ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Final Report
Prepared for: Thompson Regional Airport Authority P.O. Box 112 Thompson, MB R8N 1M9
Prepared by: Stantec Consulting Ltd. 500-311 Portage Avenue Winnipeg, MB R3B 2B9
Project No. 111216830
March 26, 2018
ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
March 26, 2018
Sign-off Sheet
This document entitled Environment Act Proposal Thompson Regional Airport Authority Water Treatment Plant was prepared by Stantec Consulting Ltd. (“Stantec”) for the account of Thompson Regional Airport Authority (the “Client”). Any reliance on this document by any third party is strictly prohibited. The material in it reflects Stantec’s professional judgment in light of the scope, schedule and other limitations stated in the document and in the contract between Stantec and the Client. The opinions in the document are based on conditions and information existing at the time the document was published and do not take into account any subsequent changes. In preparing the document, Stantec did not verify information supplied to it by others. Any use which a third party makes of this document is the responsibility of such third party. Such third party agrees that Stantec shall not be responsible for costs or damages of any kind, if any, suffered by it or any other third party as a result of decisions made or actions taken based on this document.
Prepared by (signature)
Bill Krawchuk, M.N.R.M., MCIP, RPP
Reviewed by (signature)
Carmen Anseeuw, M.Env.
Approval to transmit: (signature)
Stephen Biswanger, P.Eng.
i lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx
ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
March 26, 2018
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... III
1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1.1 1.1 THE PROPONENT ...... 1.1 1.2 LAND OWNERSHIP AND PROPERTY RIGHTS ...... 1.2 1.3 PREVIOUS ACTIVITIES/STUDIES ...... 1.3 1.4 APPROVALS AND LICENCES ...... 1.3 1.5 FUNDING ...... 1.3
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...... 2.1 2.1 PROPOSED DESIGN CRITERIA ...... 2.1 2.2 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ...... 2.3 2.2.1 Project Schedule ...... 2.5 2.3 STORAGE OF GASOLINE OR ASSOCIATED PRODUCTS ...... 2.5
3.0 SCOPE OF THE ASSESSMENT ...... 3.1 3.1 SPATIAL AND TEMPORAL BOUNDARIES ...... 3.1
4.0 DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING ENVIRONMENT ...... 4.1 4.1.1 Physical Environment ...... 4.1 4.1.2 Surface Water Resources ...... 4.3 4.1.3 Groundwater ...... 4.4 4.1.4 Vegetation ...... 4.5 4.1.5 Fish and Fish Habitat ...... 4.5 4.1.6 Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat ...... 4.7 4.1.7 Species of Concern ...... 4.7 4.1.8 Socio-economics ...... 4.8 4.1.9 Heritage Resources ...... 4.12
5.0 ASSESSMENT APPROACH ...... 5.1 5.1 SELECTION OF PROJECT INTERACTIONS AND VALUED COMPONENTS ...... 5.1 5.2 RESIDUAL EFFECTS CRITERIA ...... 5.3
6.0 DESCRIPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND MITIGATION MEASURES ...... 6.1 6.1 GENERAL ...... 6.1 6.1.1 Air Quality ...... 6.1 6.1.2 Surface Water ...... 6.2 6.1.3 Groundwater ...... 6.5 6.1.4 Soil and Vegetation ...... 6.7 6.1.5 Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat ...... 6.8 6.1.6 Fish and Fish Habitat ...... 6.9
7.0 ACCIDENTS AND MALFUNCTIONS ...... 7.1
i lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Introduction March 26, 2018
7.1 GENERAL ...... 7.1 7.1.1 Scenarios...... 7.1 7.1.2 Mitigation Measures ...... 7.4 7.1.3 Summary ...... 7.5
8.0 FOLLOW-UP PLANS AND MONITORING ...... 8.1
9.0 CONCLUSION ...... 9.1
10.0 REFERENCES ...... 10.1 10.1 PERSONAL COMMUNICATION ...... 10.5
LIST OF TABLES Table 2-1 Raw Groundwater Quality Data ...... 2.1 Table 2-2 GCDWQ/DWSA and Design Parameters ...... 2.2 Table 4-1 Climate Normals for Thompson Regional Airport, Manitoba (1981- 2010) ...... 4.1 Table 4-2 Summary of Air Pollution Concentrations at Thompson Monitoring Site (2013) ...... 4.2 Table 4-3 Surface Water Characteristics Birch Tree Brook (2008) ...... 4.4 Table 4-4 Species of Conservation Concern with the Potential to Occur in the RAA ...... 4.9 Table 5-1 Designation of Valued Components ...... 5.2 Table 5-2 Characterization of Residual Environmental Effects ...... 5.3 Table 6-1 Comparison of Reject Water Quality Data to Guidelines ...... 6.3
LIST OF APPENDICES
FIGURES AND DRAWINGS ...... A.1
SITE PHOTOS ...... B.1
CERTIFICATE OF TITLE ...... C.1
ii lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
March 26, 2018
Executive Summary
The Thompson Regional Airport Authority is seeking an Environment Act Licence for a new water treatment plant, utilizing a groundwater source, to supply potable water and fire protection requirements to the new terminal building. A Reverse Osmosis treatment process is proposed for the water treatment plant, which will generate reject water. This concentrate will discharge via buried pipeline to Birch Tree Lake.
The Thompson Regional Airport Authority is planning an expansion (i.e., new terminal building, parking, hanger developments) of the existing Thompson Regional Airport northwest of Thompson, Manitoba. There is presently no water treatment plant or piped potable water supply to the airport. Currently, potable water is hauled to the airport on a daily basis via water truck to supply the existing Terminal Building. Wells in the vicinity of the airport supply non-potable water for toilets. Potable water sources and fire suppression capacity are required for the expansion at the airport.
This Environment Act Proposal has been prepared by Stantec Consulting Ltd. on behalf of the Airport Authority in accordance with Manitoba Sustainable Development’s Information Bulletin, “Environment Act Proposal Report Guidelines” October 2017. This EAP documents the proposed construction, potential environmental effects and planned mitigation measures associated with the facility’s operation. The report is submitted as supporting information to the Environment Act Proposal Form for licensing consideration by Manitoba Sustainable Development for Water Treatment Plant construction and operation.
Potential environmental effects of the Project over the construction and operation and maintenance phases are considered routine activities and are similarly well understood (i.e., related to short-term construction noise, traffic, some air emissions, and continual reject water discharge). The proposed Reverse Osmosis process for the Water Treatment Plant is an established treatment system with numerous similar installations in Manitoba and the processes are well known. The Water Treatment Plant Project will result in an improvement to the water supply to meet operational requirements of the expanded airport.
The proponent is committed to following mitigation measures to reduce the potential effects to the environment during the Project. The likelihood of fire/explosion, spills, and transportation accidents occurring as a result of the Project is limited given the implementation of mitigation measures and safe work practices.
On the basis of the desktop studies undertaken, site observations and information available to date as presented in this report, the Project is expected to create no significant adverse effects to the biophysical and socio-economic environment.
iii lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx
ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Introduction March 26, 2018
1.0 Introduction
The Thompson Regional Airport (TRA), operated by the Thompson Regional Airport Authority (TRAA), is located approximately four kilometres northwest of the City of Thompson. The TRA is located within the Local Government District (LGD) of Mystery Lake. The TRAA is in the process of developing a new Air Terminal Building along with other large hangar developments. There is no water treatment plant or piped potable water supply to the TRA. Currently, potable water is hauled to the TRA on a daily basis via water truck to supply the existing Terminal Building. Wells in the vicinity of the airport supply non-potable water for toilets. The elevated hardness of this water has shortened the life cycle of mechanical systems. Furthermore, the present water source does not have the volume capacity for fire suppression at the airport. As such, additional potable water and fire suppression capacity is required for the airport’s expansion.
TRAA is seeking an Environment Act Licence to construct a water treatment plant (WTP), utilizing a groundwater source, to supply potable water and fire protection requirements to the new terminal building. A Reverse Osmosis (RO) treatment process is proposed for the water treatment plant, which will generate reject water. This reject concentrate will be discharged via buried pipeline to Birch Tree Lake. The proposed WTP facility is considered a Class 1 Development under the Classes of Development Regulation (MR 164/88) and requires an Environment Act Licence. Activities and components associated with the airport expansion are not considered within the scope of this EAP.
This Environment Act Proposal (EAP) has been prepared by Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec), on behalf of the TRAA, in accordance with Manitoba Sustainable Development’s (MSD’s) Information Bulletin, “Environment Act Proposal Report Guidelines” October 2017. This report documents the proposed construction, potential environmental effects, and planned mitigation measures associated with the facility’s operation. The EAP report is submitted as supporting information to the Environment Act Proposal Form for licensing consideration by MSD for facility operation.
1.1 THE PROPONENT
For the purposes of development licensing, the proponent is the TRAA. For further information regarding the TRAA, please contact the following:
Mr. Curtis Ross, President/CEO Thompson Regional Airport Authority P.O. Box 112 Thompson, MB R8N 1M9 Telephone: (204) 677-0720 Email: [email protected]
1.1 lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Introduction March 26, 2018
This Environment Act Proposal was prepared by Stantec Consulting Ltd. The local contact is:
Mr. Stephen Biswanger, P.Eng. Senior Project Manager, Environmental Engineer Stantec Consulting Ltd. 500-311 Portage Avenue Winnipeg, MB R3B 2B9 Telephone: (204) 924-7061 Email: [email protected]
1.2 LAND OWNERSHIP AND PROPERTY RIGHTS
The proposed WTP is located on land owned by the TRAA. The legal plan for the subject property is described as Parcels A/B, Plan 7394 PLTO. The plant site covers approximately 327 m2 (13.2 m by 24.8 m) or 0.03 ha located west of the proposed new air terminal building and parking lot (see Appendix A, Figure 1-1). The associated water pipeline discharge route is approximately 2.6 km in length and will be located on land owned by the TRAA as well as the provincial Crown. The proposed WTP site and discharge pipeline route is a mixture of undeveloped and previously disturbed land owned by the TRAA as well as open to densely forested cover along Provincial Road (PR) 391 (see Appendix B, Photos).
A copy of the current Certificate of Title (CT# 2694183 PLTO) for the subject property for the new WTP and a portion of the proposed water discharge pipeline is included in Appendix C. According to the Mineral Resources Branch (2017) of Manitoba Growth, Enterprise and Trade, there are several mineral dispositions and mining restricted areas encompassing the TRA, the subject property and proposed discharge pipeline route. Ownership of the mineral rights beneath the land is expected to rest with the Crown (Province of Manitoba).
Existing and adjacent land use consists of the airport and supporting infrastructure and facilities, provincial aggregate/quarry pits to the south of PR 391, and Crown land, including Crown land encumbrances (i.e., Treaty Land Entitlement sites). The City of Thompson is located approximately 4 km southeast of the airport.
The TRA and proposed discharge pipeline route are located within the Thompson Planning District. Under the Thompson Planning District Development Plan, the airport and surrounding lands are designated as “Rural Development Policy Area” which indicates what type of developments are allowed related to mineral exploration, agricultural, parks and recreation, Crown land, and seasonal resort. Planning for the TRA should include identifying both light and aerospace-oriented heavy industrial land use on the north side of the main runway for goods transfer, storage, warehousing, and infrastructure needs. Plan policies also encourage the expansion of the TRA boundaries where necessary to support ongoing growth of the airport (Thompson Planning District 2013). Under the LGD of Mystery Lake Zoning By-law No. 541, the TRA lands and the discharge pipeline route are zoned as “LD – Limited Development Zone”. Public utilities, work, and services, including the transmission of water to the public at large, including
1.2 lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Introduction March 26, 2018
related facilities and structures, and water control structures are permitted uses in the LD zone. Airports as regulated by the Federal government are also a permitted use in this zone (LGD of Mystery Lake 1984).
1.3 PREVIOUS ACTIVITIES/STUDIES
Information developed as part of a feasibility study (Stantec 2017a) was utilized to advance the design concept of the proposed WTP and was advanced to Preliminary Design (Stantec 2017b). The primary purpose of the preliminary design was to further define and size the key components of the proposed WTP including establishing the design basis for structural, architectural, building mechanical, electrical, instrumentation and controls and site services components of the project. The Preliminary Design report is the basis for the submission of this EAP.
1.4 APPROVALS AND LICENCES
The following is an overview of the regulatory approvals and licenses pertinent to the construction and operation of the TRA WTP and regulations considered in this assessment.
• The Drinking Water Safety Act – permit to construct a private water system – Office of Drinking Water
• The Water Rights Act – water rights licence application for groundwater removal for municipal, industrial or other purposes where the quantity exceeds 25,000 litres per day – Manitoba Sustainable Development, Water Stewardship Division.
• The Highways Protection Act – permit application to Manitoba Infrastructure for placement of a structure (i.e., pipeline) within controlled areas (i.e., 38 m control line from the edge of the rights-of-way), including provincial roads.
• Fisheries Act (federal)– as a discharge pipeline will outlet into Birch Tree Lake, the Fisheries Act requires that the potential for serious harm to fish and fish habitat as defined under the Act be considered. The project may necessitate submission of a Request for Review (RFR) to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) as per the requirements of the Act.
Other permits and approvals likely required include Bell MTS and Manitoba Hydro for crossing utility and gas locations.
1.5 FUNDING
The TRAA is providing all funding for necessary undertakings related to the Project.
lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx 1.3
ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Project Description March 26, 2018
2.0 Project Description
2.1 PROPOSED DESIGN CRITERIA
The proposed WTP will be designed based on providing potable water and fire protection to the new air terminal building, existing facilities on the south side and north side of the airport runway, and an additional 12 airside facilities proposed over a 20-year design period.
Based on a water demand analysis completed for the TRAA Feasibility Study, the projected 20- year average potable water demand is 84.5 m3/day, with a maximum water demand of 144.6 m3/day. The resultant required WTP capacity is 1.7 L/s. The treatment plant will operate year-round, 23 hours per day with an operator on-site. A fire flow water requirement of 117 L/s will be required for the new air terminal building. The recommended useful underground reservoir capacity for the Project is 877 m3 (876,550 litres). The raw water source for the proposed WTP is groundwater, likely under the direct influence (GUDI) of surface water (Friesen Drillers Inc. 2016). Raw groundwater characteristics based on sampling of groundwater from one existing production well on-site are shown in Table 2-1.
Table 2-1 Raw Groundwater Quality Data
Raw Water GCDWQ/DWSA Parameter Unit Min Max MAC/(AO)/OG
Alkalinity, Total (as CaCO3) mg/L 386 441 Ammonia mg/L 0.047 0.122 Arsenic mg/L 0.0061 0.0115 ≤ 0.01
Bicarbonate (HCO3) mg/L 471 538 Calcium mg/L 74.7 86.4
Carbonate (CO3) mg/L <0.6 <0.6 Chloride mg/L 0.46 0.63 (250) Conductivity umhos/cm 690 731 Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) mg/L 423 424 (500) Fluoride mg/L 0.424 0.446 1.5
Hardness (Total) CaCO3 mg/L 427 444 (< 200/500a) Hydroxide (OH) mg/L <0.34 <0.34 Iron mg/L 0.553 0.650 (≤ 0.3) Langelier Saturation Index (4°C) 0.4 0.42 Langelier Saturation Index (60°C) 1.2 1.2 Lead mg/L 0.0001 0.000208 0.01 Magnesium mg/L 55.5 58.4
2.1 lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Project Description March 26, 2018
Table 2-1 Raw Groundwater Quality Data
Raw Water GCDWQ/DWSA Parameter Unit Min Max MAC/(AO)/OG Manganese mg/L 0.0072 0.0159 (≤ 0.05b) Nitrite (as N) mg/L <0.005 <0.005 10 pH pH units 7.55 7.68 (7-10) Potassium mg/L 8.0 8.19 Silica mg/L 24.1 24.1 Sodium mg/L 13.3 14.9 (200) Sulphate mg/L 10.4 10.6 (500) Total Organic Carbon mg/L 1.33 1.56 True Colour CU <5.0 <5.0 (≤ 15) Turbidityc NTU 0.25 14.7 Uranium mg/L 0.00072 0.00423 0.02 UV Transmittance %T 94.2 96.8 Notes: DWSA = The Drinking Water Safety Act; GCDWQ = Guideline for Canadian Drinking Water Quality; MAC = Maximum Acceptable Concentration; AO = Aesthetic Objective; OG = Operational Guideline a Hardness – 80 and 100 mg/L is acceptable; >200 mg/L is poor but tolerable; >500 mg/L is unacceptable b Manganese – Health Canada existing AO is 0.05 mg/L – proposed new Health Canada guideline of 0.1 mg/L as MAC and 0.02 mg/L as AO currently under review c Turbidity – minimum result is from an acidified sample; maximum is based on an unacidified sample Source: Stantec 2017a
Key water quality objectives are summarized in Table 2-2 below.
Table 2-2 GCDWQ/DWSA and Design Parameters
Parameter GCDWQ/DWSA Design Criteria Arsenic ≤ 0.01 mg/L (MAC) ≤ 0.01 mg/L Haloacetic Acid (HA) 0.08 mg/L ≤ 0.08 mg/L Hardness < 200 / 500 mg/L (AO) 80 to 120 mg/L Iron ≤ 0.3 mg/L (AO) ≤ 0.3 mg/L Manganese ≤ 0.05 mg/L (AO) ≤ 0.05 mg/L pH 7 to 10 (AO) 7 to 8.5 Total Organic Carbon n/a ≤ 1 mg/L Trihalomethanes (THM) ≤ 0.10 mg/L ≤ 0.10 mg/L True Colour ≤ 15 TCU (AO) ≤ 5 TCU 95% of time & not exceeding 15 TCU
2.2 lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Project Description March 26, 2018
Table 2-2 GCDWQ/DWSA and Design Parameters
Parameter GCDWQ/DWSA Design Criteria Turbidity ≤ 0.1 NTUa ≤ 0.1 NTU 95% of time & not exceeding 0.3 NTU UV Transmittance n/a 94% Notes: MAC = Maximum Acceptable Concentration; AO = Aesthetic Objective a Turbidity limits for surface water vary with the treatment process as follows: chemically assisted filtration ≤ 0.3 NTU 95% of time, never to exceed 1 NTU; slow sand filtration or diatomaceous earth filtration ≤ 1 NTU 95% of time, never to exceed 3 NTU; membrane filtration ≤ 0.1 NTU 95% of time, never to exceed 0.3 NTU.
2.2 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
The proposed development consists of the construction of a WTP facility, reservoir, and reject discharge line to Birch Tree Lake adjacent to the proposed TRA air terminal building and new parking lot. A site plan showing the proposed development is shown in Appendix A, Figures 1-1 and 1-2.
The WTP will consist of the following key process components.
Raw Water Source
The proposed raw water supply will be from two recently drilled groundwater production wells with sufficient capacity located east of the airport access road and will include a new pump system. A 75mm diameter polyethylene pipeline will be installed 2.7 m below ground to convey the raw water from the production wells to the WTP over a distance of 1.1 km (approx.). The Project does not include the installation of two production wells and the raw water pipeline from the wells to the WTP (done by others).
WTP Facility
The proposed WTP consists of a wood-framed building, dual cell underground concrete reservoirs with separate pumping chambers, and a process room. The WTP will include a RO membrane system, distribution/fire pumping system, UV disinfection, chemical feed systems and chemical storage area. The WTP will include an electrical room, office/laboratory room, and washroom. A concentrate pump station and emergency generator will be located on the exterior of the WTP.
Power to the WTP will be supplied by an underground main electrical service to a padmount transformer installed by Manitoba Hydro. An outdoor backup 300-kW diesel generator, within its own weather-proof enclosure, will supply power to the WTP and its systems in the event of a local outage.
lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx 2.3 ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Project Description March 26, 2018
The proposed treatment process for the WTP is a RO membrane system. RO membranes reject 15 to 25% of raw water continuously when producing water. The proposed WTP is based on 80% recovery of raw water, meaning 20% of the raw water is rejected. This equates to an average daily reject quantity of approximately 16.9 m3/day in the design year (Stantec 2017a).
Concentrate Pumping Station and Discharge Pipeline
The water treatment system will generate approximately 0.34 L/s per day of reject water. Reject water will be collected via a trench located in the WTP and then conveyed to a reject water pump station located on the southeast side of the WTP with duty/standby submersible pumps. A 75-mm diameter HDPE discharge pipeline will be routed west and north of the WTP site across airport runway lands and then under PR 391 and northwest along the side of PR 391 within the road right-of-way to Birch Tree Lake. The pipeline will be installed at a depth of approximately 2.4 m via directional drilling methods for approximately 2.6 km. The pipeline will discharge reject water into Birch Tree Lake on the south side of the road causeway (see Appendix A, Drawings C103 and C104). Discharge to Birch Tree Lake will be via a perforated dispersion pipe gallery with a buoy and a lake-bottom anchoring device attached (see Appendix A, Drawing C201).
The reject water includes hardness-causing minerals such as calcium and magnesium, total dissolved solids (TDS), sodium, and sulphate. The highly-mineralized concentrate can lead to pipeline encrustation and clogging if routed over a long distance. Three maintenance manholes with a valve will be placed along the pipeline route, one on the bank of the lake prior to the pipeline entering the water and two others at a high point. The manholes would allow for flushing of the pipeline with a dilute mineral acid solution to loosen calcification within the pipeline, if any. The flushing solution would be removed by vacuum truck and hauled to the wastewater treatment plant in Thompson for disposal. Table 2-3 summarizes the expected concentrate reject water quality.
Table 2-3 Expected Concentrate Reject Water Quality
Parameter Units Reject Water Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L 2,267.3 Calcium mg/L 430.2 Magnesium mg/L 290.8 Sodium mg/L 56.1 Potassium mg/L 34.6 Ammonium (NH4) mg/L 0.5 Iron mg/L 2.8 Carbonate (CO3) mg/L 41.0 Bicarbonate (HCO3) mg/L 2,597.8 Sulfate (SO4) mg/L 53.0 Chloride mg/L 3.1
2.4 lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Project Description March 26, 2018
Table 2-3 Expected Concentrate Reject Water Quality
Parameter Units Reject Water Fluoride mg/L 2.1 Silicon Dioxide (SiO2) mg/L 253.2 Carbon Dioxide (CO2) mg/L 21.52 Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 3,765.28 pH pH units 8.32 Source: Stantec 2017b
2.2.1 Project Schedule
The proposed TRA WTP requires funding approval prior to proceeding to detailed design and construction. A preliminary project implementation schedule is provided as follows:
• Submit Environment Act Proposal to Manitoba April 2018 Sustainable Development
• Receive Environment Act Licence (estimated) June 2018
Design and Construction (Estimated)
• Complete Detailed Design April 2018
• Tender Proposed Works May 2018
• Construction Contract Start July 2018 (WTP)
July 16 to August 30, 2018 (discharge pipeline)
2.3 STORAGE OF GASOLINE OR ASSOCIATED PRODUCTS
It is anticipated that large quantities of fuel will not be stored on-site at any given time. Fuel for construction equipment will be supplied by fueling trucks that are regulated under The Storage and Handling of Petroleum Products and Allied Products Regulation. Records of fuel volumes and an Emergency Response Plan which includes spill avoidance, notification and response will be implemented as a part of the construction specifications and enforced at the site. No fueling or servicing activities will be permitted within 100 m of watercourses. A backup power diesel generator will be used as a backup power supply for powering key elements in plant operation. Fuel storage for the backup generator will consist of on-board or external tanks of 546-L capacity. Storage tanks will meet provincial fuel storage requirements.
lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx 2.5
ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Scope of the Assessment March 26, 2018
3.0 Scope of the Assessment
3.1 SPATIAL AND TEMPORAL BOUNDARIES
The proposed WTP and discharge pipeline (the Project) is located at the TRA and discharges to Birch Tree Lake. For the purposes of this environmental assessment, the Project Development Area, Local Assessment Area and Regional Assessment Area are defined as follows:
• Project Development Area (PDA) – the physical footprint of the Project comprises the WTP (327.4 m2) and discharge pipeline route (approx. 2.6 km) within the subject property, defined as being within Parcels A/B, Plan 7394 PLTO, and across Provincial Crown land in Sections NW28, NE29, NW/SW & SE32 and SW33, Township 78, Range 3 WPM.
• Local Assessment Area (LAA) – area up to a two km radius from the Project site. For the purposes of the assessment, the LAA is the area over which direct effects of the Project are expected to occur.
• Regional Assessment Area (RAA) – area up to a ten km radius from the Project site. For the purposes of the assessment, the RAA represents the area that establishes the context for determining the significance of project effects.
For the purposes of this assessment, the following temporal boundaries are defined:
• Construction phase – a period of approximately seven months from July 2018 to January 2019 over which construction will occur.
• Operation phase – the period over which the facility will be in operation, at least 20 years.
• Decommissioning phase – there are currently no decommissioning plans for the facility. If and when decommissioning occurs at some point in the future, it would be anticipated to consist of the removal of WTP buildings and equipment from the site and capping of the discharge pipe. Decommissioning would be conducted according to Licence conditions and regulatory requirements at the time.
3.1 lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx
ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Description of Existing Environment March 26, 2018
4.0 Description of Existing Environment
4.1.1 Physical Environment
The TRA facility is located in the Sipiwesk Lake Ecodistrict in the Hayes River Upland Ecoregion of the Boreal Shield Ecozone. The Sipiwesk Lake Ecodistrict is part of the glacial Lake Agassiz basin (Smith et al. 1998).
4.1.1.1 Climate and Air Quality
The Project area lies within the warmer, more humid High Boreal Ecoclimatic Region subdivision in Manitoba. The climate is characteristic of short, cool summers and long, very cold winters (Smith et al. 1998). The average growing season is 149 days (Smith et al. 1998). Monthly climate normal data for the TRA are provided in Table 4-1.
Table 4-1 Climate Normals for Thompson Regional Airport, Manitoba (1981-2010)
Parameter Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Yr Temperature (°C)
Daily Avg. -23.9 -20.1 -12.5 -2.2 6.1 12.6 16.2 14.5 7.8 0.1 -12.0 -20.9 -2.9
Daily Max. -18.3 -13.5 -5.0 4.8 13.1 19.8 23.1 21.4 13.6 4.4 -7.3 -15.7 3.4
Daily Min. -29.3 -26.5 -19.9 -9.1 -0.8 5.4 9.1 7.6 1.9 -4.3 -16.6 -26.2 -9.1
Precipitation
Rainfall (mm) 0.1 0.3 1.0 6.7 36.9 66.6 80.9 70.7 59.2 16.6 1.1 0.1 340.2
Snowfall (cm) 22.7 18.9 23.4 23.0 11.2 1.1 0.0 0.0 3.0 21.4 35.4 27.0 187.0
Total (mm) 19.5 16.5 22.5 29.0 47.4 67.8 80.9 70.7 62.1 37.1 32.9 22.8 509.2
Source: Environment and Climate Change Canada 2017a
Ambient air quality data is available for the City of Thompson where the nearest air quality station operated by Manitoba Sustainable Development is located. Data on concentration levels for two parameters, particulate matter and ozone, were collected as part of Manitoba’s ambient air quality monitoring program. The trend in particulate matter concentrations (PM2.5) over the period 2005 to 2014 increased, largely as a result of a highly active wildfire season in 2013 (Manitoba Sustainable Development 2016). In terms of ozone, data collection in Thompson only started in 2012, so no long-term trend could be identified; however, the levels did show a decrease over the three-year period (Manitoba Sustainable Development 2016). In terms of air zone management level, Thompson has been designated as “Yellow” which indicates actions are required for avoiding air quality deterioration (Manitoba Sustainable Development 2016).
Maximum short-term and annual mean concentrations of air pollutants for the Thompson station in 2013 are summarized in Table 4-2. There was one exceedance of ground level ozone (O3)
4.1 lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Description of Existing Environment March 26, 2018 guidelines and one exceedance of the 24-hour average for particulate matter (PM2.5 and PM10) (MCWS 2013). Vale’s smelting and mining operations and transportation are the main sources of emissions in Thompson (Manitoba Sustainable Development 2016).
Table 4-2 Summary of Air Pollution Concentrations at Thompson Monitoring Site (2013)
Manitoba Air Manitoba Air Manitoba Air Thompson Quality Quality Quality Pollutant Period (Westwood Objective – Objective – Objective – School) MTL (2005) MAL (2005) MDL (2005)
Ozone (O3) ppb 1 hour 54.1 200 82 50 24 hour 52.23 n/a n/a n/a Annual 28.0 n/a 15 n/a
Sulphur Dioxide (SO2) ppb 1 hour 441.0 (0.44) n/a 2.0+ n/a 24 hour 54 n/a n/a n/a Annual 3 n/a n/a n/a Particulate Matter 10 1 hour 783.7 n/a n/a n/a 3 (PM10) µg/m 24 hour 70.4 n/a 50 n/a Annual 11.8 n/a n/a n/a Particulate Matter 2.5 1 hour 186.2 n/a n/a n/a 3 (PM2.5) µg/m 24 hour 63.0 n/a 30 n/a Annual 4.3 n/a n/a n/a Notes: Numbers in bold indicate exceedance; n/a – no guideline or objective; + indicates objective level in parts per million; __ indicates objective level that is exceeded MTL – the maximum tolerable level denotes a time-based concentration of an air contaminant beyond which, given a diminishing margin of safety, appropriate action is required to protect the health of the general population MAL – the maximum acceptable level deemed essential to provide adequate protection for soil, water, vegetation, materials, animals, visibility, personal comfort and well-being MDL – the maximum desirable level defined as the long-term goal for air quality providing a basis for an anti- degradation policy for unpolluted areas of Manitoba and for the continuing development of control technology Source: MCWS 2013; Manitoba Conservation 2005
4.1.1.2 Topography and Soils
Topography in the Project area ranges from an average of 200 m to 220 m above sea level. Physiography is characteristic of a level to undulating clayey, glaciolacustrine plain with prominent, hummocky granitoid outcrops generally capped by glaciolacustrine blankets and veneers (Smith et al. 1998). Land surface at the TRA is undulating and very hilly. A large glacial feature is located on the north side of the airport. Elevation slopes down from north to south with drainage directed to the southeast of the site where the land surface is lower. Bedrock outcrops are visible in vicinity of the airport (Friesen Drillers Ltd. 2016).
4.2 lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Description of Existing Environment March 26, 2018
The surficial geology conditions in the Thompson, MB area generally consist of combination of glaciolacustrine and glaciofluvial sediments, with a 1- to 20-m-thick layer of clay, silt, and minor sand low-relief deposits to a 1- to 20-m-thick layer consisting of a sand and gravel complex as well as thin, low-relief deposits (Matile et al. 2006). The underlying bedrock consists of rocks of the Precambrian Shield in the Thompson belt, or Thompson nickel belt (Manitoba Energy and Mines 1995).
Soils in the PDA consist predominantly of well to imperfectly drained Gray Luvisols and some Eutric Brunisols developed on clayey deposits (Smith et al. 1998). The general soil stratigraphy, as interpreted by testhole logs from a geotechnical investigation at the Project site, revealed a general soils profile consisting of peat, organic clay, clay, silt, and sand deposits. These depths varied from 0.3 m for peat to 18.3 m for sand depending on location (Amec Foster Wheeler 2017).
4.1.2 Surface Water Resources
The PDA is located in the Burntwood River watershed. Many small, medium and large lakes are drained by the irregular bedrock-controlled network of rivers and streams. Drainage in the area is generally to the northeast (Smith et al. 1998).
The closest waterbody to the Project site is Birch Tree Lake and Birch Tree Brook, approximately 1.8 to 2.0 km to the west. Birch Tree Brook is a tributary of the Burntwood River. It receives run off from the northwest, northeast and east (including TRA) and flows southwest into Birch Tree Lake, which ultimately drains into the Burntwood River (approx. 17 km southwest). The Burntwood River flows northeast through the City of Thompson into Split Lake and is used by the City as a raw water drinking source (Stantec 2017a). Flows on the Burntwood River are high year-round and are regulated by Manitoba Hydro as part of the Churchill River Diversion (CRD). As a result of the CRD, water quality in the Burntwood River sub-basin, including the Burntwood River at Thompson, experienced elevated turbidity, sodium, potassium, chloride, fluoride, and total phosphorous concentrations, and decreased alkalinity, conductivity and concentrations of calcium and magnesium (North/South Consultants Inc. 2010; Manitoba Hydro 2015). Overall, the water quality in the Burntwood River sub-basin is deemed to be suitable to support aquatic life in comparison to available water quality guidelines and objectives for the protection of freshwater aquatic life (Manitoba Hydro 2015).
A water sample from Birch Tree Brook was compared with surface water characteristics in the Burntwood River (Stantec 2017b). The results of the comparison are noted in Table 4-3.
lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx 4.3 ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Description of Existing Environment March 26, 2018
Table 4-3 Surface Water Characteristics Birch Tree Brook (2008)
Burntwood River Historic Results Birch Tree Parameter Unit MAC AO Brook (2008)c Minimum Maximum
Alkalinity (as CaCO3) mg/L 50 53.6 81 Aluminum mg/L 0.59 2.37 0.23 0.1b Arsenic mg/L 0.0003 0.0005 0.0004 0.01 Colour TCU 25 55 55 Fluoride mg/L <0.05 0.09 0.06 1.5 Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L 51 59 87 Iron mg/L 0.78 1.52 0.43 0.3 Lead mg/L 0.0004 0.0014 0.0002 0.01 Manganese mg/L 0.017 0.028 0.013 0.05 Nitrate & Nitrite mg/L <0.01 0.05 <0.01 10 pH 7.25 7.91 8.08 6.5-8.5 Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 78 101 93 500 Total Organic Carbon mg/L 6.4 12 13 Turbidity NTU 17.6 33.7 6.9 Uranium mg/L 0.0001 0.0002 0.0002 0.02 0.3/0.1a Notes: MAC = Maximum Acceptable Concentration; AO = Aesthetic Objective a Chemically assisted filtration/membrane filtration b Operational guideline for conventional chemically assisted filtration plants c Sampled from shoreline at causeway on Provincial Trunk Highway (PTH) 6 Source: Stantec 2017b
4.1.3 Groundwater
The RAA consists of Precambrian bedrock of the Churchill/Superior geological provinces. The general bedrock geology is made up of mainly Granites and Granitoid Gniess rock types. Within the bedrock, groundwater flow is expected to be restricted to fractures and joints. There have been very little to no intensive groundwater investigations in the Precambrian bedrock regime. Groundwater yields are expected to be marginal overall. Water quality is reported to be generally saline below 150 m (Betcher et al. 1995).
Little information exists on the extent of overburden sand and gravel deposits in the RAA. Few active water wells have been drilled in the Thompson area although there have been numerous test wells. The groundwater wells that have been advanced were for domestic and industrial water use, primarily for production purposes (Groundwater Information Network 2014).
4.4 lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Description of Existing Environment March 26, 2018
There is a large glacial sand and gravel feature lying to the north of the runway at the TRA. The gravel surface, assumed to be a glacial esker, was mined locally for aggregate (Friesen Drillers Ltd. 2016).
The TRA and other commercial facilities at the airport are provided water by individual wells for non-potable water use (Stantec 2017b). A review of existing well log records indicates a potentially small, confined inter-till sand and gravel aquifer supplying these wells (MCWS GWDrill Database 2014, 2016; Stantec 2017b). Existing groundwater wells no longer required with development of a new water supply will be decommissioned by others at a later date.
Groundwater investigation undertaken at the PDA involving one pre-production well and three test wells revealed a highly transmissive sand and gravel aquifer underlying the site. A very high capacity water supply, estimated at 136.5 U.S. gallons per minute per foot, was noted at the site. The proposed use at the TRA was estimated to be 34 U.S. gallons per minute (Stantec 2016). The aquifer is described as flowing off the local glacial feature running through the area to the southeast. This upland feature appears to be a recharge area for the aquifer. Groundwater samples collected indicated a groundwater quality of a Calcium/Magnesium/ Bicarbonate type with very low chlorides, non-detectable nitrates, and reasonably high dissolved iron typical of sand and gravel aquifers in Manitoba. Overall, the groundwater quality at the site appears to be good (Friesen Drillers Ltd. 2016).
4.1.4 Vegetation
The Hayes River Upland Ecoregion is characterized by a mosaic of mixedwood and coniferous forest stands and clearings. The dominant forest cover in the region consists of black spruce stands, along with some jack pine and trembling aspen stands due to the frequency of forest fires (Smith et al. 1998). Land cover mapping indicates that the predominant vegetation cover in the Project area consists of dense and open coniferous stands, dense mixedwood stands, and shrub and wetland vegetation cover (Natural Resources Canada 2000). Forest resource inventory mapping indicates predominant tree species within the Project area as softwood forest, treed muskeg and some minor hardwood forest (MCWS 1999). Other than areas for runways/taxiways and other clearings, the Project area (LAA) for the TRA site is heavily forested.
Lands within the LAA and RAA have been moderately modified by human development and support infrastructure (e.g., roads, mines and prospecting activities, gravel/quarry pits, a golf course, and the City of Thompson). The water treatment plant site and pipeline right of way traverse a mosaic of young aspen trees, mature conifers, willows, grasses, and sedges (see Appendix B, Photos B1 to B4).
4.1.5 Fish and Fish Habitat
A large wetland complex associated with Birch Tree Brook is present at the north side of the PR 391 causeway in the LAA. Open water is permanent in the central wetland with ephemeral edges dependent on annual precipitation. At the pipeline discharge site, the causeway has
lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx 4.5 ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Description of Existing Environment March 26, 2018
created an impoundment of Birch Tree Brook resulting in the extension of Birch Tree Lake on the south with open water as a permanent feature. Numerous streams and smaller wetlands are present within the LAA, with general drainage towards Birch Tree Brook and Birch Tree Lake. Birch Tree Lake drains into the Burntwood River approximately 17 km downstream of the site. Birch Tree Lake, Birch Tree Brook, the Burntwood River and other nearby rivers and streams are likely home to a wide array of aquatic fish species, including: lake sturgeon (a COSEWIC listed species), mooneye, longnose and white sucker, northern pike, lake whitefish, lake trout, lake cisco, burbot, walleye, sauger, yellow perch, spottail shiner and emerald shiner, as well as numerous forage fish species such as fathead minnow, pearl dace, and lake chub (Stewart and Watkinson 2004; Fisheries and Oceans Canada 2005).
The nearest water body to the Project site is Birch Tree Lake/Birch Tree Brook, some 2.6 km to the northwest (see Appendix B, Photo B5). At the proposed discharge location, a paved causeway crosses the northeast portion of the lake where Birch Tree Brook enters. Historical photos indicate the presence of culverts through the causeway and ephemeral water on the north side of the causeway.
Rip rap lines both sides of the causeway. At the time of the site visit by Stantec (October 2017), the water level was expected to be at its seasonal low, as very little precipitation had fallen in July and August. However, the water level was still higher than in dry years, reportedly due to the unprecedented snowfall in March 2017. The water on the south side of the causeway appears to have an average depth of 3.0 to 3.6 m (approx.) based on bathymetric survey. Water levels on the north side of the causeway are shallower (approx. 1.5 m). The south side of the causeway (see Appendix B, Photo B6) has less emergent vegetation than the north side, although both sides have emergent and submergent vegetation (see Appendix B, Photos B6 to B9).
Spring, summer and fall spawning fish are all possible within Birch Tree Lake (DFO 2013). The results of the site visit indicate the north and south side of the causeway both have sufficient depth to provide “good” fish overwintering habitat. Both sides of the causeway have sufficient emergent vegetation to provide good habitat and cover for spawning and rearing activities as well. If fish can traverse the causeway via culverts, the northeastern side would be good migration habitat, providing a conduit to lakes and streams further upstream from Birch Tree Lake. Use of the northern portion of the wetland in Birch Tree Brook for life stages of fish is based on the assumption that the causeway culverts are present and provide viable fish passage during spring freshet to allow fish onto the northeast side of the causeway.
A previous assessment of the Burntwood River upstream of the City of Thompson by Fisheries and Oceans Canada identified 20 fish species present (Fisheries and Oceans Canada, 2005). One species, lake sturgeon, is identified in the reviewed literature as being listed as Endangered by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC; Government of Canada 2016). No species are identified as listed under the Species At Risk Act (Government of Canada 2017). The Burntwood River is deep and fast flowing and some sections do not freeze in winter. It is a known fish-bearing watercourse with Commercial, Recreational and Aboriginal
4.6 lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Description of Existing Environment March 26, 2018
(CRA) species and provides good fish habitat for spawning, overwintering, rearing, and migration for various types of fish (Fisheries and Oceans Canada, 2005). Based on water depth and observed in-stream vegetation in Birch Tree Lake, it may provide spawning and rearing habitat for the fish of Burntwood River, at least on the south side of the causeway. Assuming the culverts are passable, fish may migrate through onto the north side of the causeway, which would provide additional habitat for spawning, rearing, and migration.
4.1.6 Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat
Located within the Hayes River Ecoregion, characteristic wildlife species consist of moose, black bear, woodland caribou, wolf, lynx, beaver, muskrat, and snowshoe hare. Waterfowl including ducks, geese, pelicans, and other common bird species such as sandhill crane, spruce grouse, willow ptarmigan, raven, Canada jay and other passerine bird species are common in the region (Smith et al. 1998).
Results of the desktop review indicate that migratory bird habitat is present throughout the RAA. Migratory birds and their nests are protected by the Migratory Birds Convention Act (MBCA). The sensitive breeding window for migratory birds inhabiting the Regional Assessment Area (RAA), which falls within zone B6, is April 15-August 31 (Environment and Climate Change Canada 2017b).
Lands within the LAA and RAA have been moderately modified by human development and support infrastructure as noted previously (see Section 4.1.4). Terrestrial habitat encompassing the water treatment plant site and pipeline right of way consist of young aspen trees, mature conifers, willows, grasses, and sedges (see Appendix B, Photos B1 to B5).
4.1.7 Species of Concern
A request submitted to MBCDC for existing recorded observations of species of conservation concern indicated four such species in the LAA and RAA – Columbine dusky wing, common nighthawk, olive-sided flycatcher, and woodland caribou (MBCDC Coordinator pers. comm. 2017). A search of the Manitoba Herps Atlas database found three records of amphibian species in the vicinity of Thompson, namely the boreal chorus frog and wood frog (NatureNorth 2017). These species are common in northern Manitoba.
According to range maps and land cover data, 19 species of conservation concern (SOCC) have the potential to occur within the RAA. A search of the Manitoba Herps Atlas (Manitoba Herps Atlas 2017), Manitoba Conservation Data Centre (MBCDC 2016), and eBird (eBird 2017) revealed records of 11 SOCC that have been observed within the RAA (Table 4-4). SOCC are those species listed under the federal Species at Risk Act, Manitoba’s The Endangered Species and Ecosystems Act (MSD 2017b), by COSEWIC, and/or those ranked as rare (i.e., ranks 1, 2, and 3) by NatureServe Canada.
A review of ortho-imagery and results of the desktop review indicated that suitable habitat for the SOCC listed in Table 4-4, with the exception of American White Pelican, exists in the LAA and
lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx 4.7 ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Description of Existing Environment March 26, 2018
SOCC may occur within the RAA. The disturbed nature of the PDA and immediate surrounding area from existing development (i.e., active airport) and/or infrastructure (i.e., road right-of-way) are less likely to support woodland caribou due to increased predation risk and avoidance. Presence of disturbance is known to reduce suitability of adjacent (>500 m) habitat for caribou (Environment Canada 2011).
4.1.8 Socio-economics
4.1.8.1 Land and Resource Use
The City of Thompson is located approximately 750 km north of Winnipeg, located in north- central Manitoba. The community was established in 1956 by the International Nickel Company of Canada (INCO, now VALE Ltd.) with the discovery of a rich body of nickel ore. Much of the city’s economic base centers on mining and also includes a strong retail and service sector. The local trading area encompasses over 40,000 people within a larger regional centre.
The RAA includes Treaty Land Entitlement (TLE) sites, Resource Management Areas (RMAs), Registered Trapline Districts, and Community Interest Zones. Nisichawayasihk Cree Nation (Nelson House), the closest First Nation to the Project, has four TLE selections recorded as encumbrances within the RAA, two located on the northwest side of Birch Tree Brook and Birch Tree Lake (i.e., approx. 375 m from the discharge pipeline on the opposite shore) and two south of the City of Thompson at Manasan Falls (i.e., approx. 7.4 km from the WTP) along the Burntwood River (Crown Lands and Property Agency 2017; Manitoba Mineral Resources 2017). The Project RAA is located within the Nelson House RMA and the Nelson House Registered Trapline Section, encompassing portions of three individual traplines. Crown land encumbrances for three trapper’s cabin sites are located within the Project RAA, one of which is also located in the LAA (Crown Lands Property Agency 2017).
The City of Thompson is located within the Local Government District (LGD) of Mystery Lake. Land use development and control in the Project area is provided by the Thompson Planning District Development Plan By-law 42-2012 (Thompson Planning District 2013). The PDA is designated as “Rural Development Policy Area” under the applicable development plan. Under Transportation and Servicing Policies of the Plan, developments requiring the construction of a water or wastewater supply or development of a water or wastewater supply system must meet provincial requirements (Thompson Planning District 2013).
4.8 lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Description of Existing Environment March 26, 2018
Table 4-4 Species of Conservation Concern with the Potential to Occur in the RAA
Name Manitoba Status Federal Status Recorded The Endangered NatureServe Observations Common Scientific Species and COSEWIC SARA Canada in RAA Ecosystems Act Horned Grebe Podiceps auritus - 3 Special Concern Special Concern - Common Nighthawk Chordeiles minor Threatened 3 Threatened Threatened (1) √ Yellow Rail Coturnicops - 3 Special Concern Special Concern (1) - noveboracensis American White Pelican Pelecanus - 3 Not at Risk - - erythrorhynchos Short-eared Owl Asio flammeus Threatened 2 Special Concern Special Concern (1) - Boreal Owl Aegolius funereus - 3 Not at Risk - √ American Kestrel Falco sparverius - 3 - - √ Olive-sided Flycatcher Contopus cooperi Threatened 3 Threatened Threatened (1) √ Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica - 4 Threatened (2011) √ Red Crossbill Loxia curvirostra - 3 - - - Rusty Blackbird Euphagus carolinus - 3 Special Concern Special Concern (1) - Little Brown Bat Myotis lucifugus Endangered 5 Endangered Endangered (1) √ Northern (Long-eared) Myotis septentrionalis Endangered 4 Endangered Endangered (1) √ Myotis Wolverine Gulo gulo - 3 Special Concern (2014) √ Woodland Caribou Rangifer tarandus Threatened 2 Threatened Threatened (1) √ (Boreal) caribou Barren Ground Caribou Rangifer tarandus - - Threatened (2016) √ groenlandicus Northern Leopard Frog Rana (Lithobates) - 4 Special Concern Special Concern (1) - pipiens Nine-spotted Lady Beetle Coccinella - - Endangered (2016) - novemnotata Columbine Dusky Wing Erynnis lucilius - 3 - - √ Notes: COSEWIC = Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada; SARA = Species at Risk Act NatureServe Canada Rankings: 1 (critically imperiled; 2 (imperiled); 3 (vulnerable); 4 (apparently secure); 5 (secure)
4.9 lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx
ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Description of Existing Environment March 26, 2018
The TRA is located on land owned by the Province of Manitoba and administered locally by the LGD of Mystery Lake in the RAA. The airport is managed and operated by the TRAA. Under the LGD of Mystery Lake Zoning By-law No. 541, lands associated with the WTP and concentrate discharge pipeline route are zoned as “LD – Limited Development Zone”. The intent of the “LD Zone” is to permit orderly and environmentally safe resource extraction activities, recreational use, and public, government, transportation and utility uses, as regulated by Provincial and Federal agencies. Permitted uses under the “Limited Development Zone” include public utilities, works, and services (LGD of Mystery Lake 1984). Public utility, works or services means “any system, works, plant, equipment or services … including (b) production, transmission, delivery or furnishing of water…;” and “(d) collection, treatment, storage and disposal of sewage, garbage or other waste, including related facilities and structures; ….” (Local Government District of Mystery Lake 1984).
The proposed site for the WTP and the associated discharge pipe is located to the west of the existing TRAA airport terminal building. The site for the WTP is in a clearing at the TRA; whereas, the route for the discharge pipe encompasses areas of exposed land, open coniferous, dense mixedwood, dense broadleaf, and shrub and herb wetland vegetation cover (Natural Resources Canada 2000).
Recreation and tourist activities and sites in the City of Thompson consist of outdoor recreation facilities and parks, including the Thompson Golf Club, and a system of trails for walking, biking, all-terrain vehicle, and skiing (City of Thompson 2017a). The surrounding LGD of Mystery Lake includes the Millennium hiking and picnic trail, Moak Lake ATV route, Mystery Mountain, Nickel, and Thompson-Churchill snowmobile routes, Mystery Mountain Winter Park, and Jack Crolly cross-country ski trails (Mussio Ventures Ltd. 2015). The closest regional park is Paint Lake Provincial Park, located approximately 18 km to the south of the Project site.
The Thompson Nickel Belt is identified as having high mineral potential that is to be protected from conflicting surface land uses that could interfere with access to mineral resources. There are extensive mineral exploration rights, claims and leases within the LAA and RAA. The PDA encompasses two active mining claim areas as well as one mining restricted area for the proposed WTP and associated discharge pipeline. Two existing aggregate pits are located to the south of the existing airport, across PR 391. A large glacial sand and gravel feature, an esker located at the TRA, has partially been excavated in the past for gravel resources (Friesen Drillers Ltd. 2016).
The Project RAA also encompasses Forest Management Licence (FML) No. 2 issued to Tolko Industries Ltd. (formerly Repap), now known as Canadian Kraft Paper Industries Limited following the sale of the paper mill at The Pas, MB in 2016. The Project area is located within the Nelson River Forest Section, Forest Management Units 87 and 89 within the FML.
Hunting/outfitting and fishing activities occur within the Project RAA. The RAA encompasses Game Hunting Area (GHA) 9A and Game Bird Hunting Zone (GBHZ) 2. Common big game
4.10 lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Description of Existing Environment March 26, 2018
species include moose, black bear, and gray wolf. Upland game birds and waterfowl hunted commonly include ptarmigan, spruce grouse and various ducks and geese (Mussio Ventures Ltd. 2015). Lodges and outfitters operating in GHA 9A in the Thompson area include: Trapper Mike’s Outfitting Service – non-resident moose and spring/fall bear hunt; and Johnson Road Outfitters – hunting for non-resident bear (Travel Manitoba 2017).
4.1.8.2 Infrastructure and Services
PTH 6 is the main route into Thompson from the south. Going west from the city, PR 391 is the major road connecting to Leaf Rapids, MB. PR 391 is a combination of a two-lane paved primary and secondary arterial road (Manitoba Highways and Transportation 1997). Weight restrictions for PR 391 consist of a Roads and Transportation Association of Canada (RTAC) route designation of 62,500 kg from the city to the TRA and a winter seasonal RTAC route designation from the TRA to points northwest (Manitoba Infrastructure 2017). Traffic volumes for PR 391 were obtained from the Manitoba Highway Traffic Information System, 2016 Traffic on Manitoba Highways (Manitoba Infrastructure and University of Manitoba 2016). In 2016, traffic count locations on PR 391 at the north end of the Burntwood River Bridge and west of the TRA access road had recorded Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) of 2,850 and 1,430 vehicles, respectively (Manitoba Infrastructure and University of Manitoba 2016).
Railway service to Thompson is provided by the Sipiwesk spur line from the main Hudson Bay Railway line. Transmission lines connect to the City of Thompson from points north and west. Key Manitoba Hydro infrastructure includes 138 kV and 230 kV transmission line connections and the Wuskwatim Generating Station (approx. 45 km southwest of Thompson). The TRA serves as a northern transportation hub and is the main air link between the city and points north and south.
City of Thompson municipal services consist of water distribution, wastewater collection and treatment, garbage collection and operation of the waste disposal ground, waste diversion (i.e., composting, E-waste, recycling, hazardous waste), and snow removal. The City of Thompson has a main hospital as part of the Northern Regional Health Authority. Services provided include ambulatory/emergency medical services, emergency outpatient services, diagnostic imaging and lab services, and mental health services. Education facilities in Thompson consist of public Nursery to Grade 12 schools and the University College of the North (UCN) post-secondary campus. The city maintains a RCMP detachment.
Telecommunication in the Thompson region is primarily provided by Manitoba Telecom Services (now Bell MTS). The Thompson area has access to home phone service, dial-up internet, with access also to wireless (cell phone) service (The Thompson Economic Diversification Working Group 2013).
The City of Thompson has a municipal water service system utilizing surface water as the primary source (i.e., the Burntwood River) (MSD 2017a). The Thompson Water Treatment Plant was constructed by VALE and is in the process of being transferred to the City in 2018. The water supply system consists of a river pump house, the water treatment plant, raw water and potable
lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx 4.11 ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Description of Existing Environment March 26, 2018
water pipes to VALE, and a city distribution system of potable water (City of Thompson 2016b; VALE 2014). The water service system does not provide water directly to the TRA. Potable water is currently hauled to the TRA on a daily basis via water truck to supply the existing Terminal Building and will be discontinued once the new water supply system is operational.
The City of Thompson’s existing wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) is located in the northeast part of the city. Treated effluent discharge is to the Burntwood River (City of Thompson 2016a). The City is in the process of replacing the existing plant with a new centralized wastewater treatment facility adjacent to the existing plant. The new plant has been designed for secondary treatment including nutrient removal, and will handle all domestic wastewater generated from the city service area including truck haul wastewater. Treated effluent from the city’s WWTP will be discharged via new outfall to the Burntwood River (City of Thompson 2017b).
The TRA offers regular flights, and is the second busiest airport in the province after James Richardson International Airport in Winnipeg. The TRA reported 120,000 passengers passing through the airport in 2010 (The Thompson Economic Diversification Working Group 2013) and another 15,000 people per year on charter flights (Stantec 2017a). Flights are provided by two primary carriers – Calm Air and Perimeter Air to locations throughout the province (City of Thompson 2016a). The TRAA is working towards establishing a new terminal building. It estimates that airport traffic through the new terminal will have 5% to 7% growth per year over the next 20 years (Stantec 2017a).
4.1.8.3 Population and Economy
The City of Thompson population is approximately 13,678 people according the 2016 Census of Canada. The population growth rate between 2011 and 2016 was 4.2% (Statistics Canada 2016). Of the total 5,482 private dwellings recorded in 2016, 4,910 dwellings were occupied. The total land area of the City of Thompson is 20.8 sq. km. with a population density of 657.6 persons per sq. km. (Statistics Canada 2016).
Mining has been, and still is, an important driver of the city’s economy. The city also has a diversified service hub economy based on industrial and business, health and education, and government services. Tourism remains an important part economic development for the city. The city is also home to aerospace winter weather testing as well as winter testing for the automotive sector (City of Thompson 2016a).
4.1.9 Heritage Resources
Heritage resources have been documented within the LGD of Mystery Lake within the City of Thompson, consisting of a heritage museum and the Thompson nickel discovery (Manitoba Sport, Culture and Heritage 2017). A review of the provincial Archaeological Sites Inventory Database revealed nine recorded sites within the RAA, all within the vicinity of the City of Thompson. The closest site is a campsite located approximately 4.7 km southeast of the PDA on
4.12 lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Description of Existing Environment March 26, 2018
the Burntwood River (Historic Resources Branch pers. comm. 2017). No heritage resources were identified in the PDA.
The Historic Resources Branch (HRB) Archaeological Assessment Services Unit was contacted to undertake a Heritage Screening for the proposed Project site. The HRB examined the applicable area proposed for development based on the Branch’s records for areas of potential concern. The Branch identified no heritage concerns with the Project at this time as the proposed development is located within a previously disturbed area (Municipal Heritage Consultant pers. comm. 2017).
lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx 4.13 ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Assessment Approach March 26, 2018
5.0 Assessment Approach
This assessment was completed to meet the requirements of an Environment Act Proposal (EAP), and includes assessing project-specific environmental effects. For the purposes of this assessment, the term environment refers broadly to biophysical and socio-economic elements of the environmental setting.
The assessment focuses on valued components (VCs), which are environmental components of particular value or interest to regulators and other parties and are identified based on the biophysical and socio-economic elements. Project-related effects on these VCs are assessed sequentially in the assessment. Residual effects are characterized using specific, predetermined criteria (e.g., direction, magnitude, geographical extent, duration, frequency).
5.1 SELECTION OF PROJECT INTERACTIONS AND VALUED COMPONENTS
Biophysical and socio-economic VCs that could be affected through interactions of the environment with the Project are identified to scope the assessment. The VCs selected:
• Represent a broad biophysical or socio-economic component that might be affected by the Project; or
• Are of scientific, historical, or archaeological importance.
To focus the assessment on matters of greatest importance, potential interactions of the Project with the surrounding biophysical and socio-economic environment were identified using a variety of sources, including:
• Applicable provincial regulatory requirements
• Existing information regarding biophysical and socio-economic components found in the project area (e.g., vegetation, land uses, etc.) and results of desktop studies
• Professional judgement of the assessment practitioners, based on experience with similar projects elsewhere and other projects and activities in the project area
The rationale for selecting each VC is explained and potential interactions between the Project and VCs are identified in Table 5-1.
5.1 lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Assessment Approach March 26, 2018
Table 5-1 Designation of Valued Components
Potential Valued Component Project Rationale for Inclusion or Exclusion Interaction Air quality √ Construction activities contribute to airshed loading from on-site equipment and truck usage. The WTP includes a backup diesel generator for emergency operation. Surface water √ Process water discharge during operation will be directed to Birch Tree Lake via discharge pipeline. Groundwater √ During construction and operation of the WTP, effects on groundwater in terms of quality, flows or levels are limited to the raw water supply at the Project site. Soils and vegetation √ The new building footprint on-site will result in some disturbance to soils and vegetation on TRAA property. Route for the discharge pipeline to the discharge point at Birch Tree Lake will be directionally drilled. Native vegetation includes forest and shrub covered areas that would be affected by Project activities. Wildlife and wildlife habitat √ There is some wildlife habitat on-site at the WTP site and along the proposed discharge pipeline route. Tree cover removal for the WTP will be approx. 0.03 ha or less. Fish and fish habitat √ Construction and operation of the concentrate discharge pipeline may affect fish and fish habitat. Discharge of the reject water is on a continual basis. Land and resource use x Site activities for the WTP and discharge pipeline will occur within lands owned by the TRAA and along an existing road right-of-way. The WTP and associated structures are permitted uses under the Zoning by-law. Effect of the project on land and resource use is negligible. Noise x Site is located approx. 4 km northwest of residential areas in the City of Thompson. Construction at the project site has potential to generate some noise but would be comparatively small given existing vehicle and air traffic. Noise generation during operation will be negligible. Infrastructure and services x The new WTP will generate construction traffic at the site and along the road right-of-way but will be negligible in context of existing traffic. The new WTP may increase power usage at the site but utilities and infrastructure are anticipated to have sufficient capacity to accommodate the new WTP, reject water pumping station, and associated pumps. The new WTP will be an improvement to the local water infrastructure and supply service at the airport. Employment and x Benefits related to employment, tax generation from economy construction and continued operation will be negligible; the new plant is expected to require a negligible increase in workforce with the addition of certified operator(s).
5.2 lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Assessment Approach March 26, 2018
Table 5-1 Designation of Valued Components
Potential Valued Component Project Rationale for Inclusion or Exclusion Interaction Heritage resources x Review of heritage resource records have indicated no heritage concerns at the site and in the Project area.
Once interactions that are likely to have effects are identified and the VCs determined, an analytical framework is used to evaluate and characterize the potential project effects according to a set of standardized criteria to facilitate quantitative (where possible) and qualitative assessment of residual effects (see Section 5.2).
5.2 RESIDUAL EFFECTS CRITERIA
Terms used to characterize the residual environmental effects are summarized in Table 5-2.
Table 5-2 Characterization of Residual Environmental Effects
Characterization Description Quantitative Measure or Qualitative Categories Direction The long-term trend of the Positive— an improvement in the valued residual effect component compared with existing conditions and trends Adverse— a decline in the valued component compared with existing conditions and trends Neutral— no change in the valued component from existing conditions and trends Magnitude The amount of change in Negligible—no measurable change the VC relative to existing Low— a change that falls within the level of natural conditions variability Moderate— a measurable change which is unlikely to affect the valued component High— a measurable change which is likely to affect the valued component Geographic Extent The geographic area in PDA—residual effects are restricted to the Project which an environmental Development Area effect occurs LAA—residual effects extend into the LAA (up to a 2 km radius of project site) RAA—residual effects extend to other adjacent areas of the property up to a 10 km radius Frequency When the residual effect Single event— residual effect occurs once occurs and how often throughout the life of the Project Multiple irregular event— residual effect occurs sporadically and intermittently (no set schedule) throughout
lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx 5.3 ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Assessment Approach March 26, 2018
Table 5-2 Characterization of Residual Environmental Effects
Characterization Description Quantitative Measure or Qualitative Categories Multiple regular event— residual effect occurs repeatedly and regularly throughout Continuous—residual effect occurs continuously throughout the life of the Project Duration The period of time Short-term— residual effect restricted to the required until VC returns to duration of construction (assumed to be 7 months) existing condition, or the or less effect can no longer be Medium-term— residual effect extends to ten years measured or otherwise Long-term— residual effect extends for longer than perceived ten years Reversibility Whether the VC can Reversible—the effect is likely to be reversed after return to existing condition activity completion and decommissioning after project activity Irreversible—the effect is unlikely to be reversed ceases even after decommissioning Ecological and Existing condition and Undisturbed—area is relatively undisturbed or not Socio-economic trends in the area where adversely affected by human activity environmental effects Context Disturbed—area has been substantially previously occur disturbed by human development or human development is still present
5.4 lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Description of Environmental Effects of the Proposed Development and Mitigation Measures March 26, 2018
6.0 Description of Environmental Effects of the Proposed Development and Mitigation Measures
6.1 GENERAL
This section identifies and characterizes the environmental effects of the proposed development in terms of components identified in Table 5-1. Proposed mitigation measures to be included in the Project are summarized in turn below. Residual (post mitigation) environmental effects of the proposed development are further summarized and characterized in each case.
6.1.1 Air Quality
There is potential for emissions and fugitive dust generation from Project construction activities. Vehicle and equipment emissions will occur from activities during construction and transportation of goods and materials to the construction site. Increased volatile organic compound (VOC) levels could result from fuels used during construction. Fuel may be transported to the Project site to fuel equipment. The Project is expected to have only a nominal contribution to greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) during the construction period.
Dust will be generated as a result of construction activities such as open excavations at the proposed WTP site. Some clearing/grubbing activities will be necessary at the WTP construction site which may generate dust. Vehicle and equipment exhaust emissions can cause changes to air quality. The effect will be of short-term duration, occurring on a continuous basis during work hours of the construction period in the PDA.
During operation, the potential for air emissions are associated with the intermittent use of the backup 300 kW diesel generator at the WTP. The outdoor generator, housed within its own weather-proof enclosure, would operate during a power outage and maintenance activities.
Mitigation
Emissions resulting from construction and transportation equipment will be mitigated by the following:
• using well-maintained and operated vehicles while reducing unnecessary vehicle idling
• using an approved dust suppressant on construction sites
• limiting construction during high wind periods
• limiting the height of material stockpiles
• limiting the area of exposed soil
6.1 lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Description of Environmental Effects of the Proposed Development and Mitigation Measures March 26, 2018
• re-establishing vegetation promptly following construction
The operation of the WTP and water reject pipeline are not expected to have adverse effects on air quality.
Summary
After implementation of mitigation measures, the residual effects on air quality are expected to be negligible in magnitude, limited to the PDA/LAA, short-term and continuous during construction, long-term in duration, and irregular in frequency during operation, reversible, and occurring within a disturbed context. As such, the potential residual effect on air quality is considered not significant.
6.1.2 Surface Water
There are no surface water features on the WTP Project site. The closest surface water is Birch Tree Brook and Brook Tree Lake, located approximately 2.6 km to the northwest. Negligible and short-term impacts on surface water quality may occur as a result of construction activities through sedimentation/erosion from excavation activities, stockpiling of material, and equipment/vehicle movement related to surface drainage.
The discharge pipeline will be extended into Birch Tree Lake via the directional drill method, approximately 285 m from the lake shoreline, and will be weighted down at the end-point. The pipe end-point will be located in water that is approximately 3.0-3.6 m (10-12 ft.) deep on the south side of road causeway. The pipe will be advanced into Birch Tree Lake via directional drill from the lakeshore and connected to a concrete ballast block end piece by divers at the dispersion pipe’s outfall location within the lake. Directional drilling activity will necessitate the placement of a silt curtain along the entire length of the affected area. Appropriate signage will be posted with regard to the outfall pipe to deter damage to the pipe.
Reverse osmosis membrane concentrate contains minerals that cause hardness, including calcium and magnesium. The reject water quality from the new WTP is shown in Table 2-1. The estimated reject water discharged to Birch Tree Lake will be on average 16.9 m3/day (approx.) or 0.34 L/s when the WTP is operating, equating to 20% of the potable water production.
With respect to reject water discharge concentrations, the applicable Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME) guideline value for un-ionized ammonia is 0.019 mg/L (CCME 2010). The level of un-ionized ammonia as part of the reject water concentrate, based on a total ammonium concentration of 0.5 mg/L, a pH level of 8.32, and a range of potential reject water temperatures (i.e., 6°C to 18°C), was determined to be less than the CCME minimum guideline value. Table 6-1 compares the reject water effluent quality to DWSA, GCDWQ, and MWQSOG criteria. Parameters meet the Maximum Acceptable Concentration (MAC) levels or Aesthetic Objectives (AO), except for Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) and fluoride, and applicable objectives for iron. The iron and TDS exceedances relate to the applicable
6.2 lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Description of Environmental Effects of the Proposed Development and Mitigation Measures March 26, 2018 surface water quality guideline for freshwater aquatic life and the AO, respectively. The fluoride exceedance relates to the interim water quality guideline for freshwater aquatic life. The CCME interim guideline value for fluoride (inorganic) is 0.12 mg/L (CCME 2002). The level of fluoride as part of the reject water concentrate was determined to be 2 mg/L.
Table 6-1 Comparison of Reject Water Quality Data to Guidelines
Reject Water DWSA/GCDWQ Parameter Units MWQSOG Effluent MAC AO
Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L 2,267 - - -
Calcium mg/L 4,302 - - -
Magnesium mg/L 291 - - -
Sodium mg/L 56 - 200 -
Potassium mg/L 35 - - -
Ammonium (NH4) mg/L 0.5 10 - 1.06a
Iron mg/L 3 - 0.3 0.3
Carbonate (CO3) mg/L 41 - - -
Bicarbonate (HCO3) mg/L 2,598 - - -
Sulfate (SO4) mg/L 53 - 500 -
Chloride mg/L 3 - 250 -
Fluoride mg/L 2 1.5 - -
Silicon Dioxide (SiO2) mg/L 253 - - -
Carbon Dioxide (CO2) mg/L 21 - - -
Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 3,765 - 500 Narrativeb
pH pH units 8.3 - 6.5-8.5 6.5-9.0
Notes: DWSA = The Drinking Water Safety Act; GCDWQ = Guidelines for Canadian Drinking Water Quality; MAC = Maximum Acceptable Concentration; AO = Aesthetic Objective; MWQSOG = Manitoba Water Quality Standards, Objectives, and Guidelines a Assumed pH of 8.5 and temperature of 15° C, early life stages present; expressed as N b For receiving waterbodies with clear flow; maximum average increase of 5 mg/L from background for inputs lasting 24 hours to 30 days (assumed continuous discharge) Source: Stantec 2017b
In comparing existing surface water quality in Birch Tree Brook (based on a 2008 sample) and the Burntwood River (based on historic results), reject water concentrations for iron, fluoride, and
lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx 6.3 ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Description of Environmental Effects of the Proposed Development and Mitigation Measures March 26, 2018
TDS are higher than the corresponding surface water characteristics for Birch Tree Brook and the Burntwood River. The area within the receiving waterbody (i.e., Birch Tree Lake) for reject water discharge was calculated to determine an effective mixing zone. In lakes and other impoundments, the volume of the mixing zone should not exceed 10% of the volume of those portions of the receiving waterbody (Manitoba Water Stewardship 2011). For the discharge pipeline, the theoretical mixing zone is estimated to be approximately 13,680 m3 (based on a mixing zone size of 10% of the lake composed of a distance across of 380 m, a depth of approximately 3.6 m, and width of 100 m). Reject water from the WTP is estimated to discharge at a rate of 16.9 m3/day on a continuous basis, representing approximately 0.1% of the mixing zone volume within Birch Tree Lake. With the moderating effect of the mixing zone considered, water quality objectives will be met and acutely toxic conditions for aquatic life are not anticipated.
Mitigation
Mitigation of surface water issues during construction may be achieved by redirecting surface water runoff, pumping accumulated water to adjacent ditches, and providing erosion control measures such as silt fences as required. Other mitigation measures include:
• maintaining existing surface drainage patterns on site
• installing silt fencing and other erosion protection measures as necessary for construction to avoid erosion and sediments from stormwater being transported off-site to surface water
• limiting construction activities during heavy precipitation/runoff events
• maintaining a 100 metre setback to watercourses for fueling, servicing, and washing activities for vehicles and equipment
• avoiding vehicle and equipment entering riparian zones as much as practical
• avoiding storage of fuel and other materials within 100 metres of a water body to avoid deleterious substances from entering water
• re-establishing disturbed vegetation in riparian zones as soon as practical
• placing silt curtains on either side of area to be directionally drilled and monitoring pipe installation
These requirements will be incorporated in the Tender Specifications for the Project.
Required measures will be implemented to mitigate in water construction works for the protection of fish and fish habitat as determined through the DFO Request for Review process.
6.4 lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Description of Environmental Effects of the Proposed Development and Mitigation Measures March 26, 2018
For operation and maintenance, a manhole with a valve will be placed on the bank of the lake outside the ordinary high water mark. The manhole will allow for flushing of the discharge pipeline as needed with a dilute mineral acid solution to loosen calcification within the pipeline. The flushing solution would be removed by vacuum truck and hauled to the wastewater treatment plant in Thompson for disposal.
Summary
The proposed WTP will meet the GCDWQ / DWSA design criteria as described in Section 2.1. A summary of the anticipated reject water concentrate is provided in Table 6-1. Surface water effects from the operation of the proposed new WTP and discharge pipeline will be mitigated by adherence to CCME guidelines for the protection of aquatic life and surface water quality objectives (MWQSOG) at the edge of the mixing zone. The proposed WTP treatment process will meet future operational requirements of the TRA and anticipated target water quality criteria.
After implementation of mitigation measures, the residual effects on surface water quality are expected to be negligible to low in magnitude, limited to the LAA, long-term in duration, continuous, reversible, and occurring within a disturbed ecological context. As such, the potential residual effect on surface water quality from the WTP is considered not significant.
6.1.3 Groundwater
During construction, excavation activities for foundations at the Project site have the potential to encounter groundwater. A review of historic GWDrill water well logs in the vicinity of the PDA revealed the presence of coarse to fine grained sands and gravel wells with variable groundwater levels (approx. 1.2 m to 26.8 m) below grade (MCWS 2014, 2016).
Construction of the WTP is proposed to utilize driven steel end bearing piles due to groundwater issues (Amec Foster Wheeler 2017). Groundwater was encountered in some test holes during a subsequent field drilling program undertaken as a part of the geotechnical investigations conducted in 2017. Sloughing conditions were observed at two test holes for the WTP at depths ranging from 13.1 to 13.7 m. Groundwater levels were noted at 12.2 and 13.1 m below grade (Amec Foster Wheeler 2017). Surface drainage will be directed away from building foundations by final site grading to reduce water accumulation on-site. With the implementation of building and foundation design measures, the effects of building construction on groundwater are expected to be negligible.
Groundwater quality at the airport site was reported to be quite good having had little impact from local surface activities and no long-term progressive drawdown (Friesen Drillers Ltd. 2016). Hydrogeological investigation at the site for the WTP revealed layers of organic clay and clay encountered down to depths of approximately 9.0 to 12.2 m below grade from two test holes (Amec Foster Wheeler 2017). This clay provides a layer of low permeability material and therefore the groundwater is considered as having low potential for contamination from surface
lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx 6.5 ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Description of Environmental Effects of the Proposed Development and Mitigation Measures March 26, 2018
activities. Groundwater depth after drilling in the two test holes at the WTP site ranged from 12.2 to 13.1 m below grade (Amec Foster Wheeler 2017).
For the new WTP, the groundwater aquifer source appears to be a highly transmissive one with high head conditions and a large local recharge area (i.e., consisting of the upland glacial feature north of the runway). New watermains will be extended to the WTP via underground water pipeline from two groundwater production wells installed at the site. The potable water demand is estimated to be approximately 1.7 L/s (Stantec 2017a). TRAA will be required to obtain a Water Rights Licence from MSD for the WTP prior to commencement of operation. The WTP is not expected to change the local groundwater hydrogeologic regime, as the existing airport well has been in service for almost 50 years, with no negative consequences noted (Friesen Drillers Ltd. 2016). As such, the effects on groundwater quantity are anticipated to be negligible.
During WTP operations, reject water from the groundwater aquifer will be discharged to Birch Tree Lake via a new buried discharge pipeline on a continuous basis, subject to periodic shut down for maintenance purposes.
Mitigation
The WTP will be supplied with raw water from a suitable groundwater source identified in the groundwater study (Friesen Drillers Inc. 2016). Potential operational effects on groundwater quality will be mitigated through various treatment measures incorporated into the design and as approved by MSD.
There will be no pollutants directly released or disposed of on or into the ground either during construction or normal operations at the WTP site. Chemical storage tanks will be subject to proper engineering design and will be designed and constructed in accordance with appropriate regulations and guidelines. No potential adverse effects are anticipated from normal WTP operation on groundwater quality, flows and levels in the area.
Summary
After implementation of design mitigation measures, the residual effects on groundwater quantity at the WTP site are expected to be negligible in magnitude, extend to the LAA, long- term in duration, continuous, reversible, and occurring within a disturbed ecological context. Groundwater quality is considered to be quite good at the airport site having had little impact from local surface activities. No long-term progressive drawdown was noted at the site (Friesen Drillers Ltd. 2016). As such, the potential residual effects on groundwater quantity and quality are considered not significant.
6.6 lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Description of Environmental Effects of the Proposed Development and Mitigation Measures March 26, 2018
6.1.4 Soil and Vegetation
During Project construction, soils could be disturbed by clearing and grading, soil loss due to erosion, and compaction associated with equipment operating at the site. Compaction of soils, if any, would be limited to the immediate cleared footprint for the Project and excavation activities associated building foundations.
The Project will disturb an area of approximately 480 m2 (16 m by 30 m) for the WTP (see Appendix A, Figure 1-2; Appendix B, Photo B1). The route for the reject water discharge pipeline will be directionally drilled and placed at a depth of 2.4 m over a distance of approximately 2.6 km along a path that has already been partially cleared. Placement of three maintenance manholes along the pipeline (one set back 30 m from the bank of Birch Tree Lake and two others at a high point along the pipeline) to allow for maintenance of the pipeline and the extension of the pipeline into the lake has the potential to disturb soils and vegetation at the sites. Disturbance of soils in the Project area will be reduced during construction by keeping heavy equipment operations limited to the project site, existing road right-of-way, and outside the emergent vegetation at the bank to the extent possible. Potential effects on soil are considered low given the small amount of equipment and quantity of fuel, lubricants and materials that would be present at the Project site.
Building construction will require clearing and grubbing and limited removal of treed vegetation for the footprint (approx. 0.03 ha or less). The amount of clearing and disturbance is small relative to the remaining adjacent wooded areas surrounding the Project site. New road access will be provided to the new WTP as part of new parking lot development for the new airport terminal building. For the discharge pipeline route, proposed construction will utilize directional drill methods and will be located within tree covered airport lands and along a grass and shrub covered existing road right-of-way (PR 391) to the discharge point at the bank of Birch Tree Lake. Disturbance of emergent/riparian vegetation at the bank will be avoided by the extension of the pipeline into the lake via directional drill.
A request submitted to MBCDC for existing records of vegetation species of conservation concern indicated no records of such species existed in the Project area (MBCDC Coordinator pers. comm. 2017). No protected native vegetation species are expected to be directly affected by the Project given the nature of the Project area.
Mitigation
Potential Project effects on soil and vegetation from construction will be mitigated by implementing the following measures:
• limiting construction equipment and vehicle movements to designated roads and pathways within and around work areas
lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx 6.7 ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Description of Environmental Effects of the Proposed Development and Mitigation Measures March 26, 2018
• reducing disturbed/exposed areas and rehabilitating areas as soon as practical where required
• stripping and stockpiling topsoil on the Project site for use in site restoration
• making repair to areas where equipment has compacted soils, if any
• using horizontal directional drilling
The area to be developed is largely located in a clearing or a disturbed road right-of-way, with open grassed and shrub areas on the margins and emergent vegetation along Birch Tree Lake. Limited clearing of woody vegetation cover will be required for the new plant (approx. 0.03 ha or less).
The operational phase of the Project is not anticipated to have adverse effects on soil and vegetation.
Summary
After implementation of design mitigation measures, the residual effects on soil and vegetation at the WTP site and the associated discharge pipeline are expected to be negligible in magnitude, limited to the PDA, long-term in duration, continuous, reversible, and occurring within a disturbed ecological context. As such, the potential residual effect on soil and vegetation is considered not significant.
6.1.5 Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat
There is a potential for ground disturbance activities, such as clearing, stripping, pile driving, and excavating, to disturb breeding wildlife, including nesting birds. There is also potential to affect habitat from the installation of the discharge pipeline from the WTP to the discharge point via directional drill and excavation methods where the discharge pipe and maintenance manhole are to be installed.
A request submitted to MBCDC for existing recorded observations of species of conservation concern and a search of the Manitoba Herps Atlas (Manitoba Herps Atlas 2017), and eBird (eBird 2017) revealed records of 11 SOCC that have been observed within the RAA. Suitable habitat for the SOCC listed in Table 4-4, with the exception of the American White Pelican, exists in the LAA and each SOCC may occur in the RAA. The WTP site to a large extent is already disturbed and located within a clearing (i.e., the new airport terminal building parking lot). In addition, the WTP site is adjacent to an existing construction site, bordered by existing roads, and is located at the province’s second busiest airport. Furthermore, the discharge pipe will be installed using direction drill methods and will predominantly be located within an existing highway road right-of-way. Given the nature of the Project area, no protected wildlife species are expected to be directly affected.
6.8 lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Description of Environmental Effects of the Proposed Development and Mitigation Measures March 26, 2018
Mitigation
Effects to wildlife habitat will be limited to the immediate construction area vicinity associated with soil and vegetation disturbance. Other effects resulting from dust or exhaust will be reduced as previously indicated. Incremental noise disturbance will be negligible as the construction area is located at an active airport and along an existing road right-of-way.
Project construction is anticipated to occur over the period of July 2018 to January 2019. Given the previously cleared and disturbed nature of the WTP site and the method of pipeline installation to be employed (directional drilling), Project-related disturbance activities from vegetation clearing or ground disturbance to wildlife and wildlife habitat will be negligible. Effects can be further reduced by avoiding the sensitive breeding window for migratory bird wildlife species (including bird SOCC) – mid-April to end of August (Environment and Climate Change Canada 2017). If ground disturbance/clearing must be undertaken during the sensitive nesting period, a pre-construction nest survey will be conducted by a qualified biologist to locate and buffer active bird nests to the extent possible.
Construction workers should also be aware of the potential for amphibian species to be present in the Project area; they will be required to report sightings and take caution to avoid harming a sensitive species. The area to be developed is currently a disturbed road right-of-way with open grassed and shrub areas and emergent/riparian vegetation on the margins. Limited clearing of woody vegetation cover will be required for the new plant (approx. 0.03 ha or less).
Summary
With implementation of the mitigation measures identified above, the potential residual effect to wildlife is anticipated to be negligible in magnitude, limited to the PDA/LAA, short-term and reversible, and occurring within a disturbed ecological context. No further operational effects on wildlife are expected once the plant and pipeline are commissioned. As such, residual effects are considered not significant.
6.1.6 Fish and Fish Habitat
Potential effects on fish and fish habitat are related to the deposition of sediment from construction activities (i.e., blown dust, exposed surface runoff), construction of the outfall in Birch Tree Lake, and from reject water discharge into a surface water body utilized by fish.
The likelihood of erosion/deposition from WTP construction activities or a spill/leak at the site directly affecting fish bearing water bodies is considered low given the distance between the Project site and Birch Tree Lake. Prior to construction, silt fences will be installed at the Project site to reduce erosion and deposition off-site.
The discharge pipe is to be placed 2.4 m below grade via directional drill with a screened discharge pipe diffuser end-point (possibly at a 90-degree angle and weighted with concrete
lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx 6.9 ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Description of Environmental Effects of the Proposed Development and Mitigation Measures March 26, 2018
ballast blocks). There is potential for effects on fish habitat from the placement of the outfall into Birch Tree Lake and from directional drilling to Birch Tree Lake as well as in-water installation work. The discharge end will be located approximately 285 m into Birch Tree Lake in a zone of maximum depth (i.e., 3 metres) to enhance the extent of effluent mixing within Birch Tree Lake.
The proposed treatment process and discharge of reject water to Birch Tree Lake has been designed to meet the CCME criteria for unionized ammonia (see Section 6.1.2) at the point of discharge to the lake. During the operations period, effects to fish and fish habitat will be met at the end of the mixing zone in Birch Tree Lake.
Mitigation
The construction specifications will require that the Contractor implement beneficial management practices to reduce soil and contaminant runoff, implement erosion control measures such as silt fences during work activities, and implement measures to avoid/reduce effects on surface water (see Section 6.1.2). Directional drilling into the lake will necessitate the placement of a silt curtain along the affected area to contain silt in the isolated area, to the extent practical. The DFO restricted activity timing windows for fish species in northern Manitoba extend from April 15 to July 15 (for spring and summer spawners) and from September 1 to May 15 (for fall spawners) (Fisheries and Oceans Canada 2013). The period for avoiding In-water work would extend from September 1 to July 15 of any given year. Should the discharge pipeline and outfall be constructed in the winter months over the fall spawning period, measures will be implemented to mitigate working in water related to the protection of fish and fish habitat as determined through the DFO self-assessment and Request for Review process, including the following:
• conducting in-stream work during period of low flow, or allowing excavation work to be isolated from flows with installation of a silt curtain
• implementing in-water activities, or associated in-water structures, so as not to interfere with fish passage, or result in stranding or death of fish
• screening the outlet pipe in accordance with guidelines to avoid entrainment or impingement of fish (DFO Freshwater Intake End-of- Pipe Fish Screen Guideline 1995)
Summary
The potential residual project effects are expected to result in an adverse effect to fish and fish habitat with the reject water discharge from the new WTP. The effect is expected to be negligible to low in magnitude (depending on the concentrate parameter of concern) and anticipated to affect water quality and fish habitat in the immediate LAA. The change will be long-term in duration, and continuous, occurring within a disturbed ecological context but will meet federal and provincial guidelines for water quality. As such, residual effects on fish and fish habitat are considered not significant.
6.10 lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Accidents and Malfunctions March 26, 2018
7.0 Accidents and Malfunctions
7.1 GENERAL
The effects of accidents and malfunctions for the Project are primarily related to the potential for mechanical equipment failure, fire/explosion, fuel or other chemical spills, and transportation accidents. The following sections outline the potential effects from accidents and malfunctions and the measures proposed to avoid accidents and malfunctions.
An Emergency Response Plan for the new operation will be developed as part of the expanded TRA. The plant’s critical infrastructure will have both duty, standby, and backup equipment (i.e., pumps, power generator). Practices at the Project site will be performed in accordance with The Workplace Safety and Health Act, which will serve to reduce the potential effects on health and safety. Personal protective equipment and safety equipment will be provided for employee(s) working in the facility, where required.
7.1.1 Scenarios
7.1.1.1 Fire/Explosion
During construction and operation, there is the potential for a fire at the Project site involving mechanical equipment and fuels. Effects related to fires include: harm to on-site personnel, damage to equipment and property, and the potential release of contaminants and hazardous materials. The plant includes a backup generator that is fueled by a diesel fuel source.
There is also the potential for explosions associated with chemical storage at the site (i.e., sodium hydroxide, sodium hypochlorite, cleaning in place [CIP] chemical) if an accident were to happen. The design of the chemical storage area for the provision of required chemicals will be in accordance with applicable regulations and guidelines.
Precautions and mitigative actions will be taken to avoid fire hazards at the Project site, such as removing flammable waste and combustible materials, and the proper storage and handling of potentially hazardous materials and chemicals.
7.1.1.2 Spills
During construction and operation, there is potential for environmental effects due to fuel and chemical spills and/or leaks of lubricants from equipment and activities at the Project site. Accidents could result in the release of hazardous materials and/or equipment fluids or fuels from equipment or vehicles and chemical spills from improper storage and handling procedures and from equipment failure. As a result of spills, effects on air quality, surface water drainage, surface water, groundwater quality, soil degradation, fish and fish habitat, and human health and safety are possible.
7.1 lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Accidents and Malfunctions March 26, 2018
Adherence to standard environmental protection practices will reduce the risk and adverse effects associated with accidental spills or leaks. Provincial regulations related to chemical storage, spill containment, and requirements respecting the storage, handling and transport of dangerous goods and hazardous wastes will also be adhered to. Emergency response plans, procedures and equipment will also address the potential for accidental release of fuel, chemicals or other hazardous materials and will serve to reduce the potential effects.
7.1.1.2.1 Construction
Potential effects resulting from spills occurring during the construction phase are anticipated to be irregular and short-term in duration. A spill, if it were to occur, would predominantly be contained within the Project site; the magnitude of a spill effect could range from negligible to moderate and would depend on the size and nature of the spill.
Surface water and near-surface groundwater has the potential to be affected by the accidental release of contaminants and improper storage and disposal of construction wastes generated on-site and via runoff from the site, and from potential spills during directional drilling to the lake. An emergency spill kit capable of remediating small accidental spills, leaks or releases will be maintained on the Project site during construction.
Groundwater quality has the potential to be affected by the accidental release of contaminants from construction equipment and improper storage and disposal of construction wastes generated on-site.
There is also the potential for soils to be contaminated due to accidental spills, leaks or releases of fuels, lubricants or other materials from construction equipment and activities or improper storage at the Project site. Potential effects on soil are considered low given the small amount of equipment and quantity of fuel, lubricants and materials that would be present at the PDA. The low permeability clay soils at the WTP site will limit contaminant migration to groundwater.
Storage and handling of potential contaminants or hazardous materials will be in accordance with established guidelines, regulations, standards, and protocols. Petroleum leaks or spills will be mitigated by use of properly maintained equipment, use of spill cleanup equipment and materials, and use of appropriate fueling equipment. The General Contractor will be responsible for maintaining an Emergency Response Plan that can be implemented immediately in the event of a major spill. In the event of a reportable spill, Manitoba Sustainable Development will be notified through the emergency response line and appropriate measures will be taken according to MSD requirements. Improper storage or spills, leaks or accidental releases of pollutants and/or hazardous substances and chemicals can adversely affect fish and fish habitat at the pipeline/outfall construction site. A 100 m setback to watercourses will be maintained for all fueling and servicing activities.
7.2 lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Accidents and Malfunctions March 26, 2018
7.1.1.2.2 Operation
The delivery, storage and use of chemicals (i.e., sodium hydroxide, sodium hypochlorite, CIP chemical) for the chemical feed system has the potential to affect surface water if an accidental spill were to happen. The design of the chemical storage area for the provision of required chemicals will be in accordance with applicable regulations and guidelines.
Operation of the TRAA WTP will utilize various quantities of potentially hazardous materials (i.e., chemicals). Improper storage or spills, leaks or accidental releases can adversely affect the soil at the Project site. Process, equipment, or pipeline failures may release partially treated groundwater that could affect soil and groundwater quality. It is expected that engineering design of processes meeting applicable codes of practice and equipment standards will mitigate the potential for these effects.
In addition, the delivery, storage and use of chemicals could affect soil and groundwater if an accidental release was to occur. Given the layer of clay ranging from 9.0 m to 12.2 m below grade and the groundwater depth (12.2 m to 13.1 m) at the WTP site, the potential adverse effects from an accidental release would be low in magnitude, short to medium-term, reversible, and limited to the PDA.
During the operations phase, the regular inspection and maintenance of vehicles and plant equipment would serve to reduce the risk of spills occurring at the site.
7.1.1.2.3 Equipment Failure
Equipment malfunctions related to pump and pipe failures could occur resulting in the release of chemicals or raw or partially treated groundwater to the environment. New pumps and distribution flow piping for the WTP will be tested prior to operation to assess for potential issues or leaks. Regular inspection of accessible pipes and pumps will be conducted by WTP personnel. It is expected that adherence to engineering design of processes meeting applicable codes of practice and equipment standards will mitigate the potential for these effects.
7.1.1.3 Transportation Accidents
Transportation accidents can result in the release of vehicle fluids to the environment (i.e., diesel, gasoline, oils, etc.) and the materials the vehicles were transporting (i.e., sodium hydroxide, sodium hypochlorite, CIP chemical). Effects related to such releases can include air, soil, and surface water quality effects with potential for subsequent effects on the environment and human health.
During the construction phase, there will be an increase in the number of vehicles travelling to and from the Project site with construction equipment and associated materials. The potential for an increase in vehicle traffic along PR 391 over existing levels that could lead to transportation accidents is anticipated to be negligible. Operational traffic at the WTP site (i.e.,
lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx 7.3 ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Accidents and Malfunctions March 26, 2018
deliveries) operates at slow speeds to reduce the potential for on-site transportation accidents. The WTP will utilize appropriately qualified drivers, and/or appropriately qualified companies, to transport materials and products to and from the site to reduce the potential for transportation risks.
7.1.2 Mitigation Measures
Measures to avoid or reduce potential adverse effects associated with fire/explosion, spills, equipment failure, and transportation accidents are as follows:
• Flammable waste and combustible materials (i.e., greasy/oily rags) will be removed on a regular basis and disposed of at an appropriate licensed disposal facility.
• Appropriate fire extinguishers will be available on-site during operations and are maintained to manufacturer’s standards.
• Potentially hazardous materials and chemicals will be stored and handled at dedicated areas and labelled in accordance with applicable regulatory requirements.
• Hazardous materials will be transported in accordance with the Dangerous Goods Handling and Transportation Act and used according to product-use instructions.
• Regular waste materials will be deposited and stored in appropriate containers and removed from the site on a regular basis for disposal at an appropriate facility.
• Refueling of vehicles and equipment will adhere to proper procedures and will use designated refueling areas or will be refueled off-site.
• Emergency spill kits will be maintained on-site and staff will be trained to properly deploy spill kit materials and cleanup spills.
• Vehicles and equipment will be maintained to reduce leaks. Regular inspections of hydraulic and fuel systems on equipment and machinery will be undertaken by the Contractor on a routine basis. Leaks detected will be repaired immediately by trained personnel.
• Chemical transfers for the chemical feed system from delivery vehicles to the chemical storage area and from the storage area to process equipment will be monitored.
• Pump equipment, pipelines and the discharge pipe will be regularly inspected by qualified personnel.
• Existing traffic control measures (i.e., speed limits, signage) will be adhered to.
7.4 lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Accidents and Malfunctions March 26, 2018
• The TRAA will maintain a Safety and Health Program which includes policies related to emergency preparedness and response plan, workplace hazardous materials information system (WHMIS) and spill response procedures during WTP operation.
7.1.3 Summary
To reduce the likelihood and severity of accidents and malfunctions, the operation of the WTP will be conducted in accordance with regulatory requirements. The implementation of, and adherence to, measures outlined in an Emergency Response Plan to mitigate potential effects related to accidents and malfunctions will serve to reduce the likelihood of these events occurring. As such, the residual effects are considered to be not significant.
lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx 7.5
ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Follow-Up Plans and Monitoring March 26, 2018
8.0 Follow-Up Plans and Monitoring
Applicable warranties will be applied to the operation and performance of structures, equipment and process components related to the WTP and associated works. Following commissioning and acceptance testing, monitoring will occur to evaluate that the potable water and reject water concentrate quality meets the appropriate requirements.
The WTP will be operated by certified operators (currently engaged or new hire) by the owner. Specific training for the proposed plant operation and maintenance will be provided during start-up and commissioning. This includes plant optimization, plant monitoring, and laboratory techniques to monitor day-to-day treatment operations for meeting the water quality and treatment requirements.
The proposed RO process for the WTP is an established treatment system with numerous similar installations in Manitoba (e.g., Grand Rapids, Rivers, Roblin). As a part of this project, a plant operation and management manual will be prepared by TRAA which will outline maintenance requirements, detailed process operations, troubleshooting and testing requirements. Safety equipment will be provided for use by the operations staff.
Processes related to water treatment are well known and the environmental effects are similarly well understood. As such, follow-up and monitoring is not required outside of anticipated typical monitoring and reporting requirements for the operation of the WTP.
Follow-up may be required with DFO in terms of a Self-Assessment or Request for Review with respect to in-water work for the discharge pipeline. Monitoring requirements during the installation of the discharge pipeline and outfall into Birch Tree Lake (e.g., turbidity monitoring) will be determined through the DFO assessment process.
8.1 lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx
ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Conclusion March 26, 2018
9.0 Conclusion
The potential adverse residual environmental effects related to the proposed WTP and reject water pipeline for the TRA were found to be negligible to low in magnitude for normal operations and negligible to moderate in magnitude in the event of accidents and/or malfunctions. The WTP Project will result in an improvement to the water supply, treatment, and water quality to meet current operational requirements of the airport and meet the anticipated target design criteria for the groundwater source and reject concentrate for the facility.
Based on the studies undertaken for the TRA WTP Project and information available to date as presented in this report, the adverse residual effects of the Project are expected to be not significant.
9.1 lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx
ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
References March 26, 2018
10.0 References
Amec Foster Wheeler Environment and Infrastructure. 2017. Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Proposed South Ridge Air Terminal Building, Water Treatment Plant and Parking Thompson Airport Thompson, Manitoba. File #WX18155. Prepared for Thompson Regional Airport Authority. Winnipeg, MB.
Betcher, R., G. Grove and C. Pupp. 1995. Groundwater in Manitoba: Hydrogeology, Quality Concerns, Management. NHRI Contribution No. CS-93017. Environmental Sciences Division, National Hydrology Research Institute, Environment Canada. Saskatoon, SK.
Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment. 2002. Canadian Environmental Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life: Inorganic Fluorides. In: Canadian environmental quality guidelines, 1999, Canadian Council of Minister of the Environment. Winnipeg, MB.
Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment. 2010. Canadian Environmental Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life: Ammonia. In: Canadian environmental quality guidelines, 1999, Canadian Council of Minister of the Environment. Winnipeg, MB.
City of Thompson. 2013. City of Thompson Zoning By-law 1891-2012. Prepared by rePlan for the City of Thompson. Thompson, MB.
City of Thompson. 2016a. Annual Water Distribution Report 2016. Thompson, MB. Available at: http://www.thompson.ca/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=1975. Accessed August 1, 2017.
City of Thompson. 2016b. Business in Focus Magazine. Available at: http://www.businessinfocusmagazine.com/brochures/BIFNAMay2016/BIFNA_May2016_brochure _CityThompson/#?page=0. Accessed July 31, 2017.
City of Thompson. 2017a. Outdoor Facilities and Parks. Available at: http://www.thompson.ca/index.aspx?page=117. Accessed July 31, 2017.
City of Thompson. 2017b. Local Improvement Plan for the Design and Build of New Waste Water Treatment Facility in the City of Thompson. Available at: http://www.thompson.ca/index.aspx?page=461. Accessed August 1, 2017.
Department of Fisheries and Oceans. 1995. Freshwater Intake End-of-Pipe Fish Screen Guideline. Catalogue No. Fs 23-270 / 1995E. Published by Communications Directorate, Department of Fisheries and Oceans. Ottawa, ON. eBird. 2017. Species Maps. Accessed from: http://ebird.org/content/ebird/ [accessed August 28, 2017].
10.1 lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
References March 26, 2018
Environment Canada. 2011. Scientific Assessment to Support the Identification of Critical Habitat for Woodland Caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou), Boreal Population, in Canada. Ottawa, ON. 115 pp plus Appendices.
Environment and Climate Change Canada. 2017a. 1981 to 2010 Canadian Climate Normals Station Data, Thompson Airport, Manitoba. Available at: http://climate.weather.gc.ca/climate_normals/results_1981_2010_e.html?searchType=stnProv&ls tProvince=MB&txtCentralLatMin=0&txtCentralLatSec=0&txtCentralLongMin=0&txtCentralLongSe c=0&stnID=3905&dispBack=0. Accessed July 27, 2017.
Environment and Climate Change Canada. 2017b. General Nesting Periods of Migratory Birds in Canada. Accessed from: https://www.ec.gc.ca/paom-itmb/default.asp?lang=En&n=4F39A78F- 1#_04 [August 30, 2017].
Fisheries and Oceans Canada. 2005. Wuskwatim Generation project Canadian Environmental Assessment Act Comprehensive Study Report. Available at: https://www.ceaa- acee.gc.ca/F4F1CD30-5D73-47F3-9428-06D1A75EF4C7/csr-draft_e.pdf. Accessed September 2017.
Fisheries and Oceans Canada. 2013. Manitoba Restricted Activity Timing Windows for the Protection of Fish and Fish Habitat. Available at: http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/pnw-ppe/timing- periodes/mb-eng.html. Accessed November 14, 2017.
Friesen Drillers Ltd. 2016. Groundwater Investigation for Water Supply and Fire Prevention – Specific Parcels and Lots within 32/33 of Township 78 in Range 3 WPM – Local Government District of Mystery Lake, Manitoba. Prepared for Thompson Regional Airport Authority (c/o 4033515 Manitoba Ltd. Steinbach, MB.
Government of Canada 2016. Lake Sturgeon (Nelson River populations) Acipenser fulvescens. Fisheries and Oceans Canada. Available at: http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/species- especes/profiles-profils/sturgeon3-esturgeon-eng.html. Accessed March 14, 2018.
Government of Canada. 2017. Species at Risk Public Registry. Available at: http://www.sararegistry.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=En&n=24F7211B-1. Accessed September, 2017.
Groundwater Information Network. 2014. Water Wells – Canada, GIN Basic Map Viewer. Available at: http://gin.gw-info.net/service/api_ngwds:gin2/en/wmc/standard.html. Accessed August 2, 2017.
Local Government District of Mystery Lake. 1984. LGD of Mystery Zoning By-law No. 541. Prepared by The Municipal Planning Branch. Thompson, MB.
10.2 lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
References March 26, 2018
Manitoba Conservation Data Centre. 2016. Occurrence of Species by Ecoregion – Hayes River Upland. Manitoba Sustainable Development, Wildlife Branch. Winnipeg, MB. Available at: https://www.gov.mb.ca/sd/cdc/ecoreg/hayesriver.html. Accessed July 31, 2017.
Manitoba Conservation. 2005. Manitoba Ambient Air Quality Criteria (Updated July 2005). Available at: https://www.gov.mb.ca/conservation/envprograms/airquality/aq- criteria/ambientair_e.html. Accessed September 13, 2016.
Manitoba Conservation and Water Stewardship (MCWS). 1999. Province of Manitoba Forest Resource Inventory 1979-1999. Forestry Branch. Winnipeg, MB.
Manitoba Conservation and Water Stewardship (MCWS). 2013. Manitoba Air Quality Data – 2013 Annual Pollutant Summary – Continuous Monitoring. Environmental Programs and Strategies. Winnipeg, MB. Available at: https://www.gov.mb.ca/conservation/envprograms/airquality/pdf/2013_data_table.pdf. Accessed September 13, 2016.
Manitoba Conservation and Water Stewardship. 2014. GWDrill Database. Province of Manitoba, Groundwater Management, Water Science and Management Branch. Winnipeg, MB.
Manitoba Conservation and Water Stewardship. 2016. GWDrill Database. Province of Manitoba, Groundwater Management, Water Science and Management Branch. Winnipeg, MB.
Manitoba Energy and Mines. 1995. Bedrock Geology Compilation Map Series, Sipiwesk, NTS 63p, 1:250,000. Mines Branch. Winnipeg, MB.
Manitoba Highways and Transportation. 1997. Province of Manitoba Provincial Road Functional Classification Map. Systems Planning and Development Branch. Winnipeg, MB.
Manitoba Hydro. 2015. Regional Cumulative Effects Assessment – Manitoba Hydro Development on the Churchill, Burntwood and Nelson River Systems: Phase II Report. Winnipeg, MB.
Manitoba Infrastructure and University of Manitoba Transport Information Group. 2017. Traffic on Manitoba Highways – 2016. Manitoba Highway Traffic Information System. Winnipeg, MB.
Manitoba Infrastructure. 2017. Truck Weight Limit Map and Information Guide. Available at: http://www.gov.mb.ca/mit/mcd/mcpd/twlm.html. Accessed August 25, 2017.
Manitoba Mineral Resources. 2017. Mines (Regulatory)/Geoscience, GIS Map Gallery, Mining and Quarrying. Available at: http://www.gov.mb.ca/iem/geo/gis/index.html. Accessed July 26, 2017.
Manitoba Sport, Culture and Heritage. n.d. Municipal Heritage Sites. Historic Resources Branch. Available at: https://www.gov.mb.ca/chc/hrb/mun/index.html. Accessed August 28, 2017.
lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx 10.3 ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
References March 26, 2018
Manitoba Sport, Culture and Heritage. 2017. Archaeological Sites Inventory Database. Historic Resources Branch. Winnipeg, MB.
Manitoba Sustainable Development. 2016. 2015 Provincial Summary Report – Achievement Status on the Canadian Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) for Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) and Ozone. Air Quality Management Branch. Winnipeg, MB.
Manitoba Sustainable Development. 2017a. Public Waters Systems Data – Systems Open Year Round, 2015. Public Water System Data Portal. Water Stewardship Division. Available at: http://www.gov.mb.ca/conservation/waterstewardship/odw/public-info/general- info/compliance_data/year_rnd_pws_may_29_2015.pdf. Accessed July 31, 2017.
Manitoba Sustainable Development. 2017b. Species At Risk. Wildlife Branch. Winnipeg MB. Available at: http://www.manitoba.ca/conservation/wildlife/sar/sarlist.html. Accessed July 31, 2017.
Manitoba Water Stewardship. 2011. Manitoba Water Quality Standards, Objectives, and Guidelines. Report 2011-01. Water Science and Management Branch. Winnipeg, MB.
Matile, G.L.D. and G.R. Keller. 2006. Surficial Geology of the Sipiwesk Map Sheet (NTS 63P), Manitoba. Surficial Geology Compilation Map Series, SG-63P, 1:250,000. Manitoba Science, Technology, Energy and Mines, Manitoba Geological Survey. Winnipeg, MB.
Mussio Ventures Ltd. 2015. Backroads Mapbook Manitoba, 2nd Edition. Coquitlam, BC.
Natural Resources Canada. 2000. Canadian Land Cover, circa 2000 (Vector). GeoBase Series. Available at: http://open.canada.ca/data/en/dataset/97126362-5a85-4fe0-9dc2- 915464cfdbb7. Accessed July 31, 2017.
NatureNorth. 2017. The Manitoba Herps Atlas. Available at: http://www.naturenorth.com/Herps/MHA_Data.html. Accessed August 28, 2017.
North/South Consultants Inc. 2010. Bipole III Transmission Project: Existing Aquatic Environment. Prepared for Manitoba Hydro. Winnipeg, MB.
Smith, R.E., H. Veldhuis, G.F. Mills, R.G. Eilers, W.R. Fraser, and G.W. Lelyk. 1998. Terrestrial Ecozones, Ecoregions, and Ecodistricts of Manitoba: an ecological stratification of Manitoba’s Natural Landscapes. Research Branch Technical Bulletin 1998-9E. Land Resource Unit, Brandon Research Centre, Research Branch, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Winnipeg, Manitoba. Report and map at 1:1,500,000 scale.
Stantec Consulting Ltd. 2016. Thompson Airport – Water Use Calculations (unpublished). Winnipeg, MB.
10.4 lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
References March 26, 2018
Stantec Consulting Ltd. 2017a. Thompson Regional Airport Authority – Water Treatment Plant and Associated Infrastructure Feasibility Study. Revision 6. Winnipeg, MB.
Stantec Consulting Ltd. 2017b. Thompson Regional Airport Authority Water Treatment Plant – Preliminary Design Report (Draft). Prepared for Thompson Regional Airport Authority. Winnipeg, MB.
Statistics Canada. 2016. Census Profile, City of Thompson, Manitoba, 2016. Available at: http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2016/dp- pd/prof/details/page.cfm?Lang=E&Geo1=CSD&Code1=4622026&Geo2=PR&Code2=46&Data= Count&SearchText=Thompson&SearchType=Begins&SearchPR=01&B1=All&GeoLevel=PR&GeoC ode=4622026&TABID=1. Accessed July 27, 2017.
Stewart, K.W. and D.A. Watkinson. 2004. Freshwater Fishes of Manitoba. University of Manitoba Press. Winnipeg, MB.
The L.G.D. of Mystery Lake. 1984. Local Government District of Mystery Lake Zoning By-law No. 541. Prepared by the Municipal Planning Branch. Thompson, MB.
The Thompson Economic Diversification Working Group. 2013. Economic Development Action Plan – Final Report March 2013. Supported by rePlan. Thompson, MB.
Thompson Planning District. 2013. Thompson Planning District Development Plan By-law 42-2012. Prepared by rePlan for the Thompson Planning District. Thompson, MB.
VALE. 2014. City of Thompson Public Water System Annual Report – 2014. Thompson, MB. Available at: http://www.thompson.ca/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=1216. Accessed August 1, 2017.
10.1 PERSONAL COMMUNICATION
Cote, Holly. Municipal Heritage Consultant, Historic Resources Branch. Memo to K. David McLeod, Stantec Consulting Ltd., Senior Archaeologist. Thompson Regional Airport Authority Water Treatment Plant, HRB File AAS-17-12232. Dated September 25, 2017. Winnipeg, MB.
Friesen, Chris. 2017. Coordinator, Manitoba Conservation Data Centre. Email correspondence with Angele Watrin-Prodaehl, Stantec Consulting Ltd. September 5, 2017.
McLean, Heather. 2017. Heritage Resources Registrar, Historical Assessment Services, Historic Resources Branch. Archaeological Sites – Thompson Airport. Email correspondence with K. David McLeod, Stantec Consulting Ltd. Winnipeg, MB.
lf \\cd1045-f03\workgroup\1114\active\111216830\eap_report\noa_final_report\rpt_traa_wtp_eap_final_20180326.docx 10.5
ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Appendix A Figures and Drawings March 26, 2018
Figures and Drawings
A.1
N
PROPOSED WTP fig4.2
ACCESS ROAD
2.29 12.95
0.91 10.82 0.00
0.91 3.81 WB-50 meters Tractor Width : 2.44 Lock to Lock Time : 6.0 Trailer Width : 2.59 Steering Angle : 17.8 Tractor Track : 2.44 Articulating Angle : 70.0 Trailer Track : 2.59 Ramnarace, Kesh Ramnarace, By:
August, 2017 111216830 V:\1112\active\111216830\0300_drawing\0301_sketches\preliminary_design\16830_fig-4.2.dwg 2018/01/12 4:07 PM 2018/01/12 Client/Project Legend Notes THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT PRELIMINARY DESIGN Figure No. Stantec Consulting Ltd. 4.2 Suite 500, 311 Portage Avenue Title Winnipeg MB Canada R3B 2B9 SITE PLAN Tel. 204.489.5900 Fax. 204.453.9012 (TRANSPORT TRUCK) www.stantec.com
1 2 3 4 5
N
Stantec Consulting Ltd. Suite 500, 311 Portage Avenue Winnipeg MB CanadaR3B 2B9 Tel. 204.489.5900Fax.204.453.9012 www.stantec.com Copyright Reserved The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DO NOT scale the D drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported to Stantec without delay. The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of Stantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than that authorized by Stantec is forbidden. Notes
EXISTING LEGEND PROPOSED FORCEMAIN HYDRO POLE CULVERT HYDRO M.T.S. ASPHALT ROAD BUILDING N DRIVEWAY / PARKING PROPERTY LINE SURVEY BAR DITCH ELEVATION GUY C FENCE TREE
7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Revision By Appd. YYYY.MM.DD G F E D C B A FOR 66% REVIEW JB JB 2018.02.09 Issued By Appd. YYYY.MM.DD
File Name:16830c-103-910 SG JB SB 2018.01.18 Dwn. Dsgn. Chkd. YYYY.MM.DD
Permit/Seal B ENGINEERS GEOSCIENTISTS N MANITOBA Certificate of Authorization Stantec Consulting Ltd. No. 1301
Client/Project Logo
C-103 Client/Project
THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY
WATER TREATMENT PLANT AND ASSOCIATED WORKS A Thompson MB, Canada
Title P.R. 391 - 75 Ø FM LINE OUTFALL (STA.1+30) TO STA.18+50
Goel, Siloni Project No. Scale By: 111216830 Revision Sheet Drawing No. 0 ----of__ V:\1112\active\111216830\0300_drawing\0302_sheet_files\02_civil\16830c-103-910.dwg 2018/02/02 4:09 PM C-103 ORIGINAL SHEET - ISO A1 (594x841) v1801 - REVIT
1 2 3 4 5
N
Stantec Consulting Ltd. Suite 500, 311 Portage Avenue Winnipeg MB CanadaR3B 2B9 Tel. 204.489.5900Fax.204.453.9012 www.stantec.com Copyright Reserved The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DO NOT scale the D drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported to Stantec without delay. The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of Stantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than that authorized by Stantec is forbidden. Notes
EXISTING LEGEND PROPOSED WATERMAIN HYDRANT VALVE CURB STOP FORCEMAIN RAW WATER MANHOLE CATCH BASIN HYDRO POLE CULVERT GAS HYDRO M.T.S. GRAVEL ROAD C BUILDING DRIVEWAY / PARKING PROPERTY LINE SURVEY BAR DITCH ELEVATION
7 6 5 4 3 N 2 1 Revision By Appd. YYYY.MM.DD G F E D C B A FOR 66% REVIEW JB JB 2018.02.09 Issued By Appd. YYYY.MM.DD
File Name:16830c-104-910 SG JB SB 2018.01.18 Dwn. Dsgn. Chkd. YYYY.MM.DD
Permit/Seal B ENGINEERS GEOSCIENTISTS MANITOBA Certificate of Authorization Stantec Consulting Ltd. No. 1301
Client/Project Logo
C-104 Client/Project
THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY
WATER TREATMENT PLANT AND ASSOCIATED WORKS A Thompson MB, Canada
Title
PROPOSED WTP 75Ø FM, 300Ø WM AND 75Ø RW LINES
Goel, Siloni Project No. Scale By: 111216830 Revision Sheet Drawing No. 0 ----of__ V:\1112\active\111216830\0300_drawing\0302_sheet_files\02_civil\16830c-104-910.dwg 2018/02/02 4:12 PM C-104 ORIGINAL SHEET - ISO A1 (594x841) v1801 - REVIT
1 2 3
Stantec Consulting Ltd. Suite 500, 311 Portage Avenue Winnipeg MB Canada R3B 2B9 Tel. 204.489.5900 Fax. 204.453.9012 www.stantec.com Copyright Reserved The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DO NOT scale the D drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported to Stantec without delay. The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of Stantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than that authorized by Stantec is forbidden. Notes
EXISTING LEGEND PROPOSED VALVE FORCEMAIN MANHOLE CATCH BASIN HYDRO POLE N CULVERT ALL GAS WORK TO BE DONE IN CONFORMANCE WITH MANITOBA STREAM CROSSING HYDRO GUIDELINES FOR THE PROTECTION OF FISH AND FISH HABITAT. M.T.S. ROAD LAKE. BUILDING DRIVEWAY / PARKING PROPERTY LINE C SURVEY BAR DITCH LAKE. ELEVATION TREE
7 6 5 LAKE. 4 3 2 1 Revision By Appd. YYYY.MM.DD G F E D C B A FOR 66% REVIEW JB JB 2018.02.09 Issued By Appd. YYYY.MM.DD
File Name: 16830c-201-910 SG JB SB 2018.01.19 Dwn. Dsgn. Chkd. YYYY.MM.DD
Permit/Seal B ENGINEERS GEOSCIENTISTS MANITOBA
Client/Project Logo
Client/Project gC-201 THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY
WATER TREATMENT PLANT AND ASSOCIATED WORKS
A Thompson MB, Canada
Title 75Ø FM AND OUTFALL STRUCTURE DETAILS
Project No. Scale
M By: Ramnarace, Kesh 111216830 AS NOTED Revision Sheet Drawing No. 00 ---- of ____ V:\1112\active\111216830\0300_drawing\0302_sheet_files\02_civil\16830c-201-910.dw 2018/03/23 4:01 P C-201 ORIGINAL SHEET - ISO A1 (594x841) v1801 - REVIT
ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Appendix B Site Photos March 26, 2018
Site Photos
B.1
Photo B1: Looking southwest at proposed water treatment plant from parking lot cleared by TRAA on its property.
Photo B2: Looking southeast along south side of causeway (PR 391).
Photo B3: Existing culvert crossing south side of causeway (PR 391).
Photo B4: Looking northwest along PR 391 to causeway crossing and Birch Tree Lake (background and left)
Photo B5: Looking at small wetland south side of causeway (PR 391) to Birch Tree Lake.
Photo B6: Looking south to Birch Tree Lake from causeway (PR 391).
Photo B7: Looking southwest to Birch Tree Lake from causeway (PR 391).
Photo B8: Looking southeast along south side of causeway (Birch Tree Lake to right).
Photo B9: Looking northwest along causeway (PR 391) to Birch Tree Brook wetland area (north side).
ENVIRONMENT ACT PROPOSAL THOMPSON REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Appendix C Certificate of Title March 26, 2018
Certificate of Title
C.1