Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project

Attachment Letter from Mayor Rob Vagramov, City of Port Moody regarding Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project

• Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project
• Author: Administrator on behalf of Mayor Rob Vagramov, City of Port Moody
• Reference number: 50
• Submitted: 2020-10-01
• Project phase: Planning
• Please see attachment.
• Attachment included
• October 1, 2020 Email: david.mcgovern@canada.ca David McGovern President, Impact Assessment Agency of Canada 160 Elgin Street, 22nd Floor Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H3 To Mr. McGovern, On September 8, 2020 City of Port Moody Council passed a resolution (attachment 1) expressing support for the critical assessment outlined in the report from Richmond Council titled “Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project. Should the Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project move forward, the social and biological health of residents in British Columbia would be put into jeopardy by the proposed expansion of Fortis BC’s LNP pipeline, while delivering doubtful economic benefits. The City of Port Moody opposes this project for the following reasons: 1. Fortis states that additional work will be required to commission the marine jetty, should that project be approved (under separate environmental assessment). The City of Port Moody would expect that this additional work be detailed as part of this Project so potential, related issues can be fully assessed. 2. The City of Port Moody submitted a request to UBCM for a shoreline management strategy, to protect sensitive marine ecosystems in a coherent and collective fashion. The concept of the Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project would go against The Shoreline Management Strategy Project. 3. This Project does not align with Metro Vancouver's regional air quality objectives. The Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project will impact the region's air quality during construction and operation as volumes of contaminates enter the air stream. Being a municipality in Metro Vancouver’s air shed, we are concerned about the collective health this ...

Report

Attachment Madhur (TFN) to McGovern (IAAC) -- Substituted BC EA -- September 4, 2020

• Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project
• Author: Administrator on behalf of Tsawwassen First Nation
• Reference number: 49
• Submitted: 2020-09-04
• Project phase: Planning
• Participation notice: Public Notice - Public Comment Period & Virtual Open Houses
• Please see the attached submission.
• Attachment included
• Administration Office: 1926 Tsawwassen Drive, Tsawwassen, British Columbia V4M 4G2 Tel: (604) 943-2112 • Fax: (604) 943-9226 Website: tsawwassenfirstnation.com September 4, 2020 By email (david.mcgovern@canada.ca) Impact Assessment Agency of Canada 22nd Floor, Place Bell 160 Elgin Street Ottawa, ON K1A 0H3 Attention: David McGovern, President Dear Mr. McGovern: Re: Substituted Environmental Assessment for the Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project My name is Tejas Madhur, Manager of Policy and Intergovernmental Affairs and Government Services for Tsawwassen First Nation (“TFN” or “Tsawwassen”). I am writing regarding Associate Deputy Minister Kevin Jardine’s request for a substituted BC Environmental Assessment (“EA”) process for the Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project (the “Project”) proposed by Fortis BC (the “Proponent”). Part 1: Overview of TFN’s position TFN’s position is that it is acceptable for a substituted EA process to be used for the Project on the understanding that Canada will ensure the following: 1. The new provincial assessment process will apply to the Project and the standards of consultation and assessment of Project impacts will in no way be lower than current federal standards; 2. Canada will ensure that the methodology for assessing Project impacts to Treaty rights and culture in the assessment aligns with federal guidance and Tsawwassen- specific perspectives and values; 3. Canada will ensure that impacts to Treaty rights and TFN culture are not given a less rigorous assessment and that impacts to rights and culture are not viewed as subordinate to biophysical impacts; Administration Office: 1926 ...

Report

Attachment Remembering Hiroshima + Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project (#80496) and related LNG terminal and carrier traffic

• Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project
• Author: Administrator on behalf of Jim Ronback
• Reference number: 43
• Submitted: 2020-07-25
• Please see attached submission.
• Attachment included
• From: Sent: July 25, 2020 5:19:52 AM To: The Honourable John Wilkinson - Minister of Environment and Climate Change; The Honourable Carla Qualtrough - Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Disability Inclusion; BC Environmental Assessment Office (BCEAO); Tilbury LNG / GNL Tilbury (IAAC/AEIC); The Honourable John Horgan - Premier of BC; The Honourable George Heyman, Minister of Environment and Climate Change Strategy; Honourable Justin Trudeau Cc: Delta Optimist; Richmond News; Surrey mayor and Council; Mayor and Councillors of Delta; Richmond - MayorandCouncillors; Surrey mayor and Council; Ian Paton; West Coast Environmental Law; editor@thetyee.ca; Andrew Nikiforuk; Honourable Marc Garneau - Minister of Transport; Honourable Todd Stone Minister of Transportation; Honourable Marc Garneau - Minister of Transport; Carrie Brown - Manager – Environmental Programs - Port Metro Vancouver; Mayor and Council Vancouver; Mayor and Council of Burnaby Subject: Remembering Hiroshima + Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project (#80496) and related LNG terminal and carrier traffic Response requested: Yes Sensitivity: Normal To: The Honourable John Wilkinson, Minister of Environment and Climate Change, Jonathan.Wilkinson@parl.gc.ca , The Honourable Carla Qualtrough, Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Disability Inclusion Carla.Qualtrough@parl.gc.ca , BC Environmental Assessment Office (BCEAO) eaoinfo@gov.bc.ca , Impact Assessment Act Canada (IAAC) IAAC.TilburyLNG-GNLTilbury.AEIC@canada.ca , Honourable Justin Trudeau Trudeau.J@parl.gc.ca The Honourable John Horgan, Premier of B.C. premier@gov.bc.ca , The Honourable George Heyman, Minister of Environment and Climate Change Strategy ENV.Minister@gov.bc.ca ...

Attachment Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project (#80496)

• Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project
• Author: Administrator on behalf of Boundary Bay Conservation Committee
• Reference number: 37
• Submitted: 2020-07-17
• Please see attached.
• Attachment included
• 1 BOUNDARY BAY CONSERVATION COMMITTEE Box 1251, Delta, B.C. V4M 3T3 Contact: marytaitt@gmail.com July 16, 2020 The Honourable John Wilkinson, Minister of Environment and Climate Change The Honourable Carla Qualtrough, Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Disability Inclusion Cc: The Honourable John Horgan, Premier of B.C., Cc: The Honourable George Heyman, Minister of Environment and Climate Change Strategy Impact Assessment Act Canada (IAAC) BC Environmental Assessment Office (BCEAO) Email: IAAC.TilburyLNG-GNLTilbury.AEIC@canada.ca Email: eaoinfo@gov.bc.ca Re: Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project (#80496) Thank you for the opportunity to give input from the Boundary Bay Conservation Committee (BBCC) on the Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project. We have submitted comments on these projects by Fortis and WesPac on Tilbury Island in Delta over the last five years: to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA) and to BC Environmental Assessment Office (BCEAO). More recently on 17 May 2019, we wrote to both BCEAO and CEAA on the Federal Environmental Assessment of the WesPac Tilbury Marine Jetty (Registry #80105). We have not received any answers to the questions we have raised over the five years. Process: Members of the BBCC strongly object to: 1. The dangerous piecemealing of the reviews of these projects on Tilbury Island (Fortis - Phase 1 - the enormous LNG storage tank and huge infrastructure for the liquefaction production of LNG are nearly complete, the WesPac Tilbury Marine ...

Report

Attachment Tilbury Phase 2 LNG project

• Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project
• Author: Administrator on behalf of White Rock and Surrey Naturalists
• Reference number: 38
• Submitted: 2020-07-17
• Please see attached.
• Attachment included
• 16 July 2020 BC Environmental Assessment Office (BCEAO) Email: eaoinfo@gov.bc.ca Impact Assessment Act Canada (IAAC) Email: IAAC.TilburyLNG-GNLTilbury.AEIC@canada.ca The Honourable John Horgan, Premier of B.C., The Honourable George Heyman, Minister of Environment and Climate Change Strategy Cc: The Honourable John Wilkinson, Minister of Environment and Climate Change The Honourable Carla Qualtrough, Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Disability Inclusion Dear Sirs/Mesdames, Thank you for the opportunity to give input from the White Rock and Surrey Naturalists on the Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project. The White Rock and Surrey Naturalists, society whose members live in the region, are stakeholders within the Fraser River Estuary area and wish to register our concern over the current Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion project As the concerns over Global Warming grow attention to detail becomes increasingly important and necessary. WRSN concurs with other local environmentally focussed groups that a year ago experts worldwide said that the booming LNG industry could be as bad for the climate as coal and that LNG developments were on a collision course with the Paris Agreement. Of note are several factors: 1. Canada is warming at 2X the rate of most of the world; we must be responsible let alone mindful of global initiatives such as the Paris Agreement. 2. We must recognize that over a 20-year period methane is at least 84X worse than carbon dioxide as a global warming gas and 25X worse over ...

Report

Attachment Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project (#80496) and related LNG terminal and tanker traffic

• Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project
• Author: Administrator on behalf of Jim Ronback
• Reference number: 39
• Submitted: 2020-07-17
• Re: Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project (#80496) and related LNG terminal and tanker traffic This LNG project must not be located along the Fraser River. The location of this proposed expanded liquefaction and storage facility and related terminal and LNG tanker traffic have very high consequence hazards that violate the guidelines of the International Maritime Organization. Both industry-groups - SIGTTO (Society of International Gas Tanker and Terminal Operators) and U.S. DHS Regulations, strongly argue against locating LNG plants near human populations and/or in narrow inland waterways with significant aircraft, ferry, freighter and recreational traffic. Also it is vulnerable to high impact security/ terrorist threats which expose the LNG storage facilities on shore and LNG tankers along the river, to huge catastrophic fires and horrific fuel air explosions with devastating blast waves destroying residential and industrial buildings along the Fraser River. The human death toll and environmental damage cannot be mitigated. The stored energy in a Q-MAX LNG carrier has the equivalent of 660 tons of TNT. The Halifax explosion had 200 tons of TNT + 2,300 tons of Picric acid. It killed 2000 people, injured 9000 and 25,000 were left without adequate shelter. If the LNG on the Q-MAX LNG carrier or the LNG Storage tank on shore was released as vapor and ignited, a fuel air explosion would occur ...

Report

Attachment Tilbury LNG proposal Reference Number 80496

• Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project
• Author: Misty MacDuffee
• Reference number: 36
• Submitted: 2020-07-16 - 9:57 PM
• Project phase: Planning
• Participation notice: Public Notice - Public Comment Period & Virtual Open Houses
• July 16, 2020 Canadian Impact Assessment Registry Re: Tilbury LNG proposal Reference Number 80496 (http://iaac-aeic.gc.ca/050/evaluations/proj/80496?culture=en-CA) Dear Sir/Madam, I am writing on behalf of the Raincoast Conservation Foundation to highlight the significant concerns that surround the proposed expansion of the Tilbury LNG facility. Two of these concerns include further habitat alterations in the Lower Fraser River and estuary, and the implications from increased shipping on Southern Resident killer whales.  As Raincoast has said for some time, these large industrial expansions must stop being assessed as ...
• Attachment included
• July 16, 2020 Canadian Impact Assessment Registry Re: Tilbury LNG proposal Reference Number 80496 Dear Sir/Madam, I am writing on behalf of the Raincoast Conservation Foundation to highlight the significant concerns that surround the proposed expansion of the Tilbury LNG facility. Two of these concerns include further habitat alterations in the Lower Fraser River and estuary, and the implications from increased shipping on Southern Resident killer whales. As Raincoast has said for some time, these large industrial expansions must stop being assessed as “one-offs” and become subject to federal and provincial cumulative effects assessments that consider their consistency with broader sustainability goals and the ecological limits these proposals ignore. It is contradictory for the federal government to invest millions of dollars to recover Fraser River habitat for threatened and endangered salmonids while on the other hand continue to approve projects that erode and destroy the very same habitat. At this stage, both the NEB panel assessing Trans Mountain and the CEAA panel assessing Roberts Bank Terminal Two, have identified that increased shipping through the critical habitat of Southern Resident killer whales will have significant and cumulative adverse effects on the recovery of these whales. Population viability analysis examines the likelihood of extinction for endangered wildlife. Five years ago, the chance that the 80 Southern Resident killer whales alive in 2015 would be functionally extinct in 100 years was 9%. Since 2015, the risk of extinction has increased. In 2020, the chance the 72 whales alive now will be functionally extinct within a century is 59%. The abundance ...

Report

Attachment Delta Chamber of Commerce - Letter of Support for FortisBC's Tilbury LNG Phase 2 Project Application

• Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project
• Author: Delta Chamber of Commerce
• Reference number: 35
• Submitted: 2020-07-16 - 5:47 PM
• Project phase: Planning
• Participation notice: Public Notice - Public Comment Period & Virtual Open Houses
• Please find attached a letter of support for the FortisBC Tilbury LNG Phase 2 project application from the Delta Chamber of Commerce. 
• Attachment included
• deltachamber.ca The Delta Chamber of Commerce, 6201 60 Avenue, Delta, BC July 16th, 2020 Shannon Potter Impact Assessment Agency of Canada 778-657-8547 | Email: Shannon.Potter@canada.ca Re: Letter of Support for the FortisBC Tilbury LNG Phase 2 Expansion Project Dear Shannon, Thank you for the opportunity to provide input in the Early Engagement phase of the Environmental Assessment process. The Delta Chamber of Commerce, which represents member businesses across the service, retail, industrial, fishing and farming sectors, acknowledges the vital roles that our community has in nurturing Canada’s trade capability and competitiveness. As home to Canada’s largest container terminal, we understand the importance of meeting current customer needs for cost-effective, low carbon alternative fuels for transportation. We also appreciate the importance of Canada’s role in the global economy, in leading the transition away from high carbon-emission fuels to meet new global shipping emissions regulations. FortisBC’s Tilbury Liquid Natural Gas (LNG) plant has been safely operating in the Tilbury Industrial Park of Delta since it was first constructed in 1971 and has been producing LNG for marine customers such as BC Ferries and Seaspan Ferries and storing LNG to meet the energy needs of FortisBC customers here in BC for over a decade. We know from FortisBC’s history of engaging with our community, and from their work in Phase 1, that this project provided direct economic and employment benefits for the people of Delta and neighbouring communities. Since the beginning of construction and through Phase 1, FortisBC has demonstrated a notable commitment to the engagement of local ...

Report

Attachment No to Tilbury project

• Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project
• Author: Judith Doyle
• Reference number: 34
• Submitted: 2020-07-16 - 12:07 PM
• Project phase: Planning
• Participation notice: Public Notice - Public Comment Period & Virtual Open Houses
• The Tilbury Project should be cancelled on two grounds: 1. SIGTTO, Society of Gas Tanker and Terminal Operators, an industry association, advises against tanker traffic and facility siting within 3500m of busy waterways and populated areas, for safety concerns. The Tilbury project and shipping routes don't meet that standard and are directly across the river from a large jet fuel tank farm. 2. COVID-19 has been terrible of course but the cessation of much of human activities has been positive for the earth. As Canada plans for a new normal, that should include making the environment a priority. We need a green and clean economy.  

Report

Attachment Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project

• Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project
• Author: Administrator on behalf of Susan Jones
• Reference number: 40
• Submitted: 2020-07-16
• Please see attached.
• Attachment included
• 1 Susan Jones 1028 51A Street, Delta, B.C. V4M 2X8 July 16, 2020 BC Environmental Assessment Office, EA of Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project https://projects.eao.gov.bc.ca/p/5df7f1bfb7434b002164961c/commenting Canadian Impact Assessment Agency, #80496 Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project IAAC.TilburyLNG-GNLTilbury.AEIC@canada.ca The Honourable Jonathan Wilkinson, Minister of Environment and Climate Change Canada The Honourable George Heyman, B.C. Minister of Environment The Honourable Carla Qualtrough, MP, Delta, B.C. Members of Parliament, Government of Canada Members of the Legislative Assembly, Government of British Columbia Re: Governments of Canada and B.C.: Environmental Assessment of Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion The Governments of British Columbia and Canada should terminate the environmental assessment of the Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project which will increase LNG production 196 times the original operation and 15 times the current permitted production. Phase 2 expansions will increase onsite storage of LNG 8.4 time the original capacity and more than triple the current capacity. As a result the Tilbury Island LNG plant will produce 1.4 times more LNG than the Woodfibre LNG plant in Squamish. Phase 2 LNG expansion should be flagged as a non-starter because:  The location of the Project endangers human lives and the globally significant ecosystems of the lower Fraser River and Salish Sea in violation of international safety standards  The costs to taxpayers for LNG projects outweigh the outdated projections and mythical benefits of jobs and royalties in today’s economy  With toxic pollutants, emissions, high-energy and ...

Report

Attachment KAIROS Canada and its network do not support the Tilbury LNG expansion project

• Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project
• Author: Beth Lorimer
• Reference number: 30
• Submitted: 2020-07-15 - 4:21 PM
• Project phase: Planning
• Participation notice: Public Notice - Public Comment Period & Virtual Open Houses
• Please see attached.
• Attachment included
• Impact Assessment Agency of Canada Suite 210A- 757 West Hastings Street Vancouver, BC, V6C 3M2 July 15, 2020 Re: Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project invitation for public comment, Ref # 80496 Dear Sir or Madam, We are writing to express our serious concern with the Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project, proposed by FortisBC. We represent a network of Indigenous, settlers and newcomers in Canada working with people of faith or conscience all over the world for ecological justice and human rights. This project increases risks from fracking, undermines Canada’s progress on reducing greenhouse gas emissions, threatens the health and safety of communities, and undermines the rights of local First Nations. First, KAIROS is deeply concerned about the upstream impacts of this project associated with fracking. It is estimated that 2,800 new fracking wells are needed for this project. Fracking raises significant social and ecological justice concerns related to the rights of Indigenous peoples, public health, air and water contamination, groundwater depletion, and the triggering of seismic activity. These new wells will use an intense amount of freshwater. The water that is contaminated in the process will end up underground or in tailings ponds and removed from the local water cycle, threatening local drinking water, habitats, and fishing grounds. Fracking also increases the risk of methane leakage. A recent study of BC’s active and abandoned gas wells revealed that “almost 11 percent of all oil and gas wells had a reported leak, together releasing 14,000 cubic metres of methane per day.i Methane is a greenhouse gas that is roughly 30 times more potent than carbon dioxide ...

Report

Attachment LNG depends on Fracking - Project should not be expanded

• Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project
• Author: J. Sterling
• Reference number: 29
• Submitted: 2020-07-15 - 11:45 AM
• Project phase: Planning
• Participation notice: Public Notice - Public Comment Period & Virtual Open Houses
• LNG is not the harmless alternative its proponents claim it to be.  It is produced by Fracking, a process that uses vast amounts of water and toxic chemicals fracturing the earth.  In addition to causing seismic activity in areas not otherwise prone to earthquakes, fracking has poisoned drinking water in communities that depend on ground water for personal and agricultural use. LNG is classified as a hazardous substance.  FortisBc should not be expanding potential contamination of our province.

Report

Attachment I do not welcome this project. It is dangerous and harms Richmond

• Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project
• Author: heiky kwan
• Reference number: 28
• Submitted: 2020-07-15 - 1:50 AM
• Project phase: Planning
• Participation notice: Public Notice - Public Comment Period & Virtual Open Houses
• The industry association SIGTTO advises a 3500m buffer zone around tankers and terminals for safety reasons. The Tilbury project and shipping routes don't meet that standard and are directly across the river from a large jet fuel tank farm.  This is an incredibly dangerous project that DOES NOT have public support and was opposed by Richmond's council on May 8, 2020.

Report

Attachment Full support of the Tilbury LNG expansion project

• Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project
• Author: Philip Scott
• Reference number: 27
• Submitted: 2020-07-14 - 2:29 PM
• Project phase: Planning
• Participation notice: Public Notice - Public Comment Period & Virtual Open Houses
• Hello: I am writing to support the Tilbury LNG expansion project for the following reasons: The project will produce clean-burning LNG that will replace Bunker C and MGO as ship fuels, thereby greatly reducing NOx, SOx and particulate emissions.  The project will be fully electrified (E-LNG), so it will be a very clean LNG facility. The project supports the BC natural gas industry, which from a GHG emission perspective is 5 to 8 times cleaner than the US industry on a life-cycle carbon analysis. The project will create hundreds of jobs during construction.   During operation, it will create ~100 direct jobs and 300 indirect opportunities for people in the lower mainland. LNG jobs are well-paying, full-time family wage positions, which is needed to rebuild the economy. The project will create spin off opportunities for businesses across BC The project will support fuel switching from coal to LNG, which represents a 50% decrease in GHG emissions. Let's not delay this project, it needs to be started as soon as possible. Thank you

Report

Attachment We cannot have hazardous industry in the middle of an estaury!

• Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project
• Author: Administrator on behalf of Otto Langer
• Reference number: 41
• Submitted: 2020-07-14
• Please see attached.
• Attachment included
• George Heyman Minister of Environment Parliament Buildings Victoria, B.C. Fraser Voices 6911 Dunsany Place Richmond, BC. V7C 4N8 March 5, 2020 Dear Hon. Minister Heyman: Re: State of Environmental Protection in the Fraser River Estuary. During the past decade the industrial development pressures are again building momentum in the Lower Fraser River and its estuary. Some terrible precedents were set by previous Federal and BC governments but to our dismay we see little action from present senior governments to re-establish some of the environmental assessment and protection measures that we could count on in the 1970’s to 2010 time period to at least maintain the status quo. A short listing of shortcomings in environmental assessments, high risk projects and inadequate government policies that are exposing the estuary to great risk and losses include: 1. Ottawa elimination of EA and protection legislation in 2012. Although restored in 2019, the Trudeau government is not implementing those legislation upgrades. 2. Absence of CEAA environmental assessments in past 10 years (exception RBT2). 3. Inadequate BC legislation, policy and BC EAO approach to EAs and protection measures. 4. Pending CEAA (now CIAA) decision on RBT2 area of mass destruction on Roberts Banks. 5. No federal EA and BC EAO exemption of Tilbury LNG from plant expansion EA. 6. No federal EA and BC EAO exemption of Lehigh Cement plant expansion and dock. 7. Questionable BC policy and approach on a new Massey crossing bridge or tunnel? 8. Port Vancouver conflict of interest - as a large industrial developer and assessor of impacts. 9. Questionable why BC EAO is taking EA ...
• Attachment included
• History and Outcomes of the Fraser River Estuary Management Program (FREMP) and the Burrard Inlet Environmental Action Plan (BIEAP). FREMP was formed in the 1980s after several years of Fraser River Estuary Study work. FREMP was to overcome the disjointed and inadequate protection of the Fraser River estuary. FREMP was a successful initiative but was terminated by the federal government in 2013. A new FREMP type program is urgently required to protect the estuary and associated ecosystems to reduce industrial / environmental conflict now taking place in the estuary and the Lower Fraser River. Otto E. Langer May 18, 2019 After FREMP/ BIEAP – Where to Next? 1 Overview and History of the Fraser River Estuary Management Plan (FREMP) / Burrard Inlet Environmental Action Plan (BIEAP) and Recommendations for Action. After FREMP / BIEAP - Where to Next? Otto E. Langer - Fisheries and Aquatic Biologist May 18, 2019 1. Overview – the Need for FREMP. Since the 1860s the Fraser River Estuary was and is threatened by a myriad of industrial projects and jurisdictions that caused maximum conflict and a continued loss of estuarine life (fish, wildlife, and their habitats) and recreation opportunities. In the 1970s many citizens, public groups and fish and wildlife agency staff lobbied for a much higher level of protection for the living resources in the Fraser River Estuary. FREMP did not evolve because it was simply the right thing to do at the time. Senior bureaucrats and politicians had to be forced into finding a better way to arrest the downward spiral mess caused by inadequate will, weak or non-existent legislation, ...
• Attachment included
• July 10, 2020 FRASER VOICES ASSOCIATION*] Environment Minister George Heyman BC Environment Victoria, BC (forwarded by email) July 10, 2020 Dear Minister Heyman: Re: Request for an Extension to the Public Review Period on the Fortis Tilbury Phase II LNG Expansion Project. On March 5, 2020 Fraser Voices mailed you a letter concerning the tremendous industrial pressure now facing the Fraser River Estuary, its living resources and our community’s quality of life. We listed a long list of industrial projects that are now posed for development on the banks of the Fraser Estuary. That letter is attached. We had hoped to meet and discuss the issue but COVID has delayed that meeting. Despite constant public pressure for better estuary protection, it appears that government is now solely devoted to assessing and approving almost any project proposed for development in the estuary. Since the elimination of FREMP there is no planning process in place to protect the environment while allowing certain industrial projects to proceed. A review of the value of the FREMP organization and need for its rebirth is also attached. The Fraser Estuary is indeed now in its third industrial phase and the consequences of a continuous over development of the estuary are immense to its ecological well- being. It is extremely disturbing that the environmental assessment process has been set up to have an exaggerated and misplaced sense of diligence, robustness and thoroughness as based on science. While it pretends to cover all bases it largely neglects to consider overall ecosystem and cumulative impacts and downplays human safety. Despite upgrades in the Federal CEAA (IAAC) ...
• Attachment included
• Please see the attachment to view the content.

Report

Attachment Request for Extension to Public Comment Period for Tilbury Phase II LNG Expansion

• Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project
• Author: Administrator on behalf of Otto Langer
• Reference number: 33
• Submitted: 2020-07-13
• Sent: July 10, 2020 8:17 PM To: Minister Heyman >> <george.heyman.mla@leg.bc.ca>; Jonathan Wilkinson <Jonathan.Wilkinson.C1A@parl.gc.ca>; Malcolm Brodie <mayorandcouncillors@richmond.ca>; Nathan.Braun@gov.bc.ca; Fern.Stockman@gov.bc.ca; Registry-Registre (IAAC/AEIC) <iaac.registry-registre.aeic@canada.ca> Cc: Delta Optimist <editor@delta-optimist.com>; Richmond News <editor@richmond-news.com>; Eoghan Moriarty <eoghan@mindagape.com>; Eoin <info@myseatosky.org>; Fraser Voices <Fraser-Voices@googlegroups.com>; Eoghan Moriarty <"mailto:info"@realhearings.org> Subject: Request for Extension to Public Comment Period for Tilbury Phase II LNG Expansion Importance: High   Dear Hon. Minister Heyman: Attached please find our request for at least a 60 day extension for proper public review of the Fortis Tilbury Phase II LNG Expansion  project considering that we are in the middle of the summer, in the middle of a COVID pandemic and this public comment period overlapped the the long review of the RBT2 project. By forcing this public review at this time is not in the interests of the public nor the environment.  It is requested that this letter be made part of the Tilbury Phase II LNG Expansion EPIC record. Thank you.   Otto E. Langer Chair Fraser Voices -->
• Attachment included
• History and Outcomes of the Fraser River Estuary Management Program (FREMP) and the Burrard Inlet Environmental Action Plan (BIEAP). FREMP was formed in the 1980s after several years of Fraser River Estuary Study work. FREMP was to overcome the disjointed and inadequate protection of the Fraser River estuary. FREMP was a successful initiative but was terminated by the federal government in 2013. A new FREMP type program is urgently required to protect the estuary and associated ecosystems to reduce industrial / environmental conflict now taking place in the estuary and the Lower Fraser River. Otto E. Langer May 18, 2019 After FREMP/ BIEAP – Where to Next? 1 Overview and History of the Fraser River Estuary Management Plan (FREMP) / Burrard Inlet Environmental Action Plan (BIEAP) and Recommendations for Action. After FREMP / BIEAP - Where to Next? Otto E. Langer - Fisheries and Aquatic Biologist May 18, 2019 1. Overview – the Need for FREMP. Since the 1860s the Fraser River Estuary was and is threatened by a myriad of industrial projects and jurisdictions that caused maximum conflict and a continued loss of estuarine life (fish, wildlife, and their habitats) and recreation opportunities. In the 1970s many citizens, public groups and fish and wildlife agency staff lobbied for a much higher level of protection for the living resources in the Fraser River Estuary. FREMP did not evolve because it was simply the right thing to do at the time. Senior bureaucrats and politicians had to be forced into finding a better way to arrest the downward spiral mess caused by inadequate will, weak or non-existent legislation, ...
• Attachment included
• July 10, 2020 FRASER VOICES ASSOCIATION*] Environment Minister George Heyman BC Environment Victoria, BC (forwarded by email) July 10, 2020 Dear Minister Heyman: Re: Request for an Extension to the Public Review Period on the Fortis Tilbury Phase II LNG Expansion Project. On March 5, 2020 Fraser Voices mailed you a letter concerning the tremendous industrial pressure now facing the Fraser River Estuary, its living resources and our community’s quality of life. We listed a long list of industrial projects that are now posed for development on the banks of the Fraser Estuary. That letter is attached. We had hoped to meet and discuss the issue but COVID has delayed that meeting. Despite constant public pressure for better estuary protection, it appears that government is now solely devoted to assessing and approving almost any project proposed for development in the estuary. Since the elimination of FREMP there is no planning process in place to protect the environment while allowing certain industrial projects to proceed. A review of the value of the FREMP organization and need for its rebirth is also attached. The Fraser Estuary is indeed now in its third industrial phase and the consequences of a continuous over development of the estuary are immense to its ecological well- being. It is extremely disturbing that the environmental assessment process has been set up to have an exaggerated and misplaced sense of diligence, robustness and thoroughness as based on science. While it pretends to cover all bases it largely neglects to consider overall ecosystem and cumulative impacts and downplays human safety. Despite upgrades in the Federal CEAA (IAAC) ...
• Attachment included
• George Heyman Minister of Environment Parliament Buildings Victoria, B.C. Fraser Voices 6911 Dunsany Place Richmond, BC. V7C 4N8 March 5, 2020 Dear Hon. Minister Heyman: Re: State of Environmental Protection in the Fraser River Estuary. During the past decade the industrial development pressures are again building momentum in the Lower Fraser River and its estuary. Some terrible precedents were set by previous Federal and BC governments but to our dismay we see little action from present senior governments to re-establish some of the environmental assessment and protection measures that we could count on in the 1970’s to 2010 time period to at least maintain the status quo. A short listing of shortcomings in environmental assessments, high risk projects and inadequate government policies that are exposing the estuary to great risk and losses include: 1. Ottawa elimination of EA and protection legislation in 2012. Although restored in 2019, the Trudeau government is not implementing those legislation upgrades. 2. Absence of CEAA environmental assessments in past 10 years (exception RBT2). 3. Inadequate BC legislation, policy and BC EAO approach to EAs and protection measures. 4. Pending CEAA (now CIAA) decision on RBT2 area of mass destruction on Roberts Banks. 5. No federal EA and BC EAO exemption of Tilbury LNG from plant expansion EA. 6. No federal EA and BC EAO exemption of Lehigh Cement plant expansion and dock. 7. Questionable BC policy and approach on a new Massey crossing bridge or tunnel? 8. Port Vancouver conflict of interest - as a large industrial developer and assessor of impacts. 9. Questionable why BC EAO is taking EA ...
• Attachment included
• Please see the attachment to view the content.

Report

Attachment Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project

• Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project
• Author: Administrator on behalf of Brent Boates
• Reference number: 31
• Submitted: 2020-07-13
• To Whom It May Concern     I believe this project is wrong for the safety of the people of the lower mainland, for environmental reasons and is yet another infringement of the indigenous people of this area.   I was unable to comment using the suggested ‘review process’ due to an error.   My name is Brent Boates. I live at <personal information removed>

Report

Attachment Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project

• Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project
• Author: Administrator on behalf of Melissa Luk
• Reference number: 32
• Submitted: 2020-07-13
• To Whom It May Concern,   I would like to make a comment during this public participation period.  As a resident of Richmond, I am in support of the Richmond city council's decision to oppose the expansion of Tilbury LNG plant in Delta.  I agree with the statements that this expansion is dangerous so close among residential areas and important wildlife environments.  I would like to see these issues addressed before this project moves forward, including addressing environmental stewardship.   Thank you.   Sincerely, Melissa Luk

Report

Attachment Proceed with development

• Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project
• Author: Calin Dragoie
• Reference number: 26
• Submitted: 2020-07-05 - 1:51 PM
• Project phase: Planning
• Participation notice: Public Notice - Public Comment Period & Virtual Open Houses
• Let's get it done already. LNG displaces evnironmentally harmful coals and bunker fuels; development creates jobs and generate taxes that can pay for health and education.

Report

Attachment Notice of time limit resumption and notification of the opportunity to comment on the proposed Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project (Agency Project Number 005724, Registry Reference Number 80496)

• Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project
• Author: Administrator on behalf of Katzie First Nation
• Reference number: 25
• Submitted: 2020-07-02
• Participation notice: Public Notice - Public Comment Period & Virtual Open Houses
• Please see attached.
• Attachment included
• P: (604)465-8961 | F: (604)465-5949 19700 Salish Road, Pitt Meadows, BC, V3Y2G1 KATZIE First Nation …Land of the Moss June 24, 2020 Shannon Potter Impact Assessment Agency of Canada 604-657-8547| Email: Shannon.potter@canada.ca Re: Opportunity to comment on the potential impact assessment of the proposed Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project Dear Shannon, Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the initial steps of the planning phase under the Impact Assessment Act for the proposed Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project (the Project) proposed by FortisBC Holdings Inc. (the proponent). The proposed Project lies in Katzie First Nation’s traditional territory. Katzie First Nation (Katzie) has never surrendered, ceded or sold any of our Aboriginal title or rights to the Crown. As such, Katzie is concerned with any activity that may affect our rights, title and interests in our territory. We understand that the intent of the this initial engagement is to provide Katzie with an opportunity to identify key interests and concerns or issues we may have regarding the proposed Project at this stage of the planning process, and that our inputs will inform the Summary of Issues and the development of the Detailed Project Description. We have reviewed the Initial Project Description to: get a better understanding of the proposed Project and associated activities; inform our own preliminary research to support our response; and develop a preliminary list of interests and potential concerns and issues regarding the proposed Project. The review was completed through the lens of Katzie values and interests and focused on the potential for ...
• Attachment included
• P: (604)465-8961 | F: (604)465-5949 19700 Salish Road, Pitt Meadows, BC, V3Y2G1 KATZIE First Nation …Land of the Moss June 24, 2020 Tanner May-Poole Project Assessment Officer Environmental Assessment Office Government of British Columbia 778-698-9185| Email: Tanner.MayPoole@gov.bc.ca Re: Early engagement on the proposed Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project Dear Tanner, Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the Early Engagement Phase under the Environmental Assessment Act for the proposed Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project (the Project) proposed by FortisBC Holdings Inc. (the proponent). The proposed Project lies in Katzie First Nation’s traditional territory. Katzie First Nation (Katzie) has never surrendered, ceded or sold any of our Aboriginal title or rights to the Crown. As such, Katzie is concerned with any activity that may affect our rights, title and interests in our territory. We understand that the intent of the Early Engagement Phase of the environmental assessment (EA) process is to provide Katzie with an opportunity to better understand the proposed Project, to identify key interests and concerns or issues we may have regarding the proposed Project at this stage of the planning process, and to determine if we would like to be a Participating Indigenous Nation. Using initial capacity funding provided by the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada, we have reviewed the Initial Project Description to: get a better understanding of the proposed Project and associated activities; inform our own preliminary research to support our response; and develop a preliminary list of interests and potential concerns and ...

Report

Attachment Indigenous Services Canada Federal Authority Advice Record - Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project

• Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project
• Author: Administrator on behalf of Indigenous Services Canada
• Reference number: 23
• Submitted: 2020-06-29
• Participation notice: Public Notice - Public Comment Period & Virtual Open Houses
• Please see attached.
• Attachment included
• ATTACHMENT: [June 01, 2020] Federal Authority Advice Record Response due by [June 20, 2020]. Please submit the form to: IAAC.TilburyLNG-GNLTilbury.AEIC@canada.ca Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project – FortisBC Holdings Inc. Agency File: 005724 Department/Agency Indigenous Services Canada Lead IA Contact Aaron O’Keefe Full Address 600 – 1138 Melville Street, Vancouver, BC V6E 4S3 Email Aaron.okeefe@canada.ca Telephone 604-404-2045 Alternate Departmental Contact Lee-Ann Hamilton, Senior Environmental Specialist, BC Region, 604-348-7589 1. Is it probable that your department or agency may be required to exercise a power or perform a duty or function related to the Project to enable it to proceed? If yes, specify the Act of Parliament and that power, duty or function. It is not probable that Indigenous Services Canada will exercise a power or perform a duty or function under any Act of Parliament in relation to the Project. 2. Is your department or agency in possession of specialist or expert information or knowledge that may be relevant to the conduct of an impact assessment of the Project? Specify as appropriate. As no First Nation reserves are located in the project area, Indigenous Services Canada is not likely in possession of specialist or expert information or knowledge that may be relevant to any potential adverse effects within federal jurisdiction caused by the Project. 3. Has your department or agency considered the Project; exercised a power or performed a duty or function under any Act of Parliament in relation to the Project; or taken any course of action that would allow the Project to proceed in whole or in part? Specify ...

Report

Attachment Comment removed by Administrator due to an administrative error

• Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project
• Author: Administrator on behalf of Women and Gender Equality Canada
• Reference number: 21
• Submitted: 2020-06-26
• Participation notice: Public Notice - Public Comment Period & Virtual Open Houses

Attachment The Tilbury LNG Expansion is good for the community and good for BC

• Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project
• Author: Frederick Scott
• Reference number: 15
• Submitted: 2020-06-25 - 8:47 PM
• Project phase: Planning
• Participation notice: Public Notice - Public Comment Period & Virtual Open Houses
• Dear Sir/Madames: I am writing to support the Tilbury LNG expansion project for the following reasons: 1. the project will produce clean-burning LNG that will replace Bunker C and MGO as ship fuels, thereby greatly reducing NOx, SOx and particulate emissions in my community and across BC 2. the project will be fully electrified (E-LNG), so it will be the cleanest LNG facility on the planet 3. The project supports the BC natural gas industry, which from a GHG emission perspective is 5 to 8 times cleaner than the US industry on a life-cycle carbon analysis 4. The project will create hundreds of jobs during construction.  During operation, it will create ~100 direct jobs and 300 indirect opportunities for people in the lower mainland. 5. LNG jobs tend to be high-paying, full time family wage positions, which we so desperately need as we rebuild our economy post Covid-19 6. the project will create spin off opportunities for businesses across BC 7. the project will support fuel switching from coal to LNG, which represents a 50% decrease in GHG emissions. I see absolutely no negative effects from advancing this project, please do it expediently and efficiently. Thank you for reviewing my comments. Yours truly, Fred Scott P.Eng. 

Report

Attachment Fully support this Tilbury expansion project

• Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project
• Author: Julio Hasenpfeffer
• Reference number: 14
• Submitted: 2020-06-20 - 10:15 PM
• Project phase: Planning
• Participation notice: Public Notice - Public Comment Period & Virtual Open Houses
• I am a retired Professional Engineer, having worked nearly 50 years in and for the oil & gas industry in Canada.  I am in favour of this expaniosn project, as it will increase exports of LNG to countries who currently use oil  or coal to generate electiricy, thereby reducing GHG emissions.  It will als increase employment during and following construction, increasing feceral and provincail income taxes paid, and contibuting to a postive trade balance.

Report

Attachment Test Comments - VA

• Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project
• Author: Test Comment
• Reference number: 11
• Submitted: 2020-06-11 - 7:32 PM
• Project phase: Planning
• Participation notice: Public Notice - Public Comment Period & Virtual Open Houses
• This is a test of the Impact Assessment Registry.  Tags: air quality, noise, pollution, grass, jobs.

Attachment Public Safety Canada Federal Authority Advice Record - Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project

• Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project
• Author: Administrator on behalf of Public Safety Canada
• Reference number: 20
• Submitted: 2020-06-03
• Participation notice: Public Notice - Public Comment Period & Virtual Open Houses
• Hello, The  interpretation of the Public Safety Canada, Pacific Regional Office is that we do not have a direct role in the subject areas and assessment for the Tilbury Phase 2 Expansion. The assessment is expected to to be focused at the regulatory and legislative levels, and presumably any emergency preparedness or mitigative activities during project development would be prescribed by regulations to be commented on by the specific regulatory provincial and federal departments. A role that Public Safety could have, should there be a major emergency related to the site or project in the future, would be to facilitate federal and federal/provincial coordination during emergency response. Note that this would be for a major incident exceeding the routine response mechanisms for involved departments. I have attached the link to the Federal Emergency Response Plan (FERP) which describes this role. https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/mrgnc-rspns-pln/index-en.aspx While we do have an interest in disaster risk reduction, which can include any measures to reduce the likelihood of an emergency and environmental or community impacts, again I suspect this is out of scope as it comes from a broader policy lens, and likely specific requirements to prevent or mitigate incidents related to this project will be prescribed by sector-specific regulations. Please advise if you require anything further at this time. Thank you, Andrew J. Hannan Regional Director Public Safety Canada, Pacific Region
• Attachment included
• ATTACHMENT: [June 01, 2020] Federal Authority Advice Record Response due by [June 20, 2020]. Please submit the form to: IAAC.TilburyLNG-GNLTilbury.AEIC@canada.ca Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project – FortisBC Holdings Inc. Agency File: 005724 Department/Agency Public Safety Canada, Pacific Regional Office Lead IA Contact Andrew Hannan Full Address Suite 607 – 3292 Production Way, Burnaby, BC, V5A 4R4 Email Telephone 604-353-4733 Alternate Departmental Contact Sue Olsen, 604-418-6236 1. Is it probable that your department or agency may be required to exercise a power or perform a duty or function related to the Project to enable it to proceed? If yes, specify the Act of Parliament and that power, duty or function. No. 2. Is your department or agency in possession of specialist or expert information or knowledge that may be relevant to the conduct of an impact assessment of the Project? Specify as appropriate. Our department has specialist knowledge in emergency management, but we do not expect that it would be applicable to this project. 3. Has your department or agency considered the Project; exercised a power or performed a duty or function under any Act of Parliament in relation to the Project; or taken any course of action that would allow the Project to proceed in whole or in part? Specify as appropriate. No. 4. Has your department or agency had previous contact or involvement with the proponent or other party in relation to the Project? (for example, enquiry about methodology, guidance, or data; introduction to the project) Provide an overview of the information or advice exchanged. <email address removed> <email ...

Report

Attachment Comment removed by Administrator due to an administrative error

• Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project
• Author: Administrator on behalf of Andrew J. Hannan
• Reference number: 13
• Submitted: 2020-06-03
• Participation notice: Public Notice - Public Comment Period & Virtual Open Houses

Attachment Fisheries and Oceans Canada Federal Authority Advice Record - Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project

• Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project
• Author: Administrator on behalf of Fisheries and Oceans Canada
• Reference number: 24
• Submitted: 2020-06-01
• Participation notice: Public Notice - Public Comment Period & Virtual Open Houses
• Please see attached.
• Attachment included
• ATTACHMENT: [June 01, 2020] Federal Authority Advice Record Response due by [June 20, 2020]. Please submit the form to: IAAC.TilburyLNG-GNLTilbury.AEIC@canada.ca Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project – FortisBC Holdings Inc. Agency File: 005724 Department/Agency Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) Lead IA Contact Suzanne Earle Full Address 200 – 401 Burrard Street, Vancouver, BC V6C 3S4 Email Suzanne.Earle@dfo-mpo.gc.ca Telephone Alternate Departmental Contact Michael Engelsjord Michael.Engelsjord@dfo-mpo.gc.ca James Dwyer James.Dwyer@dfo-mpo.gc.ca 1. Is it probable that your department or agency may be required to exercise a power or perform a duty or function related to the Project to enable it to proceed? If yes, specify the Act of Parliament and that power, duty or function. Unknown. If any project works near water cannot avoid death of fish or harmful alteration, disruption or destruction of fish habitat then these would require authorization under subsect ions 34.2(2)(b) or 35(2)(b) the Fisheries Act. It is possible that upgrades (e.g. infilling, pile installation, dredging or riparian vegetation removal) to an existing construction jetty may result in adverse impacts to fish and/or fish habitat and require authorization, however the project description does not contain adequate information to determine if authorization would be required. Also, it is not clear whether these upgrades would be completed as part of the Tilbury Phase 2 LNG Expansion Project or the WesPac Marine Jetty Project. 2. Is your department or agency in possession of specialist or expert information or knowledge that may be relevant to the conduct of an ...

Report