraints (REPAC) model”, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.11.022

Climate Action Committee - Page 26 Federal Electric Vehicle Initiatives Climate Action Committee Regular Meeting Date: June 7, 2017 Page 5 of 5

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Applying for FCM Municipalities for Climate Innovation Program funding will require staff resources which can be accommodated under existing budgets.

If demonstration grants funds are awarded, funding will only cover 80% of the cost. The remaining 20% of the cost, as well as staff resources to undertake these initiatives, will be considered during the project proposal process and reflected in proposed operating budgets going forward.

SUMMARY / CONCLUSION Compared to many nations around the world, Canadian Federal Government programs related to electric vehicles are at a relatively early stage of development. The Federal Government recognizes the need for more direct support for electric vehicles if Canada’s carbon targets are to be met and is thus developing a zero-emission vehicle strategy. A scan of national electric vehicle policies worldwide provides a number of best practices which the Federal Government should consider in its national zero-emission vehicle strategy. Staff recommend Alternative 1, where Metro Vancouver can advocate for a nation-wide incentive program for electric vehicles, increased funding for electric vehicle infrastructure and a zero emissions vehicle (ZEV) requirement. Additionally, Metro Vancouver can take the lead in building EV infrastructure in this region using federal funding currently available through the Municipalities for Climate Innovation Program (MCIP), delivered by the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM).

Attachment Government of Canada to develop a national Zero-Emissions Vehicle Strategy by 2018 – News Release dated May 26, 2017.

21616485

Climate Action Committee - Page 27 5.2 ATTACHMENT

Government of Canada to develop a national Zero-Emissions Vehicle Strategy by 2018

News Release

From Transport Canada

May 26, 2017 Montreal Government of Canada Today, the Honourable Marc Garneau, Minister of Transport and the Honourable Navdeep Bains, Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development, announced that the Government of Canada is moving forward with provincial and territorial partners, industry and stakeholders, to develop a national strategy to increase the number of zero-emission vehicles (ZEVS) on Canadian roads by 2018. Transportation accounts for about 24 percent of Canada’s emissions, mostly from cars and trucks. ZEVs which include battery electric, plug-in hybrid, and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, offer the potential to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the light-duty vehicle sector. Canada is also uniquely placed to take advantage of the opportunities associated with the advanced technology driving this evolution - including innovation, R&D and talent – to create high quality middle class jobs. Under the Pan-Canadian Framework on Clean Growth and Climate Change, federal, provincial and territorial governments committed to work with industry and stakeholders to develop a Canada-wide ZEV strategy by 2018. This strategy will be ambitious and will build on existing initiatives, such as light-duty vehicle regulations, provincial ZEV programs, and Canadian innovation superclusters, to help meet our 2030 greenhouse gas emissions reduction target and realize our potential as a global leader in innovation and the clean economy. To advance the strategy, a national Advisory Group has been established to contribute to developing options for addressing the key barriers for greater deployment of these technologies in five areas: vehicle supply, cost and benefits of ownership, infrastructure readiness, public awareness, and clean growth and clean jobs. The Advisory Group includes representatives from governments, industry, consumer and non-government organizations and academia. The Government of Canada has made an important start in supporting further deployment of ZEVs by providing $62.5 million through Budget 2016 and an additional $120 million through Budget 2017 for Natural Resources Canada to deploy infrastructure for electric vehicle charging and refuelling stations for alternative fuel such as natural gas and hydrogen, as well as to support technology demonstration projects. Investments like this will make it easier for Canadian ZEV drivers to travel farther, enabling them to do their part to address our climate change challenge.

Climate Action Committee - Page 28 Quotes “We understand Canadians’ concerns about the environment and are developing an aggressive strategy to tackle climate change by taking actions to reduce greenhouse gases and air pollution. By putting more zero emission vehicles on the road, we are investing in the future of cleaner transportation for all Canadians.” Marc Garneau Minister of Transport “We have an opportunity to have a major impact on the development of clean energy and clean transportation. Canada is home to countless innovative firms and talent that are already shaping the automotive technologies of the future. This strategy provides an important opportunity to create highly skilled middle class jobs, reduce carbon emissions and create healthier communities.” Navdeep Bains Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development “Developing a national strategy on zero-emission vehicles is one more way Canada can lead the global transition to the low-carbon economy while creating good jobs and giving Canadians more choices the next time they need to buy a vehicle.” Jim Carr Minister of Natural Resources “This is a time of laying the groundwork for the 21st-century society we want. As a government, we are putting forward a broad, thoughtful and modern agenda. New measures to improve efficiency across the transportation sector, as well as to encourage zero-emission vehicles, will complement carbon pricing and take advantage of a low-carbon electricity grid.” Catherine McKenna Minister of Environment and Climate Change

Quick Facts

• In 2015, light-duty vehicle emissions accounted for approximately 50 percent of Canada’s transportation-related greenhouse gas emissions, and 12 percent of the country’s total emissions

• Battery electric vehicles, plug-in hybrid vehicles, and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles offer the potential for important reductions in light-duty vehicle emissions as they have very little or no tailpipe emissions compared with conventional vehicles. Associated Links

• The Pan-Canadian Framework on Clean Growth and Climate Change

Climate Action Committee - Page 29 Contacts Delphine Denis Press Secretary Office of the Honourable Marc Garneau Minister of Transport, Ottawa 613-991-0700 [email protected] Media Relations Transport Canada, Ottawa 613-993-0055 [email protected] Karl W. Sasseville Press Secretary Office of the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development 343-291-2500 Media Relations Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada 343-291-1777 [email protected]

Search for related information by keyword: Vehicles | Transport Canada | Canada | Transport and infrastructure | Environment and natural resources | general public | news releases | Hon. Marc Garneau

21779498 Climate Action Committee - Page 30 5.3

To: Climate Action Committee

From: Eve Hou, Air Quality Planner Parks, Planning and Environment Department

Date: May 17, 2017 Meeting Date: June 7, 2017

Subject: UBCM Resolutions on Electric Vehicle Charging in Stratified Multi-Unit Residential Buildings

RECOMMENDATION That the MVRD Board: a) Submit the resolutions attached to the report dated May 17, 2017, titled, “UBCM Resolutions on Electric Vehicle Charging in Stratified Multi-Unit Residential Buildings” to the Union of British Columbia Municipalities (UBCM) to facilitate electric vehicle charging in stratified multi-family dwellings through changes to the BC Strata Property Act and the BC Utilities Commission Act; and b) Direct staff to identify appropriate BC local governments and forward this report to them prior to the UBCM Convention in September 2017, for their consideration.

PURPOSE To recommend that the MVRD Board submit two resolutions to the Union of British Columbia Municipalities (UBCM) aimed at removing two key barriers to electric vehicle charging in stratified multi-unit dwellings. Condo & BACKGROUND Apartment 8% Lack of access to electric vehicle (EV) charging is Townhouse, considered a primary impediment to EV uptake. In Duplex, Triplex 12% order to charge an EV at home (where 80-90% of charging typically occurs) a resident must have charging infrastructure and the right to access electricity.

For single-detached home owners, and even some ground-oriented townhome and duplex/triplex dwellers, this is not a significant barrier. Barriers can be Detached substantial, however, in multi-unit dwellings with Home, 80% strata-managed common parking garages. Figure 1: Percent of BC EV owners by dwelling type (2015) This challenge is evident when considering that electric vehicle owners are disproportionately likely to reside in single-detached homes or duplexes (92%)1. As shown in the figure below, only 8% of EV owners surveyed in BC live in apartments or condominiums, while in contrast, according to the 2011 Census, 39% of residents and 49% of

1 Axsen et al. (2015) “Electrifying Vehicles: Insights from the Canadian Plug-in Electric Vehicle Study”, available at http://rem- main.rem.sfu.ca/papers/jaxsen/Electrifying_Vehicle_(Early_Release)-The_2015_Canadian_Plug-in_Electric_Vehicle_Study.pdf

Climate Action Committee - Page 31 UBCM Resolutions on Electric Vehicle Charging in Stratified Multi-Unit Residential Buildings Climate Action Committee Regular Meeting Date: June 7, 2017 Page 2 of 4

households in the Metro Vancouver region live in apartments, condominiums and row homes.

Access to charging in multi-family dwellings is a regional issue that affects virtually every municipality in Metro Vancouver. It is also a pressing issue because: 1) Multi-family dwellings represent an increasing share of the total number of homes in Metro Vancouver, based on regional housing starts data and Metro 2040 goals; 2) Electric vehicle uptake is growing rapidly in this region, and the expectation is that the launch of second generation vehicle models in 2017 and 2018 (e.g., Tesla Model 3) will result in more demand from strata residents for access to home charging.

Timely action on the part of the Provincial Government is needed to address existing institutional barriers to EV uptake in multi-family buildings.

BARRIERS TO ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING IN STRATA BUILDINGS There are about 6,700 strata corporations in Metro Vancouver. Two key barriers for EV owners living in stratified multi-family dwellings are governance and electricity resale, as described below.

Governance The first barrier is governance. A strata corporation does not have any obligation to allow access to existing power outlets in the common parking area or to permit new installation of electric vehicle charging infrastructure on common property at the request of an owner. Although many strata councils, when approached, will make an effort to explore the options, there are also many strata councils and corporations which have rejected requests from EV owners (see References).

Metro Vancouver’s EVCondo.ca aims to address this governance barrier through the provision of information to property managers, strata councils and residents; however, education alone is insufficient to ensure standards and consistency between one strata and another.

Some jurisdictions, such as the State of Hawaii and State of California, have addressed this issue through passing “Right to Charge” legislation, which guarantees residents of multi-family dwellings the ability to access vehicle charging at home.

One solution is to amend the BC Strata Property Act such that a strata council or strata corporation must accommodate reasonable requests from residents, for the purpose of electric vehicle charging, for access to existing powered outlets or, where existing powered outlets are insufficient to meet charging needs, to install new powered outlets and/or electric vehicle charging infrastructure by the resident.

Electricity Resale The second barrier is related to a strata corporation’s ability to recover electricity costs associated with electric vehicle charging. Under the Utilities Commission Act (UCA) only a ‘public utility’ is permitted to resell electricity, with exemptions made for municipalities selling inside their boundaries, landlords selling to tenants, and employers selling to employees. For the purposes of electric vehicle charging, strata corporations are considered analogous to landlords, and have commonly charged a ‘user fee’ to cover the approximate cost of electricity from resident use. However, amendment of the UCA to explicitly exempt strata corporations selling to residents would eliminate any ambiguity resulting from the Act.

Climate Action Committee - Page 32 UBCM Resolutions on Electric Vehicle Charging in Stratified Multi-Unit Residential Buildings Climate Action Committee Regular Meeting Date: June 7, 2017 Page 3 of 4

Similarly, businesses not considered public utilities are technically prohibited from reselling electricity that might be used for EV charging. This removes the incentive to install privately-operated EV charging stations in public places or, potentially, within strata buildings.

Currently, in Quebec, an “infrastructure as a service” model is being piloted through Federal funding. This model involves a private company working with a strata corporation to set up EV charging in a multi-family dwelling at the expense of the private business. The business would recover costs and generate revenues through charging EV-owning residents fees for accessing the charging equipment. This moves the upfront cost and risk from the strata corporation to the private business. This model is not allowable in BC under the current regulatory environment without either a Minister’s Regulation or Cabinet pre-approval, which represents a disproportionate level of cost and effort for very small-scale electricity resale for EV charging.

A recommended solution is to amend the BC Utilities Commission Act to exclude from the definition of a ‘public utility’ a small-scale reseller of electricity at profit for the purpose of electric vehicle charging in public and private settings.

PROVINCIAL MANDATE In the BC Climate Leadership Plan (CLP), the Province states that it will be “developing policies to facilitate installing electric vehicle charging stations in strata buildings and developments.” This indicates that the Province is aware of the issues raised in this report; however, no progress on these initiatives has been announced since the CLP was adopted in August 2016.

This region expects to see rapid uptake of electric vehicles in the next couple of years. This results in urgent need for these legislative barriers to be addressed by the Province in a timely manner.

The UBCM regularly brings resolutions to the Province in order to address the concerns of its members. Resolutions may be submitted by Area Associations, Boards or Councils prior to June 30. The submission of the attached resolutions prior to this date would allow for consideration in 2017, with the intention of requesting that the above Acts be amended by the end of 2018. The resolutions aim to facilitate access to electric vehicle charging in Metro Vancouver and the province as a whole.

It is proposed that the MVRD Board endorse the following two UBCM resolutions (Attachments 1 and 2) to request that the Province do the following before the end of 2018: • amend the BC Strata Property Act such that strata councils and strata corporations must accommodate reasonable requests from residents, for the purpose of electric vehicle charging, to access existing powered outlets or, where existing powered outlets are insufficient to meet charging needs, to install new powered outlets and/or electric vehicle charging infrastructure by the resident. • amend the Utilities Commission Act to exclude from the definition of a ‘public utility’, strata corporations providing service to its members, and small-scale for-profit resellers of electricity for the purpose of electric vehicle charging in public and private settings. In both cases, consideration should be given to waiving reporting requirements set out in Section 71 of the Act. These require a filing of rates with the BC Utilities Commission and quarterly reporting of revenues, which may be onerous for strata corporations and small businesses.

Climate Action Committee - Page 33 UBCM Resolutions on Electric Vehicle Charging in Stratified Multi-Unit Residential Buildings Climate Action Committee Regular Meeting Date: June 7, 2017 Page 4 of 4

ALTERNATIVES 1. That the MVRD Board: a) Submit the resolutions attached to the report dated May 17, 2017, titled, “UBCM Resolutions on Electric Vehicle Charging in Stratified Multi-Unit Residential Buildings” to the Union of British Columbia Municipalities (UBCM) to facilitate electric vehicle charging in stratified multi-family dwellings through changes to the BC Strata Property Act and the BC Utilities Commission Act; and b) Direct staff to identify appropriate BC local governments and forward this report to them prior to the UBCM Convention in September 2017, for their consideration. 2. That the Climate Action Committee receive this report for information and refer this matter back to staff for further discussion among member jurisdictions.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS There are no financial implications associated with Alternative 1. As previously reported to the Climate Action Committee, programs are underway to remove barriers to electric vehicle use and charging within multi-unit residential buildings and workplaces. These programs are being carried out within approved operating budgets. The proposed resolutions aim to address two key barriers to electric vehicle charging in stratified multi-family dwellings, and could improve the effectiveness of current programs.

SUMMARY / CONCLUSION Electric vehicle owners living in stratified multi-family dwellings face significant barriers in accessing home charging. In addition to infrastructure barriers, strata residents face institutional and governance challenges. With almost half of households in this region living in multi-family dwellings, and rapidly growing demand for electric vehicles, there is need for the Province to fulfill its commitments under the Climate Leadership Plan and remove these barriers in a timely manner. The UBCM regularly brings resolutions to the Province in order to address the concerns of its members. As this is an urgent issue for this region, and the Province as a whole, staff recommend Alternative 1; that the MVRD Board brings two resolutions to the UBCM Convention this September to petition the Province to make changes to the BC Strata Property Act and the BC Utilities Commission Act to address these barriers in a timely manner.

Attachments: 1. Proposed UBCM Resolution on changes to the BC Strata Property Act. 2. Proposed UBCM Resolution on changes to the BC Utilities Commission Act.

References: 1. September 3, 2014, “No charge: Couple forced to move because of electric vehicle”, http://bc.ctvnews.ca/no-charge-couple-forced-to-move-because-of-electric-vehicle- 1.1987615 2. March 30, 2016, “Condo Smarts: Strata won’t allow charging station for electric car”, http://www.timescolonist.com/life/homes/condo-smarts-strata-won-t-allow-charging-station- for-electric-car-1.2219515#sthash.3mFLr0K8.dpuf 3. March 29, 2016, “Olympic Village electric vehicle fight” http://globalnews.ca/video/3344824/olympic-village-electric-vehicle-fight

21640606

Climate Action Committee - Page 34 5.3 ATTACHMENT 1

ATTACHMENT 1: Proposed UBCM Resolution on changes to the BC Strata Property Act.

EV CHARGING IN STRATA BUILDINGS Metro Vancouver Regional District

WHEREAS the BC Climate Leadership Plan has a stated goal of supporting vehicle charging development for zero emission vehicles to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and lack of access to electric vehicle (EV) charging is an impediment to EV uptake;

AND WHEREAS a significant and growing proportion of British Columbia residents live in multifamily dwellings, most of which are stratified;

AND WHEREAS requirements for approval by a strata corporation under the BC Strata Property Act for alteration of common property represent a significant barrier to installing and accessing means of charging in stratified buildings;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Province of British Columbia amend the BC Strata Property Act, before the end of 2018, such that strata councils and strata corporations must accommodate reasonable requests from residents, for the purpose of electric vehicle charging, to access existing powered outlets or, where existing powered outlets are insufficient to meet charging needs, to install new powered outlets and/or electric vehicle charging infrastructure.

Climate Action Committee - Page 35 5.3 ATTACHMENT 2

ATTACHMENT 2: Proposed UBCM Resolution on changes to the BC Utilities Commission Act.

RESALE OF ELECTRICITY FOR EV CHARGING Metro Vancouver Regional District

WHEREAS the BC Climate Leadership Plan has a stated goal of supporting vehicle charging development for zero emission vehicles to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and lack of access to electric vehicle (EV) charging, especially in stratified dwellings, is an impediment to EV uptake;

AND WHEREAS exclusions from the definition of a ‘public utility’ under the BC Utilities Commission Act include a person providing a service or commodity to tenants, but are silent regarding strata corporations and its resident members;

AND WHEREAS processes for exemptions from provisions of the BC Utilities Commission Act discourage small-scale for-profit resale of electricity for the purpose of electric vehicle charging;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Province of British Columbia amend the Utilities Commission Act, before the end of 2018, to specifically exclude from the definition of a ‘public utility’ a strata corporation providing services to its members, and exclude from the definition of a ‘public utility’ a small-scale reseller of electricity at profit for the purpose of electric vehicle charging in public and private settings; and, in both of the aforementioned cases, exempt the reporting requirements currently set out in Section 71 of the Act.

Climate Action Committee - Page 36 5.4

To: Climate Action Committee

From: Laurie Bates-Frymel, Senior Regional Planner Parks, Planning and Environment Department

Date: May 15, 2017 Meeting Date: June 7, 2017

Subject: Metro Vancouver Submission on the Review of the Federal Environmental Assessment Process

RECOMMENDATION That the MVRD Board convey to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change support for, and feedback on, the appointed Expert Panel’s recommended changes to the federal environmental assessment process as expressed in Attachment 3 to the report dated May 15, 2017, titled “Metro Vancouver Submission on the Review of the Federal Environmental Assessment Process”.

PURPOSE This report provides an overview of the recommendations of the Expert Panel regarding changes to the federal environmental assessment process, outlines the content of the Metro Vancouver staff comments that were sent to the Panel Chair on May 10, 2017, and seeks MVRD Board support for said comments via a letter to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change.

BACKGROUND In 2016, the Honourable Catherine McKenna, MP, Minister of Environment and Climate Change, launched a review of the federal environmental assessment process associated with the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 (CEAA 2012) by establishing a four-person Expert Panel. This Expert Panel engaged the public, Indigenous groups and other stakeholders by travelling to 21 cities in November and December 2016 and collecting input online. They received over 500 online submissions and spoke with over 1,000 participants during engagement sessions across the country. Metro Vancouver staff submitted initial technical comments to the Panel Chair on December 6, 2016 (Attachment 1).

On April 5, 2017 the Expert Panel delivered its findings in a report titled Building Common Ground: A New Vision for Impact Assessment in Canada to the Minister, who then invited feedback from Canadians on the panel recommendations via LetsTalkEA.ca within one month (Attachment 2). To meet that deadline, staff submitted technical comments on the recommendations to the Panel Chair. The letter notes that staff comments would be sent to the Minister for her consideration, pending endorsement by the MVRD Board. This report provides an opportunity for the MVRD Board to consider the staff comments and whether the Board would like to submit comments from Metro Vancouver to the Minister.

Climate Action Committee - Page 37 Metro Vancouver Submission on the Review of the Federal Environmental Assessment Process Climate Action Committee Regular Meeting Date: June 7, 2017 Page 2 of 4

OVERVIEW OF THE EXPERT PANEL’S RECOMMENDATIONS Below is a brief summary of the recommended changes to the assessment content and process:

Assessment - Change from environmental assessment to impact assessment – moving beyond the bio-physical environment to encompass all impacts, both positive and negative, likely to result from a project. The review describes the five pillars of sustainability - environmental, health, social, cultural and economic – which should be central to impact assessment. - Legislation requiring a new impact assessment authority to develop a schedule of regions that require a regional impact assessment and to conduct those regional impact assessments where cumulative impacts may occur or already exist on federal lands or marine areas, or where there are potential consequential cumulative impacts to matters of federal interest. - Criteria, modelling and methodology must be established to: o assess a project's contribution to climate change; o consider how climate change may impact the future environmental setting of a project; and o consider a project's or region's long-term sustainability and resiliency in a changing environmental setting. - Legislation to require the development of a central, consolidated and publicly available federal government database to house all baseline and monitoring data collected for impact assessment purposes.

Process and Decisions - A single authority (new Impact Assessment Commission) should have the mandate to conduct and decide upon impact assessment on behalf of the federal government. The Commission should be established as a quasi-judicial tribunal empowered to undertake a full range of facilitation and dispute-resolution processes. - All jurisdictions, including Indigenous, provincial, municipal and territorial governments, would be encouraged to participate earlier in the process (planning phase) to establish a coordinated process that integrates process and legislative requirements from all jurisdictions. - Greater role for Indigenous Peoples in decision-making. - Early and ongoing opportunities for public participation and all information should be easily accessible, and permanently and publicly available. - Develop an estimate of the cost and timeline for each phase of the assessment and report regularly on the success in meeting these estimates. - Decisions reference key supporting evidence, including the criteria and trade-offs used to achieve sustainability outcomes.

METRO VANCOUVER STAFF COMMENTS Staff provided feedback on the Expert Panel’s recommendations in the form of a letter to the Panel Chair on May 10, 2017 (Attachment 3). In general, staff support the Expert Panel’s recommendations and provided suggestions for further refinement. For example, staff support the use of regional impact assessments to facilitate the consideration of potential impacts of all existing and proposed projects on regional growth, employment, economic prosperity, air quality, and the regional transportation network. Staff also suggested that the Fraser River Estuary would be a good candidate for a regional impact assessment to provide valuable information about cumulative effects for current and future project proposals.

Climate Action Committee - Page 38 Metro Vancouver Submission on the Review of the Federal Environmental Assessment Process Climate Action Committee Regular Meeting Date: June 7, 2017 Page 3 of 4

Although the recommendations were supported by many online forum participants, concerns were raised by some businesses and industry about additional delays associated with the planning phase, expanded scope and further opportunities for stakeholder and public consultation.

Overall, if implemented, staff believe the Expert Panel’s recommended changes would provide a more thorough and science-based assessment of local and regional impacts, with earlier engagement of interested parties and the public.

NEXT STEPS The Minister of Environment and Climate Change has sought feedback on the Expert Panel’s recommendations from all Canadians. Staff is providing the MVRD Board with comments submitted to the Chair of the Expert panel, with the opportunity to support those comments and convey them as Metro Vancouver’s feedback, along with any additional comments, to the Minister.

The Government of Canada has committed to reviewing the Expert Panel’s report and the input received during the spring/summer of 2017. They plan to engage a broad range of stakeholders and Indigenous groups over the coming months and will consider any potential legislative, regulatory or policy changes required in fall 2017.

ALTERNATIVES 1. That the MVRD Board convey to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change support for, and feedback on, the appointed Expert Panel’s recommended changes to the federal environmental assessment process as expressed in Attachment 3 to the report dated May 15, 2017, titled “Metro Vancouver Submission on the Review of the Federal Environmental Assessment Process”. 2. That the MVRD Board receive for information the report dated May 15, 2017, titled “Metro Vancouver Submission on the Review of the Federal Environmental Assessment Process”.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Staff resources and consulting expenditures for participation in reviews of major projects, including those that undergo federal environmental assessment, are approved within existing program operating budgets. In general, staff are supportive of the recommended changes to federal assessment processes. However, it is recognized that these changes may have an impact in terms of technical review and participation in engagement processes by staff, and this will be considered in program budgets going forward.

SUMMARY / CONCLUSION Staff reviewed the recommendations of the Expert Panel appointed by the Minister of Environment and Climate Change to review the federal environmental assessment process and, in general, staff supported the Expert Panel’s recommended changes. To meet the feedback deadline, staff submitted technical comments in a letter to the Panel Chair, Ms. Johanne Gélinas (Attachment 3). Staff recommend Alternative 1, that the MVRD Board convey support for the staff submission and provide any additional feedback on the Expert Panel’s recommended changes to the federal environmental assessment process to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change.

Climate Action Committee - Page 39 Metro Vancouver Submission on the Review of the Federal Environmental Assessment Process Climate Action Committee Regular Meeting Date: June 7, 2017 Page 4 of 4

Attachments: 1. Metro Vancouver Staff Comments on the Review of Federal Environmental Assessment Process (dated December 6, 2016) (orbit #21659692) 2. Building Common Ground: A New Vision for Impact Assessment in Canada – Executive Summary (orbit #21663496) 3. Metro Vancouver Staff Feedback on Building Common Ground: A New Vision for Impact Assessment in Canada (dated May 10, 2017) (orbit #21662799)

21658959

Climate Action Committee - Page 40 5.4 ATTACHMENT 1 ...... '-4 metrovancouver ~ SERVICESAND SOLUTIONS FOR A LIVABLE REGION

Office of the Commissioner/ Chief Administrative Officer Tel. 604 432·6210 FaK 604 432-6614

File: CP-10-01-EA DEC0 6 2016 Johanne Gelinas, Chair, Expert Panel Review of Federal Environmental Assessment Processes VIA EMAIL: [email protected]

Dear Ms. Gelinas:

Re: Metro Vancouver Staff Comments on the Review of Federal Environmental Assessment Process

Metro Vancouver is pleased to provide feedback to the Expert Panel appointed by the Minister of Environment and Climate Change to review the federal environmental assessment processes.

Metro Vancouver is a regional government that reflects a partnership of 21 municipalities, one Electoral Area and one Treaty First Nation that collaboratively plans for and delivers regional-scale services. Metro Vancouver provides drinking water, wastewater treatment and solid waste management services, regulates air quality, plans for urban growth, manages a regional parks system, and provides affordable housing and works with a wide range of authorities at the municipal, regional, provincial, and federal levels to collaboratively address issues of regional significance.

Effective planning for major projects requires close consultation and coordination among all levels of government, businesses, institutions and residents since many of these projects can have far­ reaching impacts on land use, transportation, the economy, and the environment in our region. Metro Vancouver staff have participated in several federal, coordinated and substituted environmental assessments as well as National Energy Board processes.

With a diverse set of mandates and services, Metro Vancouver provides many perspectives on proposed major projects and feedback on the federal environmental and regulatory processes is no exception. Enclosed are Metro Vancouver staff comments by service area based on the goals and objectives expressed in the Board Strategic Plan, Metro Vancouver 2040: Shaping our Future (Metro 2040), the regional growth strategy, and other regional plans such as our Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan, Drinking Water Management Plan, Regional Parks Plan and Integrated liquid Waste and Resource Management Plan.

Metro Vancouver appreciates the opportunity to provide input on this important review process. For further information, please contact Elisa Campbell, Director of Regional Planning and Electoral Area Services, by phone at 604-451-6556 or email at [email protected].

19308887 4330 King sway, Burnaby, BC, Canada VSH 4G8 • 604-432-6200 • www.metrovancouver.org Greater Vancouver Regional District• Greater Vancouver Water District• Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Dra'nage D strict• Metro Vancouver Hous ng Corporation

Climate Action Committee - Page 41 Ms. Gelinas, Chair, Expert Panel, Review of Federal Environmental Assessment Processes Metro Vancouver Staff Comments on the Review of Federal Environmental Assessment Processes Page 2 of 2

Yours truly,

Carol Mason Commissioner/ Chief Administrative Officer

CM/NC/lbf

Encl: Feedback from Metro Vancouver Staff on Federal Environmental Assessment Processes

19308887

Climate Action Committee - Page 42 Feedback from Metro Vancouver Staff on Federal Environmental Assessment Processes During the Panel’s review of federal environmental assessment processes, Metro Vancouver staff suggest the following areas should be examined for improvement: - The important role of local governments. Over the last year, the federal government has been seeking feedback on several processes and pieces of legislation that may impact local government infrastructure, public services and core values. Comments from local governments are currently being sought via the same mechanisms as the public (online surveys and public hearings), but in several cases local governments have reached out to federal staff to arrange more fulsome cross- jurisdictional discussions and facilitate thoughtful feedback. The current federal environmental assessment process incorporates opportunities for self-identified local governments to submit information requests/comments on environmental impact statements to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA). However, these comments are screened by CEAA and only a subset is formally passed on to the proponent for response. In the case of Roberts Bank Terminal 2, staff from Metro Vancouver sit on the technical working group which has not met since May 2015, but federal and provincial agencies were requested to clarify their roles and relevant mandates for the Review Panel during a Panel orientation session in June 2016. Staff from Metro Vancouver and several member municipalities, on the other hand, had to request a second session to address the Panel. It is critical to incorporate ongoing mechanisms for dialogue and opportunities for meaningful engagement with local governments into federal environmental assessment processes. - Timelines for the conduct of environmental assessments. With many active federal and provincial environmental assessment processes taking place in Metro Vancouver, it can be challenging for interested parties and the public to review such large documents and provide informed comment by the prescribed deadlines. At key points in the process, enough lead time is needed for staff feedback to be considered by local government elected officials who operate within municipal Council and/or regional Board approval processes. - Consideration of science. The science in many fields is evolving and environmental assessments should reflect these growing bodies of scientific evidence with respect to the valued components for a project (e.g., climate change adaptation, health impact assessment, cumulative impacts, ecosystem services, visual air quality, ground-level ozone, etc.). The review process should also allow some flexibility to incorporate the most recent methods and findings, regardless of whether they were specified in the original environmental impact statement guidelines. - Consideration of cumulative effects. Over the past decade, several major projects have been completed (e.g., Golden Ears Bridge, Port Mann Bridge/Highway 1 Project, Deltaport Third Berth, South Fraser Perimeter Road, Canada Line, Evergreen Line), approved (e.g., Vancouver Airport Fuel Delivery Project, Fraser Surrey Docks, TransMountain Pipeline Expansion), or proposed (e.g., Vancouver Airport Fuel Delivery Project, Fraser Surrey Docks, Roberts Bank Terminal 2, George Massey Tunnel Replacement, WesPac Tilbury Marine Jetty, Centerm Expansion, Pattullo Bridge Replacement Project, Fraser Grain Terminal) within Metro Vancouver. Many of these projects are/would be situated along the Fraser River Estuary, a complex and critically important ecosystem. As more projects are developed in a particular region, the consideration of cumulative impacts/effects becomes more important. Although a single project may cause negligible impacts on a select valued component, these impacts may become significant when effects from development, other industrial projects and potential system-wide (e.g., transportation, ecosystems) changes are considered. A clear

Climate Action Committee - Page 43 and scientifically-sound approach should be employed to develop a consistent methodology for assessing cumulative effects. - Monitoring and follow-up after the construction and operation of a project are necessary to compare environmental assessment predictions to real world results. Lessons from such monitoring and follow- up programs should be used periodically to evaluate the methodologies used in environmental assessments and changes that should be reflected in the assessment process. Specifically, we encourage the Expert Review Panel to consider the following:

Metro Vancouver Comments Service Regional Planning - Review regulations regarding the coordination/harmonization of environmental assessment procedures and requirements, including the process for triggering responsible authority. To avoid conflict of interest, assessment review processes for projects where the proponent is a provincial government ministry (e.g., George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project) should be led by CEAA. - Seek feedback on consistent, evidence-based methodologies for determining significance of impacts and system-wide cumulative effects. - Require major project proponents to: o Assess potential impacts on regional transportation (on-road, rail, air and marine) patterns and land use in the affected region, o Conduct health impact assessments as part the environmental assessment process in addition to human health risk assessments, o Assess cumulative effects on all relevant species, habitats and ecosystems of concern as identified through the consultation process, o Quantify and valuate the ecosystem services that may be lost if the project is approved and compare with compensation values, o Develop management/mitigation plans in consultation with local and regional governments prior to project approval and require proof of efficacy with the Application, and o Complete follow-up monitoring and evaluation. - Work with local governments and other key stakeholders to develop a mechanism for coordinated review of major projects and assessment of cumulative environmental effects. For example, prior to 2013 the Burrard Inlet Environmental Action Program-Fraser River Estuary Management Program coordinated the review of federal, provincial and local projects, facilitated forums between experts, developed collaborative management plans and provided annual reporting on the state of the Burrard Inlet and the Fraser River.

Climate Action Committee - Page 44 Metro Vancouver Comments Service Air Quality and - Require major project proponents to: Climate Change o Investigate alternatives to proposed projects as a standard component of the environmental assessment process. o Assess the impact of proposed projects on ground-level ozone, a contaminant of concern in the Lower Fraser Valley airshed. o Include visual air quality as a standard valued component to respond to the growing body of science and international commitments to protect visibility. o Assess upstream and downstream greenhouse gas emissions. The interim requirements for pipeline reviews to assess related upstream greenhouse gas emissions is an important step forward to ensure the fulsome consideration of potential climate change impacts in environmental assessments. However, climate change is a global issue, and the cumulative impacts of these projects cannot be evaluated without also considering the downstream greenhouse gas emissions that result from the end use of the fossil fuels produced or transported by major oil and gas projects in Canada. Although downstream emissions may occur in other countries, the effects of these emissions will be felt globally, including in Canada. Liquid Waste Services - Assessments should be risk-based, putting the most effort into addressing the highest environmental concerns. - Equal and consistent treatment for participants (industry and government). - Use true environmental restoration with multipliers for compensation for environmental damage. - Give credit to organizations with distinct proven and effective environmental strategies. - Ensure updated processes are simple and effective to maximize the likelihood that they are both understood and followed. Water Services - Consider enhanced guidance for public utility system operators on regulatory expectations for managing environmental risk during unplanned or unforeseen events in the utility system, to ensure that consideration is given to the continued delivery of essential public utility services under adverse operating conditions (e.g., repair of water main breaks). - In general, the current environmental and regulatory processes tend to be prescriptive in nature and apply generally to all activities, industries, and persons. As such, public utility system operators cannot integrate risk management considerations with the public interest in ensuring the safe and reliable delivery of public utility services. - Consider an expedient and accessible process whereby exceptions to the usual requirements may be considered in specialized cases, especially for utilities providing essential public services.

Climate Action Committee - Page 45 Metro Vancouver Comments Service - Ensure that regulatory staff understand the complexity of utility system operations required to assess environmental risks and compliance in context. - Generally consider streamlining amongst the various agencies that manage the regulatory and environmental processes, including better alignment with parallel provincial processes (e.g. reporting requirements). Ensure that approval of construction windows are coordinated amongst different levels of government and agencies. - In general, the regulatory and environmental processes may not consider the effects of changing climates, which have affected, and are affecting, background conditions. Rigid criteria in existing processes can present challenges to public utility system operators in adapting to emerging risks.

In closing, the Government of Canada must ensure that science, facts, evidence and expert knowledge with respect to environmental, health, socio-economic and economic benefits/impacts, and public opinion are considered when making environmental and regulatory decisions.

21659692 Climate Action Committee - Page 46 5.4 ATTACHMENT 2

BUILDING COMMON GROUND A New Vision for Impact Assessment in Canada

The Final Report of the Expert Panel for the Review of Environmental Assessment Processes

Climate Action Committee - Page 47 Également disponible en français sous le titre : Bâtir un terrain d’entente : une nouvelle vision pour l’évaluation des impacts au Canada

To obtain additional information, please contact:

Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency 22nd Floor, Place Bell 160 Elgin Street Ottawa ON K1A 0H3 Tel.: 613-957-0700 Fax: 613-957-0862 Toll free number: 1-866-582-1884 Email: [email protected]

Images courtesy of the Canadian Tourism Commission.

This publication can be made available in alternative formats upon request.

© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, as represented by the Minister of Environment and Climate Change, 2017.

This publication may be reproduced for personal or internal use without permission, provided the source is fully acknowledged. However, multiple copy reproduction of this publication in whole or in part for purposes of redistribution requires prior written permission from the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H3, or [email protected].

Paper: Cat.: En106-158/2017E PDF: Cat.: En106-158/2017E-PDF ISBN: 978-0-660-08092-5 ISBN: 978-0-660-08091-8

Climate Action Committee - Page 48 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Message from the Panel ...... 1 Executive Summary...... 2 Introduction...... 9 Section 1 – Outlining the Vision...... 11

1.1 Meeting the Challenge...... 12

1.2 From Environmental Assessment to Impact Assessment...... 13

1.3 The Principles Guiding our Vision...... 13 Section 2 – Developing the Vision...... 16

2.1 The Purpose of Federal Impact Assessment...... 17 2.1.1 Federal Jurisdiction...... 17 2.1.2 Impact Assessment as a Planning Tool...... 18 2.1.3 From Significance to Sustainability...... 19 2.1.4 Tiering...... 22

2.2 Co-Operation Among Jurisdictions...... 22 2.2.1 Co-Operation...... 23 2.2.2 Substitution...... 25 2.2.3 Equivalency...... 26

2.3 Indigenous Considerations...... 26 2.3.1 Reflecting UNDRIP Principles in Impact Assessment...... 28 2.3.2 Assessing Impacts to Aboriginal and Treaty Rights in Impact Assessment...... 30 2.3.3 Capacity...... 31 2.3.4 Indigenous Knowledge...... 33 2.3.5 Impact Benefit Agreements...... 35

2.4 Public Participation in Impact Assessment...... 35 2.4.1 Meaningful Participation...... 36 2.4.2 Capacity for Participation...... 39 2.4.3 Informed Participation...... 40

2.5 Evidence-Based Impact Assessment...... 41 2.5.1 Incorporating Science in Impact Assessment...... 42 2.5.2 Integrating Science, Indigenous Knowledge and Community Knowledge...... 44 2.5.3 Developing Unbiased Impact Statements...... 45 2.5.4 Making Evidence-Based Decisions...... 46

Climate Action Committee - Page 49 Section 3 – Implementing The Vision...... 48

3.1 Governance Model...... 49 3.1.1 How Should Federal Impact Assessment be Governed?...... 49 3.1.2 Envisioning the New Federal Impact Assessment Authority...... 52 3.1.3 Mandate...... 55

3.2 Project Impact Assessment...... 55 3.2.1 What Should Require Project Impact Assessment?...... 56 3.2.2 How Should Project Impact Assessment be Conducted?...... 58

3.3 Monitoring, Compliance and Enforcement...... 66 3.3.1 Conditions...... 67 3.3.2 Monitoring and Follow-Up...... 68 3.3.3 Compliance and Enforcement...... 70

3.4 Discipline in Impact Assessment Time and Costs...... 72 3.4.1 Managing Proponents’ Time and Costs...... 72 3.4.2 Managing Government’s Time and Costs...... 74

3.5 Regional Impact Assessment...... 76 3.5.1 What Should Require Regional Impact Assessment?...... 78 3.5.2 How Should Regional Impact Assessment be Conducted?...... 80

3.6 Strategic Impact Assessment...... 81 3.6.1 What Should Require Strategic Impact Assessment?...... 82 3.6.2 How Should Strategic Impact Assessment be Conducted?...... 83

3.7 Climate Change and Impact Assessment...... 83 Section 4 – The Expert Panel’s Review Process and What We Heard...... 86 Annex 1 – Expert Panel Terms of Reference...... 107 Annex 2 – Biographies of Expert Panel Members...... 113 Annex 3 – Discussion Paper: Suggested Themes for Discussion...... 116

Climate Action Committee - Page 50 In developing our Report, we have strived to take all of your recommendations into account in developing our vision for the future. Separate from our Report, MESSAGE we have put together a detailed annotation of your recommendations and identified where in our Report they have been addressed.

We would like to acknowledge the support from Minister McKenna and thank her for the opportunity to contribute FROM THE to this important initiative. We wish her, her office and her staff success in developing a new federal assessment regime, and we hope that our Report will be helpful in doing so. PANEL To the Multi-Interest Advisory Committee, to the selected experts and to the former project review panel members We have been honoured to serve on the Expert Panel who gave of their time to help us, we offer our thanks. mandated by the Minister of Environment and Climate Your assistance was invaluable. Change to review federal environmental assessment Finally, to the Secretariat who supported us, we have processes. Enclosed is our Report to the Minister outlining nothing but praise and admiration. The many hours you our recommendations to restore the public’s trust and all spent working tirelessly to enable us to complete this confidence in these processes. From the start, we have task was truly awesome. Thank you all very much. We each believed that this is an important undertaking would also like to thank the Canadian Environmental without which Canada would be stalled on its journey Assessment Agency for their support in establishing the toward sustainable development. Economic progress, Secretariat and our Panel. environmental protection and social improvement would all be less than ideal without an assessment process that This Report is for those who think there is a better way has the trust of Canadians. forward. Take the next steps. Make us all accountable to build a better Canada, more in line with who we are and To all who participated in our review, we offer our heartfelt what we value. thanks and deep appreciation. Without your selfless effort, we would not have been able to undertake this work. Many of you came before us to share your views and experiences and to suggest solutions to improve assessment processes in Canada. Your enthusiasm Johanne Gélinas (Chair) and commitment fuelled our own passion and gave us the energy we needed day after day to complete our task. Others spent hours writing submissions that were thought-provoking and valued. We thank you all. You have been a source of inspiration. Doug Horswill (Member)

We were very impressed by the younger generations of participants who came before us. Coupled with those who asked us to adopt “next generation” environmental Rod Northey (Member) assessment, we received a clear message to focus on development that is sustainable for present and future generations. We send them special thanks for their knowledge, passion and commitment, and know that they Renée Pelletier (Member) will lead Canada to a better place.

BUILDING COMMON GROUND A NEW VISION FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENT IN CANADA 1

Climate Action Committee - Page 51 that, in our view, assessment processes must move beyond the bio-physical environment to encompass all impacts likely to result from a project, both positive EXECUTIVE and negative. Therefore, what is now “environmental assessment” should become “impact assessment” (IA). Changing the name of the federal process to impact assessment underscores the shift in thinking necessary to enable practitioners and Canadians to understand the SUMMARY substantive changes being proposed in our Report. In her mandate letter from the Prime Minister, the Minister We also outline that, as we listened to presenters and of Environment and Climate Change (the Minister) was read the many submissions presented to us, we came to directed to immediately review environmental assessment understand that any new effective assessment process (EA) processes with these objectives: to restore public must be governed by four fundamental principles. IA trust in EA; to introduce new, fair processes; and to get processes must be transparent, inclusive, informed, and resources to market. On August 15, 2016, the Minister meaningful. announced the establishment of our four-person Expert In Section 2, Developing the Vision, we outline Panel (the Panel) to conduct this review. recommendations about the purpose of IA, the The Terms of Reference established for the review importance of co-operation among jurisdictions, directed us, the Panel, to engage broadly with Canadians, integrating Indigenous considerations into IA processes, Indigenous Peoples, provinces and territories, and key enabling meaningful participation and ensuring evidence- stakeholders to develop recommendations to the Minister based decision-making. Each of these aspects is on how to improve federal EA processes. fundamental to ensuring that federal IA is robust and responds effectively to what we heard across the country. Views about federal EA across the various interests ranged from support to all-out opposition. It was clear, Impact assessment aims to identify and address potential however, that current assessment processes under the issues and concerns early in the design of projects, plans Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 (CEAA 2012) and policies. In so doing, it can contribute to the creation are incapable of resolving these disparate points of view. of positive relationships among various interest groups, including reconciliation between Indigenous Peoples and In general, we did not hear strident opposition to the non-Indigenous peoples. IA also aims to contribute to development of projects, although in a few cases there the protection of the bio-physical environment and the were those who held that certain projects should not have long-term well-being of Canadians by gathering proper gone ahead. Rather, we heard that, when communities, information to inform decision-making. At a project scale, proponents and governments work together with mutual IA should improve project design and ensure appropriate respect and understanding in a process that is open, mitigation measures and monitoring programs are inclusive and trusted, assessment processes can deliver implemented. In sum, IA processes should give Canadians better projects, bring society more benefits than costs confidence that projects, plans and policies have been and contribute positively to Canada’s sustainable future. adequately assessed.

As we drew lessons from what we had heard across Federal IAs require clear direction on both the purpose the country, we came to the conclusion that we need to and parameters of the process. There are many options improve the way we plan for development in our country. on how best to do IA. In considering the future of IA We believe that Canadians deserve better and that it is in Canada, it is necessary to begin by answering the entirely possible to deliver better. Our Report explains how following fundamental questions through a consideration to achieve this. of jurisdiction, significance and sustainability, and IA’s role as a planning tool: In Section 1, Outlining the Vision, we lay the foundation for the recommendations that follow. We outline nnWhat should require federal IA?

BUILDING COMMON GROUND 2 A NEW VISION FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENT IN CANADA

Climate Action Committee - Page 52 nnWhen should a federal IA for a project, plan, or policy Terms of Reference, as was reflecting the principles of begin? the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), “especially with respect to the manner n nWhat should federal IA look at? in which environmental assessment processes can be used to address potential impacts to potential or Regarding the purpose of IA, the Panel recommends established Aboriginal or treaty rights.” that: The Panel recognizes that there are broader discussions nnfederal interest be central in determining whether an IA that need to occur between the Government of Canada should be required for a given project, region, plan or and Indigenous Peoples with respect to nation-to- policy. nation relationships, overlapping and unresolved claims nnfederal IA should begin with a legislated Planning Phase to Aboriginal rights and title, reconciliation, treaty that, for projects, occurs early in project development implementation and the broader implementation of before design elements are finalized. UNDRIP. Many of these discussions will be necessary prerequisites to the full and effective implementation of nnsustainability be central to IA. The likelihood of the recommendations contained in this Report. consequential impacts on matters of federal interest should determine whether an IA would be required. Regarding Indigenous considerations, the Panel recommends that: nnfederal IA decide whether a project should proceed based on that project’s contribution to sustainability. nnIndigenous Peoples be included in decision-making at all stages of IA, in accordance with their own laws and nnIA legislation require the use of strategic and regional customs. IAs to guide project IA. nnIA processes require the assessment of impacts to IA creates challenges for Canada’s system of government, asserted or established Aboriginal or treaty rights and with the requirement that a broad range of information be interests across all components of sustainability. collected and evaluated but with no government having full authority to regulate all impacts. Federal, provincial, nnany IA authority be designated an agent of the territorial, municipal and Indigenous governments may Crown and, through a collaborative process, thus be each have responsibility for the conduct of IA, but each accountable for the duty to consult and accommodate, level of government can only regulate matters within its the conduct of consultation, and the adequacy jurisdiction. of consultation. The fulfilment of this duty must occur under a collaborative framework developed in The principle of “one project, one assessment” is central partnership with impacted Indigenous Groups. to implementing IA around the five pillars of sustainability. Grounding federal IA in legal jurisdiction, starting early nnany IA authority increase its capacity to meaningfully in planning and focusing on assessing contributions to engage with and respect Indigenous Peoples, by sustainability make co-operation among jurisdictions improving knowledge of Indigenous Peoples and their essential to ensure Canadians realize the benefits from IA. rights, history and culture.

Regarding co-operation among jurisdictions, the Panel nna funding program be developed to provide long-term, recommends that: ongoing IA capacity development that is responsive to the specific needs and contexts of diverse Indigenous nnco-operation be the primary mechanism for Groups. co-ordination where multiple IA processes apply. nnIA-specific funding programs be enhanced to provide nnsubstitution be available on the condition that the adequate support throughout the whole IA process, in highest standard of IA would apply. a manner that is responsive to the specific needs and contexts of diverse Indigenous Groups. Finding ways to enhance Indigenous participation and consultation was identified as a key goal in the Panel’s

BUILDING COMMON GROUND A NEW VISION FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENT IN CANADA 3

Climate Action Committee - Page 53 nnIA legislation require that Indigenous knowledge be Evidence comes in many forms and includes Indigenous integrated into all phases of IA, in collaboration with, knowledge and community knowledge. The sustainability- and with the permission and oversight of, Indigenous based IA framework being proposed seeks to integrate Groups. all relevant evidence that supports outcomes within the environmental, health, social, cultural and economic n nIA legislation confirm Indigenous ownership of pillars. Indigenous knowledge and include provisions to protect Indigenous knowledge from/against its unauthorized Regarding evidence-based IA, the Panel recommends use, disclosure or release. that:

Meaningful public participation is a key element to ensure nnIA legislation require that all phases of IA use and the legitimacy of IA processes and central to a renewed IA integrate the best available scientific information and that moves it towards a consensus-building exercise, at methods. the core of which are face-to-face discussions. nnIA legislation require the development of a central, IA can build trust in communities by bringing all affected consolidated and publicly available federal government parties to the table; it increases the transparency of the database to house all baseline and monitoring data process by facilitating information sharing; it improves the collected for IA purposes. design of initiatives by incorporating public information, n expertise, perspective and concerns; and it provides nIA legislation provide any IA authority with power to for improved decision-making by ensuring all relevant compel expertise from federal scientists and to retain information is available. It is through public engagement external scientists to provide technical expertise as and participation that social license to operate – obtaining required. broad public support for proposed undertakings – can be nnany IA authority have the statutory authority to verify built and optimal results of IA can be reached. Further, as the scientific accuracy of studies across all pillars of a learning process, it builds literacy in IA processes and sustainability. builds capacity. Lastly, meaningful participation does not finish with the decision and can contribute to oversight of nnIA integrate the best evidence from science, Indigenous project implementation. knowledge and community knowledge through a framework determined in collaboration with Indigenous Regarding public participation, the Panel recommends Groups, knowledge holders and scientists. that: nnIA legislation require that any IA authority lead the nnIA legislation require that IA provide early and ongoing development of the Impact Statement. public participation opportunities that are open to all. Results of public participation should have the potential nnIA decisions reference the key supporting evidence they to impact decisions. rely upon, including the criteria and trade-offs used to achieve sustainability outcomes. nnthe participant funding program for IA be commensurate with the costs associated with In Section 3, Implementing the Vision, we explain how meaningful participation in all phases of IA, including our recommended vision can be put into practice. Our monitoring and follow-up. recommendations cover the assessment regime and its governance structure. They seek to ensure that the nnIA legislation require that IA information be easily process, the resulting decisions and their implementation accessible, and permanently and publicly available. are inclusive, transparent and fair. We explain how Science, facts and evidence are critical to a well- assessment processes would start earlier and result in functioning IA process. Whether for collecting data, better and more-informed decisions. Our recommended analyzing results or establishing monitoring and follow-up approach seeks to build public confidence in the programs, the quality of science contributes to a trusted assessment process. We believe that public trust can lead process and credible outcomes.

BUILDING COMMON GROUND 4 A NEW VISION FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENT IN CANADA

Climate Action Committee - Page 54 to more efficient and timely reviews. It may also support nnlead to decisions based on the five pillars of getting resources to market. sustainability (environment, economy, social, cultural and health). To restore public trust and confidence in assessment processes, any authority given the mandate to conduct All told, this process would seek to restore trust by federal assessments should be aligned with the Panel’s bringing parties together, benefiting communities guiding principles. In developing recommendations for and advancing the national interest in sustainable how to govern federal IA, the Panel has identified four development. areas of focus: Indigenous Peoples in Canada have a particularly 1. Striving to remove any perceived notion of bias on the important role to play in project IA. The proposed part of responsible authorities; assessment process would seek to engage Indigenous Groups from early project planning through to 2. Maximizing the benefits of a planning-focused IA; assessment decisions and follow-up. It would more accurately and holistically assess impacts to Aboriginal 3. Instilling co-operation and consensus as a governance and treaty rights and interests and identify appropriate philosophy; and accommodation measures. This IA process should 4. Ensuring that IA delivers transparent, evidence-based contribute to a meaningful nation-to-nation relationship. decisions. Therefore, regarding project IA, the Panel recommends In consideration of these areas, the Panel recommends that: that: nnIA legislation define a “project” to be a physical activity nna single authority have the mandate to conduct and or undertaking that impacts one or more matters of decide upon IAs on behalf of the federal government. federal interest. nnthe IA authority should be established as a quasi- nnIA legislation require project IAs when a project is on a judicial tribunal empowered to undertake a full range of new Project List, a project not on the new List is likely facilitation and dispute-resolution processes. to have a consequential impact, or the IA authority accepts a request. Project IA is the cornerstone of the proposed IA regime. We believe that bringing federal assessment into nnall phases of project IA be conducted through a multi- alignment with the four principles guiding our review party, in-person engagement process. requires fundamental change. The proposed new process nnthe outcome of the Planning Phase would be a conduct would: of assessment agreement. nnaim to build consensus and reduce conflict; §§ Based on a prepared project design, the conduct nnfacilitate co-operation with the provinces, territories and of assessment agreement would finalize the Indigenous jurisdictions; factors for assessment, set out the sustainability framework, identify studies that need to be nnavoid conflicts of interest and protect against bias; conducted, address the constitutional duty to consult, outline how the process will integrate nnmandate early planning and early engagement; procedural and legislative requirements of other nnintegrate science, Indigenous knowledge and jurisdictions, and provide details on IA timing and community knowledge; cost. nnhave time limits and cost controls that reflect the nnthe studies outlined in the conduct of assessment specific circumstances of each project, rather than the agreement be completed in the Study Phase. The IA current “one size fits all” approach; and authority would lead an assessment team accountable for preparing the Impact Statement, informed by these studies.

BUILDING COMMON GROUND A NEW VISION FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENT IN CANADA 5

Climate Action Committee - Page 55 nna Decision Phase be established wherein the IA nnIA legislation authorize the IA authority to carry out authority would seek Indigenous consent and issue compliance and enforcement activities with other a public decision statement on whether the project jurisdictions, so long as the results of such activities contributes positively to the sustainability of Canada’s are no less available to the public than the results of development. activities by the IA authority.

The Decision Phase completes the “assessment” part of A final consideration of project IA is the need for a well- the IA process, while monitoring and follow-up related designed and successful IA process to provide clarity to to conditions, as well as compliance and enforcement, all parties through predictable requirements and timelines. make up the post-IA phase. These post-IA elements A one-size-fits-all approach to project IA timelines are equally important to restore trust in assessment through legislated timeframes has not met the objective processes and ensure robust oversight, as they ensure of delivering cost and time certainty to proponents. the implementation of conditions issued with the decision Nevertheless, these attributes are essential to ensure and verify the accuracy of the assessment predictions that projects providing a net benefit to the country are and the effectiveness of identified mitigation measures. approved and built.

Establishing an effective and transparent post-IA phase Any new IA regime must recognize the importance of ensures that project implementation meets the outcomes trying to discipline the process to provide timely and cost- established through the IA process. A consistent effective IA for Canadians. methodology for all monitoring of projects, applied to things such as data collection, would allow for results to Therefore, the Panel recommends that: be compared for similar project types or activities in a nnthe IA authority be required to develop an estimate of similar region. the cost and timeline for each phase of the assessment Therefore, the Panel recommends that: and report regularly on the success in meeting these estimates. nndecision statements use outcome-based conditions that set clear and specific standards of performance. While project-specific assessments have an important role to play to ensure new activities contribute to nnIA legislation contain a formal process to amend sustainability, many sustainability questions cannot be conditions. properly assessed at the scale of project IA. Enhanced interactions between projects, regions, plans and policies, n nIA legislation ensure sustainability outcomes are met and the pillars of sustainability are an important purpose through mandatory monitoring and follow-up programs of IA. A federal IA regime equipped with this suite of with minimum standard requirements common to all options can apply the best type of assessment to any project IAs. given activity or decision. Therefore, a tiered approach should be implemented whereby strategic and regional nnIndigenous Groups and local communities be involved IAs produce the policy and planning foundations for in the independent oversight of monitoring and improved and efficient project IAs. follow-up programs established by the IA authority. Regional IA will provide clarity on thresholds and nnall monitoring and follow-up data, including raw data, objectives on matters of federal interest in a region results and any actions taken to address ineffective and will inform and streamline project IA. In addition mitigation, be posted on a public registry. to being well-equipped to address the sustainability of nnIA legislation provide a broad range of tools to enforce development in various regions, particularly in relation IA conditions and suspend or revoke approvals. to cumulative impacts, regional IA can also streamline project IA to the benefit of proponents and communities nnthe results of inspections be promptly available to the alike. public. An annual report of compliance with conditions for all projects should be published in a public registry.

BUILDING COMMON GROUND 6 A NEW VISION FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENT IN CANADA

Climate Action Committee - Page 56 Regarding regional IA, the Panel recommends that: nnconsider a project’s or region’s long-term sustainability and resiliency in a changing environmental setting. nnIA legislation require regional IAs where cumulative impacts may occur or already exist on federal The Panel’s recommended model for strategic IA would lands or marine areas, or where there are potential prove beneficial in determining a consistent approach for consequential cumulative impacts to matters of federal evaluating a project’s contributions to climate change. interest. Therefore, regarding climate change and IA, the Panel nnIA legislation require the IA authority to develop and recommends that: maintain a schedule of regions that would require a n regional IA and to conduct those regional IAs. nCanada lead a federal strategic IA or similar co-operative and collaborative mechanism on the nna regional IA establish thresholds and objectives to be Pan-Canadian Framework on Clean Growth and Climate used in project IA and federal decisions. Change to provide direction on how to implement this Framework and related initiatives in future federal A new strategic IA model should be put in place to provide project and regional IAs. guidance on how to implement existing federal policies, plans and programs in a project or regional IA. This In Section 4, The Expert Panel’s Review Process and approach involves no amendment to the existing Cabinet What We Heard, we summarize our cross-country review Directive on the Environmental Assessment of Policy, Plan process and what we heard from coast to coast to coast. and Program Proposals and its process for assessing new The input we received had a depth and quality that clearly federal initiatives. Instead, the new model of strategic demonstrated how important this issue is to Canadians, IA would apply exclusively to the implementation of and was instrumental to the development of our Report. existing federal plans, programs and policies where these initiatives have consequential implications for project or These recommendations, taken together, present the regional IA. Panel’s vision for an impact assessment regime that will protect the physical and biological environment, promote Regarding strategic IA, the Panel recommends that: social harmony and facilitate economic development.

nnIA legislation require that the IA authority conduct a Advancing Canada’s economy is about generating strategic IA when a new or existing federal policy, plan job-supporting economic growth across all sectors. or program would have consequential implications for Infrastructure projects and the resource industries federal project or regional IA. are among those most affected by the assessment processes. We believe that the process we propose, which nnstrategic IA define how to implement a policy, plan or is guided by principles designed to restore public trust and program in project and regional IA. confidence, will facilitate the investment in these sectors that is necessary to grow Canada’s economy in ways that IA should play a critical role in supporting Canada’s efforts will contribute positively to a sustainable future. to address climate change. Current processes and interim principles take into account some aspects of climate Leadership from the federal government toward change, but there is an urgent national need for clarity and improving the project assessment process across Canada consistency on how to consider climate change in project would benefit every Canadian. We believe that this review and regional IA. provides the opportunity to raise the bar on assessment processes so that effective and trusted decisions can be Criteria, modelling and methodology must be established made, co-operation can replace dissension, and parties to: can be assured that assessment processes are fair. nnassess a project’s contribution to climate change; The Panel has diligently pursued its mandate and trusts nnconsider how climate change may impact the future that this Report will be accepted as a satisfactory environmental setting of a project; and reflection of its work.

BUILDING COMMON GROUND A NEW VISION FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENT IN CANADA 7

21663496 Climate Action Committee - Page 57 a metrovancouver 5.4 ATTACHMENT 3 ~ SERVICES AND SOLUTIONS FOR A LIVABLE REGION

Office of the Commissioner/Chief Administrative Officer Tel. 604 432-6210 Fax 604 451-6614

File: CP-10-01-EIA

MAY1 0 2017 Ms. Johanne Gelinas, Chair, Expert Panel Review of Federal Environmental Assessment Processes VIA EMAIL: [email protected]

Dear Ms. Gelinas:

Re: Metro Vancouver staff feedback on Building Common Ground: A New Vision for Impact Assessment in Canada

Metro Vancouver is pleased to provide comments to the Expert Panel on the panel's recommendations contained in the report titled "Building Common Ground: A New Vision for Impact Assessment in Canada."

Metro Vancouver is a regional government that reflects a partnership of 21 municipalities, one Electoral Area and one Treaty First Nation that collaboratively plans for and delivers regional-scale services. Metro Vancouver provides drinking water, wastewater treatment and solid waste management services, regulates air quality, plans for regional growth, manages a regional parks system, and provides affordable housing and works with a wide range of authorities at the municipal, regional, provincial, and federal levels to collaboratively address issues of regional significance.

Effective planning for major projects requires close consultation and coordination among all levels of government, businesses, institutions and residents since many of these projects can have far­ reaching impacts on land use, transportation, the economy, and the environment in our region. Metro Vancouver staff have participated in several federal, coordinated and substituted environmental assessments as well as National Energy Board processes.

Enclosed are Metro Vancouver staff comments on the panel's recommendations based on the objectives expressed in the Board Strategic Plan, Metro Vancouver 2040: Shaping our Future (the regional growth strategy), Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan, Drinking Water Management Plan, Regional Parks Plan and Integrated Liquid Waste and Resource Management Plan. These staff comments will be advanced to the Climate Action Committee and Metro Vancouver Regional District Board and, pending endorsement, will be sent to the Minister for her consideration.

On December 6, 2016 Metro Vancouver staff provided comments to the Expert Panel (the Panel) appointed by the Minister of Environment and Climate Change to review the federal environmental assessment processes. On April 5, 2017, we received notification from the Panel about the release of their recommendations in a report titled "Building Common Ground: A New Vision for Impact

21564102 ~~~~~~~~~- 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, BC, Canada VSH 4G8 • 604-432- 6200 • www.metrovancouver.org Greater Vancouver Regional District • Greater Vancouver Water District• Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District •Metro Vancouver Housing Corporation

Climate Action Committee - Page 58 Ms Gelinas, Chair, Expert Panel, Review of Federal Environmental Assessment Processes Metro Vancouver staff feedback on Building Common Ground: A New Vision for Impact Assessment in Canada Page 2 of 2

Assessment in Canada." The notification also indicated that the Honourable Minister McKenna, M.P., Minister of Environment and Climate Change, is seeking feedback from the public on the panel's recommendations via LetsTalkEA.ca.

Metro Vancouver staff are appreciative of the opportunity to provide input on this important review process. For further information, please contact Heather McNell, Acting Director of Regional Planning and Electoral Area Services, by phone at 604-436-6813 or email at [email protected].

Yours truly,

Carol Mason

CM/HM/lbf

Encl: Metro Vancouver staff feedback on Building Common Ground: A New Vision for Impact Assessment in Canada (Doc# 21570967)

21564102

Climate Action Committee - Page 59 Metro Vancouver Staff Feedback on Building Common Ground: A New Vision for Impact Assessment in Canada Metro Vancouver staff commend the Expert Panel (the Panel) appointed by the Minister of Environment and Climate Change to review the federal environmental assessment processes for developing a well- balanced and thoughtful set of recommendations. The following items are of particular interest for Metro Vancouver staff:

• Shift to impact assessment: The Panel recommends a move toward assessment of impacts on the five pillars of sustainability: environmental, social, economic, health and cultural. In a region that is growing by over 30,000 people per year and seeing significant investments in infrastructure, the shift to impact assessment is particularly important. Evaluating projects in a broader context will complement implementation of Metro 2040, the regional growth strategy, Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan, and Regional Prosperity Initiative and promotion of health impact assessments. However, raising the profile of the other pillars should not diminish the assessment of potential environmental impacts. The incorporation of ecosystem services quantification and valuation into assessments may facilitate comparisons between environmental impacts and other sustainability impacts, and ensure adequate compensation for environmental damage.

• New planning phase: The Panel recommends the new Impact Assessment process include a planning phase which would allow for earlier engagement of stakeholders, including local governments. Metro Vancouver staff support this proposed planning phase as it would formalize the pre-Environmental Assessment processes that have occurred for some, but not all, previous environmental assessments our the region. The planning phase will also allow all levels of government to better integrate potential projects into plans, identify priority issues early on and allocate resources accordingly into investigating these issues and their potential preventative or mitigative solutions.

• Public participation in review processes: The Panel recommends that Impact Assessment legislation should require early and ongoing public participation opportunities. Metro Vancouver staff support this recommendation. At the onset of the National Energy Board process, the Trans Mountain Expansion Project review participation was limited only to those directly affected by the project. This limitation was criticized by certain stakeholders, and as noted by the Panel, created a lack of trust and confidence in the process.

• Timelines and costs: The Panel recommends that the new Impact Assessment authority be required to develop an estimate of the costs and timelines for each phase of the assessment and report regularly on the success in meeting these estimates. Metro Vancouver staff appreciate this recommendation and re-emphasize the importance of streamlining processes using a risk management framework for utilities providing essential public services.

• Alternatives to proposed projects: The Panel supports the need to investigate alternatives to a given project. Metro Vancouver staff agrees that a review of the pros and cons of several

21570967

Climate Action Committee - Page 60 alternatives is essential to ensure no reasonable alternative has been excluded, and to ensure the preferred alternative meets the sustainability test (as set out in Figure 2 – Applying the Sustainability Framework to Project IA).

• Regional impact assessments: As noted by the Panel, many commenters highlighted gaps in guidance and standards regarding the assessment of cumulative environmental impacts. To address these concerns, the panel recommends regional Impact Assessments to measure baseline conditions and cumulative impacts of all projects and activities within a defined region. Metro Vancouver staff wholeheartedly support this recommendation for several reasons, including: o A regional impact assessment approach would facilitate the consideration of potential impacts that each proposed project may have on regional growth, employment, economic prosperity, and the regional transportation network. Management of these issues requires coordination and collaboration as they fall under the mandates of numerous authorities within this region. o In the case of the regional transportation network, the geographic scope for a regional impact assessment should encompass at a minimum the area served by the regional transportation network (highways, major roads and transit) and possibly adjoining regions to capture interregional travel where appropriate. o A regional approach would also support the consideration of impacts on regional ground-level ozone levels and visual air quality in project-level assessments, responding to international commitments and the growing body of scientific evidence on these topics. o Mentioned briefly in the report, a regional review of the Fraser-Thompson Corridor was conducted by the Federal Government in 1986. As our region has undergone significant changes since then, Metro Vancouver staff suggest the need for a new and comprehensive regional impact assessment for the Fraser River Estuary. The Fraser River plays an important role in goods movement in our region and it is also a Ramsar Wetland of International Significance and a critical stopover for millions of migrating birds along the Pacific Flyway. Although data are being collected by many organizations across the region, a comprehensive assessment of cumulative impacts along the Fraser River would provide valuable information for current and future project proposals.

• Climate change considerations: Metro Vancouver staff commented previously that upstream and downstream greenhouse gas emissions should be assessed. The interim requirements established for pipeline reviews to assess upstream greenhouse gas emissions are an important step towards consideration of potential climate change impacts in environmental assessments; however, downstream greenhouse gas emissions related to end-use of fossil fuels should also be considered. The Panel recommends the development of a plan for managing greenhouse gas emissions. This plan should outline consistent methods to thoroughly assess climate change implications of a project. • Monitoring and follow-up: Metro Vancouver staff commented that post-construction monitoring and follow-up should be used periodically to evaluate the methodologies used in environmental assessments. The Panel supported this comment and further recommended that monitoring and follow-up data, including raw data, results and any actions taken to address ineffective mitigation, be posted on a public registry. Metro Vancouver staff also support the

21570967

Climate Action Committee - Page 61 Panel’s recommendation to include a formal process to amend conditions based on new data obtained and/or changing conditions.

Metro Vancouver staff appreciate the level of effort and thoughtfulness the Panel has invested in their recommendations. If implemented, we believe the Panel’s recommended changes would provide a more thorough and science-based assessment of local and regional impacts, with earlier engagement of interested parties and the public.

21570967

21662799 Climate Action Committee - Page 62 5.5

To: Climate Action Committee

From: Ray Robb, Division Manager, Environmental Regulation and Enforcement Legal and Legislative Services Department

Date: May 25, 2017 Meeting Date: June 7, 2017

Subject: Odour Management and Measurement in Metro Vancouver

RECOMMENDATION That the MVRD Board receive for information the report dated May 25, 2017, titled “Odour Management and Measurement in Metro Vancouver”.

PURPOSE This report provides regional context for an invited presentation by Anton (Ton) van Harreveld, an expert in odour measurement and management, on the European Union standard method of odour measurement.

BACKGROUND At the May 3, 2017 meeting of the Climate Action Committee, the Chair of the Committee was advised that an international expert in odour detection would be in Vancouver to present evidence on behalf of Metro Vancouver at an Environmental Appeal Board Hearing. The Chair of the Committee requested that staff convey an invitation to the expert to make a presentation on odour measurement to the Committee.

ODOUR MANAGEMENT AND MEASUREMENT IN METRO VANCOUVER Staff have been studying the issue of managing and measuring odour in Metro Vancouver for a number of years. Staff have prepared the attached report to provide additional background information to the Committee prior to Mr. van Harreveld’s presentation. The report describes: • The legislative and legal context for air quality regulation; • The history of the development of odour regulation and measurement in Europe; • The attempted use of EN 13725, the European Union standard for measuring odour concentration, in Metro Vancouver; • The challenges of odour regulation in Metro Vancouver; • The regulatory hierarchy; and, • Current efforts to establish a framework in Metro Vancouver and the province for the regulation of odour.

The background paper also provides an explanation of how we detect odours and how instruments infer the concentration of substances in a manner that is analogous to humans’ detection of odours.

ALTERNATIVES This is an information report. No alternatives are presented.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS This is an information report and therefore there are no financial implications.

Climate Action Committee - Page 63 Odour Management and Measurement in Metro Vancouver Climate Action Committee Regular Meeting Date: June 7, 2017 Page 2 of 2

SUMMARY / CONCLUSION This is an information report to provide regional context for Anton (Ton) van Harreveld’s invited presentation on the European Union standard method of odour measurement.

Attachment Odour Management and Measurement in Metro Vancouver

21657904

Climate Action Committee - Page 64 5.5 ATTACHMENT

Odour Management and Measurement in Metro Vancouver

1) Legislative and legal context for air quality (odour) regulation in Metro Vancouver The British Columbia Environmental Management Act (the Act) delegates Metro Vancouver the authority to manage air quality and regulate the discharge of air contaminants. The definition of air contaminants in the Act and Metro Vancouver’s Greater Vancouver Regional District Air Quality Management Bylaw No.1082, 2008 (the Bylaw) includes substances that may cause material physical discomfort, may interfere with business, or may injure a person’s health.

Malodorous substances may qualify under each of the previous criteria as an air contaminant. For example, in R. vs. Money’s Mushrooms Ltd., the British Columbia Provincial Court determined that substances with unpleasant odorous properties were air contaminants. The Court also determined that “the presence of a substance in the environment can be detected by odour” and agreed with the Environmental Appeal Board that “the human nose was the instrument by which the presence of substances are detected”.

2) History of odour regulation and development of odour measurement standard in Europe In the 1970s much of the developed world began to establish odour regulations which resulted in a need for odour testing methods and standards. In the 1990s, the European Committee for Standardization technical committee TC264 ‘Air Quality’ formed an expert Working Group, chaired by Anton (Ton) van Harreveld, to draft an odour testing standard. Test methods were reviewed and many inter-laboratory comparisons were conducted before the committee agreed upon a standard methodology that they determined had acceptable precision, reproducibility and accuracy. In 2003, the European Union adopted EN 13725 “Air Quality-Determination of Odour Concentration by Dynamic Olfactometry” as the standard for measuring odour concentration, replacing odour testing standards in 18 countries. Since that time, EN 13725 has become the “gold standard” for odour measurement throughout the world.

The application of the EN 13725 method is to provide a numerical basis for regulating air quality with regard to odour. The source emission rate is sampled and measured using EN 13725. Conventional dispersion models then calculate the expected odour concentration that people will experience. The dose-effect relationship between odour exposure and public annoyance has been determined in studies. These relations are the basis for ambient odour concentration objectives in numerous jurisdictions.

EN 13725 uses an odour panel made up of at least four qualified individuals. The panelists are selected in accordance with rigorous selection criteria including the ability to consistently detect a reference odorant within a specified range. To measure the odour concentration, a sample (of a stack emission for example) is collected in specific type of polymer bag, may be diluted with nitrogen gas, and is shipped to an odour lab. In the odour lab, an aliquot (small measured volume) of the sample gas is diluted with a much larger known volume of purified air and is presented at a specified flow rate and volume to each of the panelists through a sniffing port. The panelists are asked to report whether they detect anything different between a sniffer port containing the diluted sample and other ports that contain only purified air. The sample strength is increased in a series of steps (becoming less diluted/more concentrated) until all the panelists correctly identify the diluted sample on two successive occasions. The odour units are an average of the panelist’s number of dilutions required to accurately detect an odour. See Section 8 below for more details.

Climate Action Committee - Page 65 3) Attempted use of European standard for odour measurement in Metro Vancouver In 2008, Metro Vancouver’s district director issued an amended air permit to West Coast Reduction Ltd. (WCR). The permit included emission limits in terms of odour units. The company appealed the permit to the Environmental Appeal Board (EAB) as they objected to the district director issuing a permit on his own initiative and in particular objected to having emission limits in odour units. Residents also appealed the permit as they believed the allowed emissions, in odour units, were too permissive. The EAB heard conflicting testimony from two odour measurement experts (one expert retained by WCR and another who volunteered to testify as a public service) on the reliability of the EN 13725 test method to measure odour. Ultimately, the EAB decided that the amendment was not necessary, and ruled that emission limits in odour units could not be used by the district director due to concerns about the precision of odour measurements using EN 13725.

The European Committee for Standardization is currently reviewing EN 13725 through an international technical working group led by Anton (Ton) van Harreveld. The technical review has re- examined the precision, accuracy and repeatability of the test methods and also considered concerns similar to ones raised by WCR’s expert during the EAB hearings. The technical group confirmed that the uncertainties (potential error range in results) were within accepted criteria for standard test methods but also made suggestions for improvement. The standardization organization of the European Union is expected to formally adopt the findings of the review committee in the next year.

4) The challenges of odour control through permitting in Metro Vancouver Permits usually limit the quantity and concentration of air contaminants that may be released. In the cases of rendering plants and composting operations, the primary air contaminants of concern are odorous air contaminants. However, the EAB decision in West Coast Reduction v. District Director, does not allow emission limits based on odour units. In order to attempt to address odour concerns, the district director has attempted to establish limits for individual or groups of odorous substances. This method is analogous to the decades long practice in provincial air quality permits which contain emission limits for odorous total reduced sulphur (TRS) compounds from pulp mills. This approach works for pulps mills as the odours are due to very few, similar compounds. However, the mixture of odorous substances emitted from rendering and composting operations is far more complex -- in addition to TRS compounds, rendering and composting emit a wide range of types of compounds including volatile fatty acids, aldehydes, amines, ketones, alcohols, and others. In addition, because human odour detection thresholds for many of these compounds are very, very low – it is necessary to use expensive and sophisticated sampling and analytical methods to determine the concentration of specific odorous substances released from rendering, composting and other dischargers of malodorous substances. A generally accepted model to predict the overall odour from chemical compound composition is currently not available.

Attempts to impose testing and eventually limits for groups of odorous substances such as volatile fatty acids, aldehydes, amines, ketones, etc. have resulted in appeals to the EAB. The EAB has not yet made any decisions regarding these appeals.

5) Regulatory hierarchy The British Columbia Environmental Management Act (the “Act”) delegates Metro Vancouver the authority to manage air quality and regulate the discharge of air contaminants. Under the Act Metro Vancouver may regulate air quality through bylaw and must appoint a district director with all the powers of a director under the Act, including the ability to issue permits. The Act allows anyone

Climate Action Committee - Page 66 aggrieved by a permit decision to appeal to the Environmental Appeal Board. Decisions by the EAB may be judicially reviewed, but the judicial review is limited in scope.

While the EAB decision limits the authority of the District Director it does not specifically prohibit the Metro Vancouver Regional District Board from adopting a bylaw authorizing the use of odour units to restrict emissions of air contaminants. Of course, the Board would need to consider the EAB decision on odour units, but it could also consider information from Europe, Australia, New Zealand, South America, Asia and Ontario where odour units are used to regulate odour sources. A bylaw adopted by the Board could be overturned or modified by the British Columbia Minister of the Environment.

6) Current efforts to establish a framework in Metro Vancouver and the province for the regulation of odour The BC Ministry of Environment recognizes that odour discharges in the province need to be better managed through regulatory or other tools. The Ministry recently amended the Organic Matter Recycling Regulation to require that biosolids and composting operations obtain permits. Metro Vancouver staff have been engaging in discussions with Ministry of Environment staff to develop an odour management framework. The approaches may differ between the two jurisdictions but should adhere to common principles such as the need to protect citizens from odorous air contaminants. Ensuring acceptable air quality is necessary, if we expect people to accept facilities that are essential to achieving our collective organics resource recovery goals.

7) How we detect odours Like the recognition and psychological/physiological response to sound/music, the recognition and psychological response to odours is complex and uses higher functioning regions of the brain. However, the basic process of odour detection is relatively simple:

(1) an odorant molecule binds with a specific olfactory receptor neuron in the nose which (2) causes the odorant receptor cell to ‘fire’ sending an electrical signal to the specific glomerulus (3) the glomeruli send signals to the brain where the information is processed to produce conscious odour perception.

If there are enough odorant molecules presented to the nose, the electrical signal sent to the brain will be of sufficient strength that it will be detected (the brain will be able to differentiate the signal from the background signals generated without odorant stimulus). Like other analytical methods that rely upon the detection of an electrical signal compared to background “noise”, odour detectability is considered an objective test (see Analytical Instrument Detection Limits below).

The lowest concentration of odorous substance or mixture that can be detected by the nose and brain is known as the detection threshold (may be for one person or averaged for a larger population).

8) Determining odour concentration by Dynamic Olfactometry Humans can differentiate between weak and strong concentration of odorous substances (referred to as odour intensity). However our ability to measure the intensity of an odour is not very precise, and the relation between odour concentration and perceived intensity is non linear and specific for each odorant.

To address this shortcoming, the odour test methodology EN 13725 determines the amount, or concentration of an odour by determining the number of dilutions of the sample necessary to achieve the concentration that is the detection threshold. This method of dynamic olfactometry has been shown to

Climate Action Committee - Page 67 be far more accurate and reproducible than attempts to measure odour through intensity scales. There is no subjective judgement involved in indicating whether there is an odour, in comparison to non-odorous reference air.

Figure 1: Odour Units

One odour unit is the concentration at which 50% of the population detects an odour while 50% do not. As shown in Figure 1, a sample with an odour concentration of 10 odour units must be diluted with 9 units of fresh air to get it to the point where it is just detectible. A sample with an odour concentration of 1000 odour units must be diluted with 999 units of fresh air to get it to the point where it is just detectible.

9) Analytical instrument detection limits The determination of a person’s odour detection threshold for a chemical substance or mixture of substances is analogous to how detection limits are determined for various analytical instruments. However, these instruments do not actually measure the amount of anything, rather they rely on some property of a substance to generate an electrical signal that will be correlated to the quantity of the substance that is present. For example, specific compounds absorb light of a particular wavelength and therefore the quantity of light passing through a sample is related to the amount of substance in the sample. By measuring the current generated by a photo cell receiving light we can infer the concentration of the substance that the light passed through.

The detection limit of an analytical instrument (gas chromatograph, spectrometer, etc.) is defined as the concentration at which the electric signal generated as a result of some property of the substance that is clearly distinguishable from the background signal (noise).

Climate Action Committee - Page 68 5.6

To: Climate Action Committee

From: Julie Saxton, Acting Program Manager, Bylaw and Regulation Development Parks, Planning & Environment Department

Date: May 11, 2017 Meeting Date: June 7, 2017

Subject: Caring for the Air 2017 Report

RECOMMENDATION That the MVRD Board receive for information the report dated May 11, 2017, titled “Caring for the Air 2017 Report”.

PURPOSE To present the 2017 edition of the annual Caring for the Air report and provide information about the outreach activity conducted for the 2016 edition of “Caring for the Air”.

The 2017 Caring for the Air report provides an update about climate change and air quality in the Lower Fraser Valley airshed in 2016, including initiatives undertaken by Metro Vancouver and partner agencies to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases and air contaminants, actions that can be taken by individuals, and summary data on measured air quality in 2016.

BACKGROUND Metro Vancouver’s “Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan” (IAQGGMP) contains strategies and actions to raise awareness and enhance understanding of the actions being taken to improve air quality, and reduce emissions of greenhouse gases and other air contaminants. “Caring for the Air” was developed and first published in 2012 to provide information about key air quality and climate change initiatives in accessible plain language.

The Board Strategic Plan confirms the IAQGGMP strategies and actions related to outreach and communications. It includes strategic direction to “Improve public understanding of the value of clean air and greenhouse gas reductions, and actions to achieve both”, and more specifically, to: a) Educate the public about Metro Vancouver’s air quality monitoring and management activities. b) Publicize tangible actions that individuals and businesses can take to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases and other air contaminants. c) Publish materials, such as “Caring for the Air”, that present evidence-based findings about air quality in the region in language that is accessible to a broad audience.

“Caring for the Air” provides annual updates about activities to improve air quality, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and protect against the effects of climate change and reports on the performance measures used to monitor progress in these areas. The reports published between 2012 and 2016 included information about air quality, visual air quality and climate change adaptation and mitigation as well as background material to provide helpful context and guidance about technical elements of the activities described.

Climate Action Committee - Page 69 Caring for the Air 2017 Report Climate Action Committee Regular Meeting Date: June 7, 2017 Page 2 of 3

The publication is made available in hard copy and electronically to other government agencies and organizations, including member jurisdictions, libraries and healthcare providers, and the public. To expand appeal and enhance readers’ experiences, electronic editions provide additional content, links to informative background material and opportunities to share information through social media. Inclusiveness with broad accessibility, wide availability and ongoing distribution of “Caring for the Air” throughout the year have contributed to the establishment of “branding” for Metro Vancouver’s air quality and climate change programs.

“CARING FOR THE AIR” 2016 DISTRIBUTION AND PROMOTION To build upon awareness of “Caring for the Air” outreach was expanded in 2016, including an expanded distribution of copies of the report and rack card report summaries, and promotion through social media.

Copies of “Caring for the Air” 2016 were provided to municipal offices and libraries. Additional copies were also provided for distribution to the public through the Metro Vancouver Information Centre and libraries by request. Rack cards highlighting the purpose and content of “Caring for the Air” were developed and over 3,400 were distributed to municipalities, municipal libraries, community centres, hospitals, the BC Lung patient list, and physicians in conjunction with Doctors of BC. Copies of the report and rack cards were included at events such as the Clean Technology Expo held at Surrey City Hall and at EMOTIVE events in the region.

Social media analytics indicate that Caring for the Air posts reached over 8,000 people, resulting in engagement through ‘likes’ and retweets, as well as people accessing the electronic version of the report through the hyperlinks provided. In total, there were 4,100 views of “Caring for the Air” 2016 on Metro Vancouver’s website, with the highest viewing rates occurring in June 2016, and between November 2016 and January 2017, after the distribution of rack cards and social media promotion.

INSIDE “CARING FOR THE AIR” 2017 The 2017 edition of “Caring for the Air” highlights the progress made on air quality and climate change projects undertaken by Metro Vancouver and partners in the Lower Fraser Valley in 2016 and underscores the relevance of these initiatives to residents of the region. Reference material provides context to improve understanding of the value of the actions being taken in the region to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases and air contaminants.

Articles include the development of a regional climate action strategy to coordinate actions and accelerate progress on climate change, the results from air quality monitoring activities including work done with partners to identify the impacts of traffic-related air pollutants in the region, and actions to publicize opportunities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from homes in the region.

“Caring for the Air” 2017 also highlights advances made in other key action areas, including: • Initiatives to improve the energy efficiency of buildings and reduce associated greenhouse gas emissions. • Solutions to EV charging for residents without access to off-street parking or access to electricity in off-street parking. • Assessing the benefits and challenges of car sharing in the region.

The review of air quality conditions in 2016 includes commentary on the air quality effects of the Burns Bog fire and the anticipated effects of enhancements made to the sensitivity of the Air Quality

Climate Action Committee - Page 70 Caring for the Air 2017 Report Climate Action Committee Regular Meeting Date: June 7, 2017 Page 3 of 3

Health Index to forest fire smoke. Ambient air quality in 2016 is summarized in a visual fashion, including trends in levels of five key air contaminants in the Lower Fraser Valley over the last 10 years.

Background information is provided in several articles, such as the opening article, which highlights the wide range of actions being pursued by Metro Vancouver and member jurisdictions to address climate change. Other articles provide insights into new opportunities to support cleaner transportation options through changes in technology, how new monitoring technologies can provide more detailed information about emissions, guidance on what pollution means from the perspective of regulating air emissions, an explanation of how odorous air contaminant emissions are regulated, the impacts of open burning on air quality, and the benefits emerging from the international policy to require the use of cleaner fuels by marine vessels in the waters around North America.

The cover photo for “Caring for the Air” 2017 was chosen from photos submitted through a staff photo contest. The cover photo reflects the general nature of the content of the report. A further selection of submissions is included inside the back cover of the report.

Outreach through traditional media and social media to increase awareness and readership of “Caring for the Air” will continue in 2017. This will build on established audiences for “Caring for the Air” and help to publicize actions Metro Vancouver and partners are taking to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, adapt to climate change and improve air quality to enhance liveability in the region

ALTERNATIVES This is an information report. No alternatives are presented.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The “Caring for the Air” report describes projects and programs that were undertaken within approved program budgets and work plans or by successful application to the GVRD Sustainability Innovation Fund. The report also provides information about collaborative work with external organizations on initiatives supported by their resources as well as relevant initiatives that are entirely the responsibility of external organizations.

SUMMARY / CONCLUSION The Board Strategic Plan provides direction to improve public awareness of the value of clean air and greenhouse gas reductions, and actions to achieve both. The annual “Caring for the Air” report provides a vehicle for sharing information about air quality and climate change in the region in a manner that is accessible, relevant and of general interest to a wide range of readers. The sixth edition provides updates, news about actions, activities and performance measures related to the work conducted by Metro Vancouver and other organizations in the region in 2016 and 2017.

“Caring for the Air” complements other outreach activities and publications, such as the State of the Air report produced by the BC Lung Association, which describes air quality programs throughout British Columbia, and Metro Vancouver’s annual technical air quality monitoring report, the “Lower Fraser Valley Air Quality Monitoring Report”.

Attachment (orbit #21693091) Caring for the Air 2017

21639776

Climate Action Committee - Page 71 5.6 ATTACHMENT

Caring for the Air 2017

Climate Action Committee - Page 72 The Lower Fraser Valley Airshed Metro Vancouver is situated within the Lower Fraser Valley. Air pollution can freely cross our borders both from and into the surrounding areas. These include the Fraser Valley Regional District to the east, Whatcom County in the State of Washington to the south, Vancouver Island to the west and Howe Sound and the Sunshine Coast to the north.

Managing air quality successfully requires effective collaboration with our neighbours and other levels of government, and participation from businesses, public institutions, non-government organizations, and residents. Many of the articles in this publication reflect these partnerships.

We would like to acknowledge the contributions made to this publication by: Andreas Christen, UBC

Health Canada

Vancouver Fraser Port Authority

Climate Action Committee - Page 73 Actions for Climate Solutions

There are many different sources of greenhouse gases Metro Vancouver completed 60 actions in 2015, and that contribute to climate change. It is very difficult to over 75 projects in 2016. Now, with the development find one single solution to be applied universally. of a new integrated regional climate action strategy, Metro Vancouver will be building upon its current The closest we can get to a silver bullet is arguably the actions and identifying opportunities to accelerate BC carbon tax, which puts a price on most greenhouse their progress. The strategy will create a framework for gas emissions. But it requires most jurisdictions to put directing climate action towards achieving the region’s a carbon tax in place to be effective and even then it’s greenhouse gas reductions targets and climate challenging to raise the carbon tax to a level that will change adaptation objectives. cause greenhouse gas emissions to drop fast enough. The strategy will also ensure that climate change is Since a silver bullet is elusive, Metro Vancouver and considered in every decision to reduce emissions its member jurisdictions are pursuing a wide range of or adapt to our infrastructure. By spreading our actions. Each year, local governments in our region investment of energy and resources across many implement dozens of climate actions, from low different actions, we feel confident that this strategy carbon district energy systems to heat buildings, to will be successful. the adoption of electric vehicles in municipal fleets. They are also taking action to become more resilient to the changing climate, increasing flood protection infrastructure and planting street trees that can handle hotter drier summers. Local governments report on these climate actions to the province in their annual reports. You can find the reports on the Government of British Columbia’s Community Energy & Emissions Inventory website.

Caring for the Air 2017 1

Climate Action Committee - Page 74 Driving into the Future

Technology is quickly changing the world of driving. Cars are becoming more computerized and networked. This is changing how we drive and what we drive. Here are some of the latest developments and changes we might see by 2030.

Near road monitoring using new techniques is helping us understand pollution levels near busy roads. See some results from Canada’s first near- road air quality monitoring station in “Near Road Monitoring” on page 6.

Vehicles could provide instant feedback to encourage Smart Driving techniques in the future. Metro Vancouver recently completed a study to test the effectiveness of providing feedback to drivers about improving fuel economy and reducing emissions (see “Smart Drive Challenge”, page 20).

2 Caring for the Air 2017

Climate Action Committee - Page 75 Electric vehicles will be much more commonplace, which will have huge benefits for local air quality and climate change (see ‘All Charged Up About Electric Cars!’, page 8, Caring for the Air 2014)

Autonomous vehicles are poised to arrive within the decade. These are expected to improve road safety and reduce environmental impacts through lower fuel Streetlight and consumption (in ‘Driverless Cars’, induction curbside page 12, Caring for the Air 2016) charging will help more people switch to electric vehicles. This is especially important in areas where vehicle owners primarily park on the street overnight (see ‘Garage Orphans’, page 19).

Car sharing offers an important transportation option for many, with a network of over 2,000 vehicles in our region today. Read more about the environmental benefits and future challenges on page 4.

Caring for the Air 2017 3

Climate Action Committee - Page 76 Need a ride, but not your own ride?

Car sharing has become an important transportation showed that for members who did not own a vehicle option for many Metro Vancouver residents and a prior to joining a car share, nearly half (48%) reported valuable part of climate change solutions. A network driving more afterwards. This could lead to increased of over 2,000 passenger vehicles provides people with emissions of air contaminants and greenhouse gases. access to vehicles based on an hourly and/or distance- Looking ahead, car share providers are eyeing based rate. Modo and Zipcar are two-way car share suburban parts of the region for expansion, providers (the same pick-up and drop-off location) particularly near rapid transit stations. Car sharing and car2go and Evo are one-way car share providers in these areas could enhance the appeal of public (the vehicle can be dropped off anywhere within the transit and encourage a ‘car-free’ or ‘car-lite’ lifestyle. operating service area). However car share demand may be initially lower A 2014 Metro Vancouver car share study noted some in these areas than in other established car share of the regional benefits of car sharing and some locations. It may take time to develop and nurture the challenges for land use and transportation planning. new markets. The study showed that each car share vehicle in the Metro Vancouver will continue to monitor the effects region has effectively taken between five and eleven of established and emerging transportation choices private vehicles off the road, either because people and provide information to residents so they can have shed their own car after becoming a member or make informed choices about the many transportation because they avoided buying a car. This helps reduce alternatives available. emissions associated with vehicle manufacturing globally. For more information, search ‘car share study’ at metrovancouver.org. A potential drawback in the rise in car sharing is ‘induced driving’, or people driving more after joining a car share than before they joined. The 2014 study

4 Caring for the Air 2017

Climate Action Committee - Page 77 A new method to map carbon dioxide emissions using car-sharing vehicles

Greenhouse gas emissions data are usually presented emissions are then identified from the occurrence of at the municipal scale. Having higher resolution higher street level CO2 concentrations. For example, information at street and block scales could be vehicle traffic is an important source of emissions useful when trying to design effective and efficient in cities, so busy intersections will show up as CO2 policies to help reduce emissions, but it can be hotspots. difficult and expensive. To check the mobile mapping approach, the UBC UBC Professor Andreas Christen and his team have team measured CO2 in a 12 km long by 1 km wide recently looked at a new approach to measuring area in the City of Vancouver at different times of the carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions at local scales in cities. year. The results were recently published in a scientific Graduate student Joey Lee and research engineer paper (Lee et al., 2016). The team found that in some Zoran Nesic designed a way of using affordable and parts of the city CO2 was being sequestered by the compact CO2 sensors on regular car-sharing vehicles trees. The team also compared the emission maps and even bikes. This approach enables measurements created from their measurements with information to be made continuously over a large area, in order to from independently modelled fine-scale emission determine how CO2 concentration varies spatially. inventories. The results were promising, with the measured and modelled emissions agreeing quite As the sensors are transported through the city, well on average. CO2 measurements are recorded automatically. Temperature, time and location information are also Reference: logged with each CO2 measurement. Data from many Lee J.K., Christen A., Ketler R., Nesic Z. (2016): ‘A mobile measurement points are combined into a ‘grid cell’ sensor network to map carbon dioxide emissions in urban that represents blocks and streets in a small area. A environments’. Atmospheric Measurement Techniques map is created from the grid cells. Simultaneously, Discussions, doi:10.5194/amt-2016-200, 2291-2303. background CO2 levels were measured on top of a tall tower, and compared with measurements from the mobile street level instruments. Key sources of

Caring for the Air 2017 5

Climate Action Committee - Page 78 Near-Road Air Quality Monitoring Station

Locations where the busiest roads intersect with the densest populations can be seen in red.

Measuring air quality near roads

Living near a major roadway has been identified as a uses specialized instruments such as ultrafine particle risk factor for a number of respiratory symptoms and monitors, as well as instruments found at air quality cardiovascular problems. In Metro Vancouver, more monitoring network stations. Air quality measurements than 20% of the population lives within 100 metres of have been collected for over one year. a major roadway. Preliminary study results showed that pollution levels You may have driven by Canada’s first Near-Road Air near busy roads tend to be higher. Levels would be Quality Monitoring Station on Clark Drive near 12th expected to drop off quickly with distance from the Avenue in Vancouver without even knowing. In fact, air roadway. Carbon monoxide is a pollutant emitted in pollutants from your vehicle may have been measured vehicle exhaust. The graph on the next page shows at the station. Metro Vancouver operates the station how levels varied throughout the day on weekends on Clark Drive, a major truck route, in cooperation and weekdays. The effects of traffic can be seen. On with Environment and Climate Change Canada and weekdays, concentrations increased rapidly as rush hour the University of Toronto. It measures traffic-related air traffic builds in the morning and evening. On weekends, pollutants which are associated with adverse health concentrations were lower throughout the day. When effects. measurements are assessed by wind direction the highest concentrations occurred when winds blow from A map like the one shown above was done for the the road toward the station. Lower concentrations are entire region, and shows how an analysis of traffic observed when winds blow from the residential area volume and population density were used to find the toward the station. best location for the monitoring station. Clark Drive

6 Caring for the Air 2017

Climate Action Committee - Page 79 800 UFP – What it is and what we know about it WEEKDAY Ultrafine particles (UFP) are the very smallest 600 particles that can be measured using air monitoring equipment. Each particle is less than 0.1 μm in diameter – that’s less than 100 billionths of a metre. UFP are so small that new 400 measurement methods had to be developed.

UFP come from natural processes, such as WEEKEND 200 wildfires and plant secretions, and human activities. Human sources of UFP include everyday activities like peeling citrus fruits and cooking meat, as well as some industrial CONCENTRATION OF CARBON MONOXIDE (PPB) CONCENTRATION 0 operations. UFP can also be formed in the air 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 from other pollutants. HOUR OF DAY A major source of UFP is fuel combustion, These patterns in pollutant concentrations particularly in vehicle engines where no demonstrate that traffic emissions and air quality near particulate matter emission controls are in major roadways are linked. place. Metro Vancouver has been working with Environment and Climate Change Canada and Emissions from motor vehicles are one of the other partners to assess UFP during the near- largest sources of air pollutants in our region. Metro road study. Vancouver runs a number of programs to reduce emissions from cars and trucks and is evaluating Researchers are also investigating UFP and other regulatory and non-regulatory options for are working to understand their health effects. reducing emissions. Check out pages 2 and 3 for more Diesel soot is one example of a pollutant that information. contains UFP, and is known to be harmful to our health.

Concentrations of CO when wind blows from residences or the road Caring for the Air 2017 7

Climate Action Committee - Page 80 Air Quality on Canadian Transit: ‘The Urban Transportation Exposure Study’

Canadians don’t spend a lot of time commuting Vancouver were tied to unique aspects of their design, compared to being at home or at work. Surveys by such as the material used for the wheels and whether federal government agencies found that we spend the system was open air or below ground. PM2.5 levels about 5% of our day, or about an hour, ‘in transit’. measured in the SkyTrain system clearly identified the But we are often close to traffic-related air pollution segments running below ground. It also revealed that while commuting. These traffic emissions may be particle levels increased in areas further from open air responsible for a significant part of our overall daily segments of the system. Interestingly, PM2.5 exposures exposure to air pollutants, such as fine particulate in both the below-ground and above-ground portions matter (PM2.5). of the SkyTrain were higher on platforms than in the trains. This suggests train cabins offer a protective Health Canada has been looking at traffic-related effect. air pollution in car, bus and subway (or SkyTrain) environments. They worked collaboratively with Throughout Canada, agencies strive to continually several public transit authorities in Metro Vancouver, improve the quality of the air we breathe. The results Toronto, Montreal, and Ottawa on a study to assess are being used to develop assessment methods to air quality in Canadian transit environments. The improve air quality in transit environments. Health rail transit systems studied are sizeable as each is Canada is supporting increased use of public transit approximately 68 km in length. Together they serve by identifying inexpensive and effective opportunities about 2.5 million commuters each day. to make improvements. This plays an important role in reducing air pollution in urban areas and public health The study found that air pollutant levels in the Toronto protection. subway, the Montreal metro, and the SkyTrain in Metro

Metro Vancouver Light Rail Transit PM2.5 Exposure

8 Caring for the Air 2017

Climate Action Committee - Page 81 Air Quality in 2016

In July 2016, a major fire in Burns Bog in Delta resulted in a TREND IN FINE PARTICULATE MATTER large visible smoke plume and elevated levels of particulate matter for a few hours. In spite of local smoke effects and the widespread smell of smoke in parts of the region, 6 shifting winds and good dispersion meant that conditions NEW did not become worse that the short-term air quality objective (25 μg/m3) for fine particulate matter, which is a 5 major component of smoke.

In 2016, several health and air quality agencies, including

Metro Vancouver, collaborated to develop improvements OLD 4 to the sensitivity of the Air Quality Health Index (AQHI) to smoke from wildfires. A pilot project was initiated to see Same air, whether the changes will provide people with more useful same air quality, information when smoke infiltrates the region. 3 just new measurements

Air Quality Trends 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 The regional trends charts (right) illustrate the change in average air quality across the region over time. TRENDS IN GAS PHASE AIR POLLUTANTS Measurements from monitoring stations between West Vancouver and Hope are averaged to represent the ambient

(outdoor) air quality typically experienced in the region. (μg/m3) PM2.5 CONCENTRATION

Average trends for the region show that improvements have TO 2005 LEVEL COMPARED AVERAGE been made over the last decade for most air contaminants, 1.4 even while the region’s population has grown. The region’s air quality improvements are a result of many emission 1.2 reduction actions that have been implemented. Sulphur GROUND LEVEL OZONE dioxide levels continued to improve mainly due to stricter 1.0 requirements for lower sulphur in marine fuels (see page 13) NITROGEN DIOXIDE while improved vehicle emission standards and the AirCare 0.8 program have been largely responsible for lower carbon 0.6 CARBON MONOXIDE monoxide and nitrogen dioxide levels.

0.4 Peak ground-level ozone levels (not shown), which occur during summertime hot and sunny afternoons, are better SULPHUR DIOXIDE 0.2 now than in the 1980s and early 1990s. However, despite lower levels of pollutants that form ground-level ozone, 0 average levels of ground-level ozone are increasing. This is partly due to an increase in ozone formed outside Canada coming into our region. Metro Vancouver and partners have developed a ground-level ozone reduction strategy to address this issue.

Caring for the Air 2017 9

Climate Action Committee - Page 82 Air Quality in 2016 - Data Summary

FINE PARTICULATE MATTER (PM2.5) IN 2016

Canadian Ambient Air Quality Standard – 24 hour (µg/m3) 16

14 Fraser Valley 15 Regional District

15 18 18

19 16 15 13 Whatcom County

14 15 14 Metro Vancouver 13 12

16 15 11 12

28 µg/m3 Canadian Ambient Air Quality Standard CANADA USA

In 2016, fine particulate matter (PM2.5) levels throughout the region were better than the Canadian Ambient Air Quality Standard (see map above). Measurements averaged over the entire year were within Metro Vancouver’s annual objective. Peak levels, based on the highest 24-hour average, were worse than the short- term objective (25 μg/m3) on one day at the Mission station and a separate day at the Abbotsford-Airport station, both occurring in spring. A combination of factors including emissions from local sources, such as heating, transportation and burning, along with stagnant weather conditions are thought to have caused these exceedances.

GROUND-LEVEL OZONE IN 2016

Canadian Ambient Air Quality Standard (ppb) 60

58 52 Fraser Valley Regional District 54 51 49 53 50 47 49 47 44 Whatcom County 50 44 Metro Vancouver 40 43 40 45 34

46 43 47 63 ppb Canadian Ambient Air Quality Standard

CANADA USA

Ground-level ozone forms when nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds react in the air in the presence of sunlight. Ground-level ozone levels were better than Metro Vancouver’s air quality objectives and the Canadian Ambient Air Quality Standard at all monitoring stations in 2016. The map above shows how measurements for 2016 compared to the Canadian Ambient Air Quality Standard.

10 Caring for the Air 2017

Climate Action Committee - Page 83 Air Quality in 2016 - Data Summary

SULPHUR DIOXIDE IN 2016

Annual Average (ppb)

Fraser Valley 0.1 Regional District 0.2 0.2

0.1 0.3

0.3 Whatcom County 0.5 0.3 Metro Vancouver 0.4 1.0 0.3 0.3 0.4

0.2 0.3 0.4

11 ppb Annual Average Objective CANADA USA

Average concentrations of sulphur dioxide for 2016 are shown above with all stations equal to or less than 1 ppb. Average levels continued to decrease significantly in 2016 compared with previous years and can be attributed to stricter marine fuel requirements. Levels were better than Metro Vancouver’s air quality objectives at all stations in 2016 except for at the Chilliwack station that exceeded the numerical level of the 1-hour objective (75 ppb) during an airshow event. Since the largest emission sources in the region are marine vessels (mainly ocean-going vessels) and the oil refinery in Burnaby, the highest sulphur dioxide levels are observed near these sources, especially in the Burrard Inlet area.

NITROGEN DIOXIDE IN 2016

Annual Average (ppb) 6 8 Fraser Valley 8 Regional District 8 6 7

7 6 7 9 8 12 Whatcom County 6 12 12 11 Metro Vancouver 12 11 19

12 14 6

21 ppb Annual Average Objective CANADA USA

Nitrogen dioxide concentrations were better than Metro Vancouver’s long-term and short-term air quality objectives throughout 2016. Annual averages are shown on the map. More than half of the regional emissions of nitrogen oxides (which includes nitrogen dioxide) come from transportation sources. The highest average nitrogen dioxide concentrations are measured in highly urbanized areas near busy roads.

Caring for the Air 2017 11

Climate Action Committee - Page 84 Network update

Sophisticated instruments provide high quality data a number of local issues including traffic, industrial from 29 long-term air quality monitoring stations emissions, and smoke from residential wood burning. operating continuously in Metro Vancouver and the Metro Vancouver plans to expand mobile and Fraser Valley. Instruments are routinely checked, portable monitoring capabilities, to further augment serviced and calibrated against known standards the existing network. according to federal protocols. Metro Vancouver Emerging technologies have now made air quality technicians can also connect to stations remotely to monitoring possible using very small sensors. While check instrument operation. Preliminary data from the these sensors may give up some accuracy and quality air quality monitoring network are published live every compared to the instruments used in the network, hour on airmap.ca. many are low-cost, easy to install, require little power, Air quality data are not considered validated until they and can share data using wireless connections and have been reviewed by qualified staff to ensure the smart phone apps. Some are even wearable and measurements are accurate. Measurement data goes provide information on an individual’s exposure to air through a quality assurance process, such that only pollution throughout the day. Increasingly popular validated data are published in formal reports on air use of these devices by “citizen scientists” may offer quality in the region. people an opportunity to improve their understanding of how pollution levels vary throughout their Metro Vancouver’s Mobile Air Monitoring Unit community and at home. Metro Vancouver will be (MAMU) and smaller portable instruments enhance assessing these small sensors in monitoring air quality monitoring coverage and can provide samples for in the region. detailed laboratory analyses. Monitoring results from MAMU were reported in 2016 for specialized studies in Lions Bay and the City of North Vancouver. These studies compared data collected by MAMU with network stations and provided information on

12 Caring for the Air 2017

Climate Action Committee - Page 85 Improved marine fuels steer the course to cleaner air

Sulphur dioxide (SO2) is an air pollutant that is emitted To see if the expected air quality improvements when sulphur-containing fossil fuels are burned. occurred after the introduction of the ECA, Metro The good news is that emissions and levels of SO2 Vancouver and the Vancouver Fraser Port Authority measured in our region are decreasing. This has a developed a passive SO2 monitoring program for positive impact on our health. SO2 can cause people the Burrard Inlet area. Passive samplers work by with lung conditions such as asthma to experience allowing air to diffuse across a sensitive surface, rather breathing problems, increases in hospital admissions, than actively pulling air samples into an instrument. and even premature death. It can also react with Therefore they require no power or maintenance. other substances in the air to form fine particulate Five samplers have been installed in Vancouver. The matter or acid rain. results show a striking reduction in average SO2 levels Burrard Inlet Area SO Levels occurred after January 21, 2015 (see chart below). Historically, marine vessels were the largest source of 4 Implementation of Emissions SO2 emissions in our region. Ships’ fuels contained Conrol Area Sulphur Limit of 0.1% much higher amounts of sulphur compared to fuels 3 Burrard Inlet Area SO2 Levels used in cars and trucks. The governments of Canada RANGE OF PASSIVE SAMPLES 4 and the United States recognized the impact of ship AVERAGE PASSIVE CONCENTRATION 2 Implementation of Emissions emissions on coastal air quality and worked with the Conrol Area Sulphur Limit of 0.1% CONCENTRATION (PPB) CONCENTRATION 2 International Maritime Organization to designate 3 an Emission Control Area (ECA) in North American 1 RANGE OF PASSIVE SAMPLES AVERAGE PASSIVE CONCENTRATION PASSIVE SO PASSIVE coastal waters. This meant that starting August 1, 2 CONCENTRATION (PPB) CONCENTRATION 2012, the level of sulphur allowed in marine fuels was 0 2 2014 2015 2016 JUL decreased by more than 75%. This further reduced by JUL SEP SEP FEB FEB APR APR JUN JUN JAN JAN DEC DEC MAY MAY OCT OCT OCT AUG AUG MAR MAR NOV 1 NOV 90% on January 1, 2015. PASSIVE SO PASSIVE

0 2014 2015 2016 JUL JUL SEP SEP FEB FEB APR APR JUN JUN JAN JAN DEC DEC MAY MAY OCT OCT OCT AUG AUG MAR MAR NOV NOV 4.5% Sulphur Levels Allowed in Marine Fuel Vancouver Fraser Port Authority provides funding for the Central 3.5% Burrard Inlet Area passive monitoring sites.

4.5% Sulphur Levels Allowed in Marine Fuel Metro Vancouver and partners are reviewing the air 3.5% quality objective for SO2. You can see how current SO2 levels in our region compare to the objective by 1.0% checking out Airmap.ca, as well as the air quality data 0.1% summary provided in this Caring For the Air report.

BEFORE 2012 JAN - JUL 2012 AUG 2012 - DEC 2014 2015 ONWARD 1.0% Vancouver Fraser Port Authority’s EcoAction Plan for vessels incentivized early adoption of lower sulphur fuels in advance of0.1% the ECA.

BEFORE 2012 JAN - JUL 2012 AUG 2012 - DEC 2014 2015 ONWARD

Caring for the Air 2017 13

Climate Action Committee - Page 86 Why don’t you charge them with pollution?

Metro Vancouver is often asked, “Why aren’t you The determination of pollution is a judgment call that charging Company X with pollution?” or “How can may be complex and somewhat subjective. you issue a permit to Company Y? They are going to If it is determined that pollution is being caused, emit chemicals and cause pollution.” Metro Vancouver’s District Director may issue an Air contaminants are emitted from many sources. Order to stop the pollution. However, an Order may Metro Vancouver’s Air Quality Management Bylaw be appealed to the BC Environmental Appeal Board. allows the District Director to authorize the discharge Alternatively, Metro Vancouver may charge someone of “air contaminants” but it prohibits anyone from with causing pollution, which must be proven in a discharging an air contaminant so as to cause court of law. “pollution”.

Pollution is caused when air contaminants reach An air contaminant is a substance emitted levels that “substantially” change how people, into the air that can: plants and animals are able to use the environment. • injure the health or safety of a person “Substantially” is the key, but what is substantial?

• cause material physical discomfort to a person • Is it when Metro Vancouver’s air quality objectives

are exceeded, if so how many times and by how • damage the environment much? • interfere with the normal conduct of business • If people’s lives are being adversely affected, how many people, how frequently and how severe must • injure property or any life form the effects be? • interfere with visibility

• Is it when a doctor has told you that a facility’s Pollution is the presence in the emissions are affecting your health? environment of substances or contaminants that substantially alter or impair the usefulness of the environment.

The District Director is a staff person appointed by the Metro Vancouver Board, who has permitting authority.

14 Caring for the Air 2017

Climate Action Committee - Page 87 Regulating Odorous Air Contaminants

Odours are a frequent complaint by Metro Vancouver Complaints can be made through a phone line residents. In 2016, Metro Vancouver received nearly at 604-436-6777 or on the Metro Vancouver three times as many complaints related to odours website (search ‘Air Quality Complaint’ on than in the previous year. Sources of odorous air www.metrovancouver.org). Helpful information that contaminants can include waste management complainants can provide includes a full description of facilities, rendering plants, animal feed producers, the odour, the effects and locations. food processors, restaurants, petroleum refineries, and agricultural activities. Depending on the terrain Regulating Odours and weather conditions, odorous air contaminants can be transported over long distances and reach many Metro Vancouver regulates the discharge of odorous people. air contaminants through permits and approvals for specific facilities. There are also regulations A person’s exposure to odours may have various for types of facilities or activities that share similar effects, ranging from noticing that the air ‘smells characteristics. Permits and approvals can include different’, to negative impacts on business activities, facility-specific requirements covering operating on a person’s physical health, or impairing people’s standards, collection and treatment of air contaminant ability to enjoy their environment. Metro Vancouver emissions, and measurements of specific odorous air tackles impacts from odorous air contaminants in contaminant emissions. Permits and approvals can several ways. also include limits on authorized emissions.

Responding to Complaints When a complaint is received by Metro Vancouver, staff follow up to see what might be causing the odour. Weather information, the complainant’s description, and on-site observations (when appropriate) help staff determine the probable source of the odour and what further action may be needed.

Caring for the Air 2017 15

Climate Action Committee - Page 88 Open Burning

Open burning has traditionally been used to dispose Rules and regulations have been put in place in the of debris generated from gardening, land clearing Metro Vancouver region to control open burning activities and agriculture. Many people have also activities and limit harmful effects. For instance, experienced open burning from campfires. But smoke to prevent the release of dangerous toxins, the from burning wood and other vegetative matter is following materials should never be burned in open harmful to our health and can cause air pollution. fires, without appropriate air emission controls: tires, plastics, drywall, demolition waste, domestic Smoke contains tiny particles of fine particulate matter waste (household waste materials and food waste), (PM2.5) and hundreds of other substances, some toxic. biomedical waste, asphalt and asphalt products, The particles in smoke are too small to be filtered treated lumber, railway ties, manure, rubber, paint and by the nose and respiratory system, so they are paint products, tar paper, and containers for gasoline, inhaled into the deepest parts of our lungs. Smoke is motor oil, fuel, or lubricants. associated with all sorts of health problems — from a runny nose and coughing, to bronchitis, asthma, For more information on the rules and regulations emphysema, pneumonia and heart disease. It also that apply in your area, please visit Metro Vancouver’s causes other problems, such as spoiling our region’s website (search for ‘open burning’) and contact your beautiful views. Much of the material burned could local municipality. You can also check out Metro be recycled or turned into valuable products, such as Vancouver Recycles for information on recycling or compost or particle board. disposal options for wood, vegetative waste, and materials that should not be burned in open fires.

16 Caring for the Air 2017

Climate Action Committee - Page 89 Improving Your Condo Building’s Energy Use

Building systems need to be replaced as condo buildings age. Renovations offer opportunities to install new systems with better energy performance. Energy advisors Electrical conduct building energy audits to help equipment identify these opportunities, calculate Increasing insulation costs and energy savings, and recommend ~ and upgrading to 35% high performance the most appropriate technologies and OF THE TOTAL ENERGY USED IN AN AVERAGE windows can reduce approaches. Metro Vancouver will be CONDO BUILDING 15% of its greenhouse heating and cooling launching a strata energy advisor program gas emissions loss which can lower in 2017 to help strata corporations energy bills understand where system improvements can be made in their building.

There are over 7,000 strata associations in Metro Vancouver, which are responsible for more than 800,000 tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions per year. If all condo buildings undertaking major repairs chose energy efficient options, these buildings would emit Gas and electric space heating between 2,000 and 9,000 tonnes less greenhouse gases per year, while saving up to $650 per unit per Replacing worn year on energy bills. out units to units 65%OF THE TOTAL ENERGY that have 70% USED IN AN AVERAGE heat recovery can CONDO BUILDING Individual owners and strata councils can improve efficiency reduce energy use and greenhouse gas and reduce 85% of its emissions with simple actions. Individuals emissions greenhouse could install programmable thermostats, gas emissions timers on natural gas fireplaces, weather stripping around windows and doors and Replacing old boilers even wash clothes in cold water to reduce with high efficiency energy use. Tuning up boilers, heating condensing boilers systems, and weather proofing can reduce can reduce energy a strata’s energy bills in buildings. use and emissions

Caring for the Air 2017 17

Climate Action Committee - Page 90 SPOTTING AN ENERGY EFFICIENT HOME JUST GOT EASIER.

IN PARTNERSHIP WITH

Our home is one of the biggest purchases we will ever to display their property’s EnerGuide label. You can make and yet there are some important things we search properties by EnerGuide rating, type of home, have very little or no information about when deciding and by location on the map. It’s a great way to learn which home to buy, such as energy use and carbon more about how homes perform when it comes to emissions. energy efficiency and carbon emissions.

Single-family homes are responsible for about 40% What better way to start lowering your carbon of the greenhouse gases coming from buildings. footprint while making smart decisions for you and To reduce these emissions, tools are available to your family? With RateOurHome.ca, spotting an help people make decisions that are better for their energy efficient home just got easier. families and the environment.

Home energy labels, like the EnerGuide Rating System, tell us how energy efficient a home is, how efficient it could become, and how it compares to other rated homes.

Energy efficient homes do more than save you money on utility bills; they are often healthier homes with better indoor air quality, fewer moisture problems, and are quieter and better insulated from outside temperatures and noise.

RateOurHome.ca creates awareness of home energy labels to make carbon emissions and energy use in homes more visible for everyone. The Home Energy Map on RateOurHome.ca allows owners or builders

18 Caring for the Air 2017

Climate Action Committee - Page 91 Garage Orphans

Like most of her neighbours, Karen parks on the street. In 2015, she purchased an electric vehicle (EV) for commutes within the city. She charges her vehicle exclusively in public places – the library, the rec centre, the mall. Karen is an example of what we refer to as a “garage orphan”.

Garage orphans are residents without access to off- street parking or those with off-street parking but no reliable access to electricity. Typical garage orphans live in: Since about 80% of EV charging takes place at home, access to home-based charging is critical to increasing • Single family homes where there is no driveway, the uptake of EVs. Several initiatives are helping garage or carport. address the problem.

• Secondary or basement suites, which have no off- • Curbside Charging Demonstration: BC Institute street parking access. of Technology recently received funding from Natural Resources Canada to demonstrate low-cost • Condos or apartments which either do not have curbside EV charging using existing street lighting assigned parking in the building, or who do not infrastructure. have authorized access to electricity for EV charging.

• EVCondo.ca: In 2016 Metro Vancouver launched EVCondo.ca. It walks EV owners, strata councils and property managers through typical steps in the process of setting up EV charging in an existing multi-family building. The website also contains a registry of EV-friendly strata buildings.

• Multi-Unit Residential Building (MURB) Charging Program: Rebates of 75% of total cost up to $4,500 per charging station were offered by the provincial government to purchase and install Level 2 charging stations in condominiums, apartments and Intensity of multi-family units by municipality, townhomes. The program was so popular it was fully Housing Data Book 2016 subscribed in under 4 months.

• EV charging in new buildings: In some municipalities developers of multi-family units are required or encouraged to provide EV charging infrastructure.

Caring for the Air 2017 19

Climate Action Committee - Page 92 Metro Vancouver’s Driving Smarter

In August 2016, Metro Vancouver launched the Smart Drive Challenge. Participation was free and all eligible With simple changes to driving hab- drivers were encouraged to apply. its, most drivers can save 10 to 15% on gas! Here are some tips to help. 201 residents were selected to participate and • Avoid high speeds received a data logger. The loggers are small cellular devices that plug in to a port in your car – the same • Go easy on the gas and brake pedals port your mechanic uses during a tune up – to track fuel consumption and vehicle movement in real time. • Be idle free They also recorded trips taken over the study period. • Travel light Each participant drove their vehicle normally, • Remove roof racks when not in use without feedback, for three weeks to establish their baseline. After this period, participants completed a • When it’s hot, roll down the windows at low half-hour on-line ‘Smart Drive Training’ course. The speeds instead of using air conditioning course describes how to drive more efficiently and make better trip choices that save fuel and reduce • Combine trips emissions. • Use a fuel consumption display For the final three weeks of the study, participants • Keep your tires properly inflated applied what they learned and were challenged to reduce their fuel consumption by 15%. Participants • Get regular tune ups received daily email feedback and had access to detailed information online about their performance More information and tips can be found at during this period. They could also see how their www.smartdrivemetrovancouver.ca results stacked up against the rest of the study participants. One way to drive more The Challenge will provide a better understanding smoothly is to imagine of how ‘smart’, connected technologies can provide feedback to drivers that reduces fuel consumption driving with a hot cup of and air emissions. Results will also help Metro coffee balanced on your Vancouver assess similar programs for future use. dashboard.

20 Caring for the Air 2017

Climate Action Committee - Page 93 Photo Contest This selection of photos submitted for a Caring for the Air photo contest highlights striking scenes from around the region. The cover of Caring for the Air 2017 was submitted by Judy Robertson, who together with Maria Grace Santos-Ocampo, are the winners of the 2017 photo contest. Congratulations to Judy and Grace and thank you to all those who submitted photos.

Maria Grace Santos-Ocampo

Bettina Lindenbach Ania Pawelec

Tanya Truong Paul Kadota

Climate Action Committee - Page 94 ,_- • , -er-

www.metrovancouver.org22 Caring for the Air 2017 21693091 Climate Action Committee - Page 95 5.7

To: Climate Action Committee

From: Roger Quan, Director, Air Quality and Climate Change Parks, Planning and Environment Department

Date: May 18, 2017 Meeting Date: June 7, 2017

Subject: Manager’s Report

RECOMMENDATION That the Climate Action Committee receive for information the report titled “Manager’s Report”, dated May 18, 2017.

Climate Action Committee 2017 Work Plan The attached report sets out the Committee’s Workplan for 2017. The status of work program elements is indicated as pending, in progress, or complete. The listing is updated as needed to include new issues that arise, items requested by the Committee, and changes to the schedule.

Environmental Assessment Review Process Begins for the Pattullo Bridge Replacement Project A harmonized environmental assessment review process has begun for TransLink’s proposed replacement of the Pattullo Bridge. The project would replace the existing four-lane Pattullo Bridge, which connects New Westminster and Surrey, with a new, tolled, four-lane bridge located just north and upstream of the existing bridge. The new bridge will be designed to accommodate a possible future conversion to a 6-lane bridge.

According to TransLink, the new bridge would provide: • a safer crossing with wider lanes and a centre median that separates traffic travelling in opposite directions; • modern lane widths to increase capacity on the bridge by 10%; • improved community connections to reduce traffic congestion in New Westminster and Surrey; and • separate pedestrian and cyclist paths.

The harmonized environmental assessment review process will be led by the BC Environmental Assessment Office and will incorporate Vancouver Fraser Port Authority federal requirements, as some of the works are located in areas under the Port’s jurisdiction. TransLink expects the environmental assessment process to be complete by the end of 2017. If approved, the new bridge would open in 2023, with decommissioning of the existing bridge occurring shortly thereafter.

Staff from various Metro Vancouver departments will participate in working group meetings throughout the environmental assessment process and will provide updates to the Committee and MVRD Board as necessary.

Climate Action Committee - Page 96 Manager’s Report Climate Action Committee Regular Meeting Date: June 7, 2017 Page 2 of 4

Metro Vancouver Air Quality Permitting Process At the Climate Action Committee meeting of May 3, 2017 the Committee discussed the Weir Canada Inc. (Weir) and Ebco Metal Finishing Limited Partnership (Ebco) air quality permit applications. The Committee requested staff to bring a report to the Committee outlining the current air quality permit application process, identifying the number of applications received, the process involved in awarding or rejecting applications and the impact the issuance of the Weir and Ebco air quality permits might have on local air quality and aquifers.

Staff intend to report back on both facilities, as well as the air quality permitting process, at the July Climate Action Committee meeting. This will allow time for receipt of additional information regarding both the Weir and Ebco applications, and the associated staff review time. At the time of writing of this Manager’s Report update, staff are awaiting additional information requests from concerned persons. Staff are also reviewing additional information from both proponents, including environmental assessment and dispersion modelling reports.

Attachment Climate Action Committee 2017 Work Plan

21625727

Climate Action Committee - Page 97 5.7 ATTACHMENT

Climate Action Committee 2017 Work Plan Report Date: May 18, 2017

Priorities 1st Quarter Status Consider draft Integrated Regional Climate Action Strategy and initiate in progress consultation and outreach activities. Review Sustainability Innovation Fund proposals and make recommendations to complete the Board. Initiate consultation on potential regulatory mechanisms to reduce emissions complete from indoor residential wood burning. Initiate consultation on proposed amendments to the Automotive Refinishing in progress Facilities Regulation. Emotive preliminary events schedule for 2017. complete Participate in environmental assessment processes as requested. complete 2nd Quarter Prepare sixth annual Caring for the Air report and continue to expand outreach. in progress Consider a draft policy on internal carbon pricing, to ensure greenhouse gas in progress emissions are considered in Metro Vancouver business decisions. Status report on projects and progress on deliverables that the Committee and complete Board approved Sustainability Innovation funding for in 2016. Progress report on the “RateOurHome” Home Energy Labelling outreach in progress campaign (Sustainability Innovation Fund project initiated in 2015). Report on the results of the Smart Drive Challenge (Sustainability Innovation Fund complete project initiated in 2015). Report on launch of Strata Energy Advisor Program (Sustainability Innovation Fund in progress project initiated in 2015). Progress report on GrowGreen website (Sustainability Innovation Fund project complete initiated in 2015). Initiate consultation on development of new programs to address emissions from in progress on-road light- and heavy-duty vehicles, in partnership with other levels of government. Sustainable building guidelines review. in progress Participate in environmental assessment processes as requested. in progress 3rd Quarter Report on Metro Vancouver’s climate actions and carbon neutral progress for in progress 2016. Implement additional energy and greenhouse gas reduction offset projects that in progress will achieve and maintain Metro Vancouver’s carbon neutral status. Initiate consultation on proposed regulatory mechanisms to reduce discharge of in progress odorous air contaminants, including potential changes to the Air Quality Management Bylaw and Air Quality Management Fees Bylaw Update on workplace electric vehicle charging program, including survey results in progress from consumers and employers. Initiate process to develop an update of the Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse in progress Gas Management Plan.

Climate Action Committee - Page 98

Report on renewal of Ecological Health Action Plan pending Report on results of the 2015 Lower Fraser Valley Emissions Inventory and in progress Forecast. Adopt new ambient air quality objective for sulphur dioxide. in progress Participate in environmental assessment processes as requested. pending 4th Quarter Report on Emotive electric vehicle campaign outcomes for 2017. pending Report on consultation program initiated in 2016 regarding proposed in progress amendments to the Non-Road Diesel Engine Emission Regulation Bylaw, and present proposed bylaw amendments for GVRD Board approval. Engage with external agencies on potential regulatory mechanisms to reduce pending wood burning emissions from outdoor, commercial, and light industrial activities and operations. Update on implementation of Fleet Planning and Acquisition Policy adopted by the pending Board in 2016. Report on status of experimental restoration activities at Burns Bog for ecological in progress health and carbon sequestration (Sustainability Innovation Fund project initiated in 2015). Report on near-road air quality monitoring study and potential next steps. pending Report on activities of Regional Invasive Species Task Force. in progress Participate in environmental assessment processes as requested. pending Consider proposed 2018 air quality and climate action programs and budget. pending

Climate Action Committee - Page 99