MILTON LOGISTICS HUB · 3.1 overview.....43 3.2 project setting .....44

MILTON LOGISTICS HUB Environmental Impact Statement

Prepared for: Canadian National Railway Company 935 de La Gauchetière Street W Montreal, Quebec, H3B 2M9

Prepared by: Stantec Consulting Ltd. 70 Southgate Drive, Suite 1 Guelph, Ontario, N1G 4P5

File No. 160960844 December 7, 2015

MILTON LOGISTICS HUB ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................... I

ABBREVIATIONS ...................................................................................................................... VII

GLOSSARY .............................................................................................................................. XV

1.0 INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW .................................................................................. 1 1.1 THE PROPONENT ................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 PROJECT OVERVIEW ......................................................................................................... 2

1.2.1 Project Components ...................................................................................... 4 1.2.2 Project Activities ............................................................................................. 5

1.3 PROJECT LOCATION ......................................................................................................... 6 1.4 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK AND ROLE OF GOVERNMENT ......................................... 8

1.4.1 Federal Environmental Assessment Framework ......................................... 8 1.4.2 Provincial Environmental Assessment Framework...................................... 9 1.4.3 Other Approvals and Authorizations ........................................................... 9 1.4.4 Policy and Guideline Documents .............................................................. 10

1.5 PROJECT PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES .............................................. 11 1.5.1 Design Standards and Codes ..................................................................... 12 1.5.2 Design Mitigation Measures ........................................................................ 12 1.5.3 Environmental Protection Measures .......................................................... 13

1.6 EIS ORGANIZATION AND CONTENT .............................................................................. 14 1.7 CONCORDANCE WITH THE EIS GUIDELINES ................................................................. 16

2.0 PROJECT JUSTIFICATION AND ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED ..................................... 23 2.1 PURPOSE OF THE PROJECT ............................................................................................. 23 2.2 ALTERNATIVE MEANS OF CARRYING OUT THE PROJECT ............................................ 24

2.2.1 Alternative Project Site Locations............................................................... 25 2.2.2 Transportation Corridors (Truck Routes) ..................................................... 26 2.2.3 Key Project Components ............................................................................ 29 2.2.4 Summary of Alternatives Assessment ......................................................... 36

3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................... 43 3.1 OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................................ 43 3.2 PROJECT SETTING ............................................................................................................ 44 3.3 PROJECT COMPONENTS ................................................................................................ 44

3.3.1 Yard Tracks .................................................................................................... 45 3.3.2 Work Pads and Container Storage ............................................................ 46 3.3.3 Realignment of the Existing Mainline ......................................................... 46 3.3.4 Double Track Extension of the Mainline .................................................... 46 3.3.5 Truck Entrance/Gate and Access Road ................................................... 47 3.3.6 Administration Building and Maintenance Garage ................................ 47 3.3.7 Stormwater Management System ............................................................. 48

File No. 160960844


3.3.8 Clearing, Grading and Berms ..................................................................... 49 3.3.9 Construction Materials and Stockpile Areas ............................................ 49 3.3.10 Realignment of Indian Creek ...................................................................... 50 3.3.11 Realignment of Tributary A .......................................................................... 50 3.3.12 Naturalization and Restoration ................................................................... 51 3.3.13 Electrical and Communications Infrastructure ......................................... 51 3.3.14 Lower Base Line Crossing ............................................................................. 52 3.3.15 Existing Petroleum Pipelines......................................................................... 52

3.4 PROJECT ACTIVITIES ........................................................................................................ 53 3.4.1 Construction .................................................................................................. 53 3.4.2 Operations ..................................................................................................... 60 3.4.3 Emissions, Discharges and Wastes.............................................................. 65 3.4.4 Decommissioning ......................................................................................... 67

3.5 EMPLOYMENT REQUIREMENTS ....................................................................................... 67 3.6 SCHEDULE ........................................................................................................................ 67 3.7 SUMMARY OF CHANGES TO THE PROJECT DESIGN SINCE FILING WITH CEAA ....... 67

4.0 COMMUNITY AND STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION ................................................... 69 4.1 OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................................ 69

4.1.1 Preliminary Consultation .............................................................................. 70 4.1.2 Environmental Impact Statement Consultation ...................................... 71

4.2 IDENTIFICATION OF STAKEHOLDERS .............................................................................. 71 4.2.1 Public and Interest Group Stakeholders .................................................... 72 4.2.2 Municipal and Agency Stakeholders ........................................................ 72

4.3 STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION ACTIVITIES ................................................................... 73 4.3.1 Project Notification ....................................................................................... 74 4.3.2 Public and Interest Group Consultation Opportunities ........................... 76 4.3.3 Agency and Municipal Consultation Opportunities ............................... 78

4.4 SUMMARY OF STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS ................................................................... 79 4.4.1 Summary of Public and Interest Group Comments ................................. 79 4.4.2 Summary of Agency and Municipal Comments ..................................... 84

4.5 ONGOING AND FUTURE CONSULTATION ..................................................................... 86

5.0 ABORIGINAL ENGAGEMENT AND CONCERNS .......................................................... 89 5.1 OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................................ 89 5.2 CONTEXT .......................................................................................................................... 89 5.3 IDENTIFICATION OF ABORIGINAL COMMUNITIES ........................................................ 90 5.4 ABORIGINAL COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT .................................................................. 90

5.4.1 Relationship Building .................................................................................... 91 5.4.2 Project Notification ....................................................................................... 92 5.4.3 Engagement in Environmental Baseline Studies ...................................... 94 5.4.4 Public Open House ...................................................................................... 94 5.4.5 Traditional Land Use Study .......................................................................... 95 5.4.6 Site Tours ......................................................................................................... 96 5.4.7 Document Review ........................................................................................ 96

File No. 16090844


5.4.8 Community-Specific Correspondence ..................................................... 96 5.4.9 Meetings ........................................................................................................ 97 5.4.10 Memoranda of Understanding................................................................... 97

5.5 ABORIGINAL COMMUNITY PROFILES ............................................................................ 97 5.5.1 Mississaugas of the New Credit .................................................................. 98 5.5.2 Six Nations of the Grand River .................................................................... 99 5.5.3 Huron Wendat Nation (Wendake) ........................................................... 100 5.5.4 Métis Nation of Ontario.............................................................................. 101

5.6 SUMMARY OF VIEWS EXPRESSED BY ABORIGINAL COMMUNITIES .......................... 101 5.6.1 Mississaugas of the New Credit ................................................................ 101 5.6.2 Six Nations .................................................................................................... 103 5.6.3 Huron Wendat Nation (Wendake) ........................................................... 103 5.6.4 Métis Nation of Ontario.............................................................................. 104

5.7 FUTURE ABORIGINAL ENGAGEMENT ........................................................................... 105

6.0 EFFECTS ASSESSMENT .................................................................................................107 6.1 SCOPE OF THE ASSESSMENT ......................................................................................... 107

6.1.1 Scope of the Project .................................................................................. 107 6.1.2 Factors to be Considered ......................................................................... 107 6.1.3 Scope of the Factors to be Considered ................................................. 108

6.2 METHODS ....................................................................................................................... 110 6.2.1 Overview of Approach .............................................................................. 110 6.2.2 Selection of Valued Components ........................................................... 113 6.2.3 Identification of Potential Environmental Effects and Measurable

Parameters .................................................................................................. 120 6.2.4 Identification of Spatial and Temporal EA Boundaries ......................... 120 6.2.5 Characterization of Residual Project-related Environmental

Effects ........................................................................................................... 121 6.2.6 Thresholds or Benchmarks for Characterizing and Determining

the Significance of Residual Environmental Effects ............................... 122 6.2.7 Existing Conditions ...................................................................................... 123 6.2.8 Potential Project-VC Interactions ............................................................. 123 6.2.9 Assessment of Project-Related Environmental Effects .......................... 124 6.2.10 Assessment of Cumulative Effects ............................................................ 124 6.2.11 Assessment of Potential Accidents or Malfunctions .............................. 129 6.2.12 Assessment of Effects of the Environment on the Project ..................... 129 6.2.13 Identification of Follow-up and Monitoring ............................................ 129 6.2.14 Summary ...................................................................................................... 129

6.3 PROJECT SETTING AND BASELINE CONDITIONS ........................................................ 130 6.3.1 Atmospheric Environment ......................................................................... 130 6.3.2 Geology and Geochemistry ..................................................................... 135 6.3.3 Topography and Soil .................................................................................. 137 6.3.4 Groundwater and Surface Water ............................................................ 138 6.3.5 Fish and Fish Habitat ................................................................................... 141 6.3.6 Migratory birds and their Habitat ............................................................. 144

File No. 160960844


6.3.7 Species at Risk ............................................................................................. 147 6.3.8 Traditional Land and Resource Use for Aboriginal Peoples ................. 149 6.3.9 Socio-Economic Conditions ...................................................................... 150 6.3.10 Health Conditions ....................................................................................... 157 6.3.11 Cultural Heritage Resources ..................................................................... 158 6.3.12 Archaeology ............................................................................................... 158 6.3.13 Paleontology ............................................................................................... 159

6.4 PREDICTED CHANGES TO THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT ......................................... 159 6.4.1 Changes to the Atmospheric Environment ............................................ 159 6.4.2 Changes to Groundwater and Surface Water ...................................... 163 6.4.3 Changes to Terrestrial Landscape ........................................................... 165

6.5 PREDICTED EFFECTS ON VALUED COMPONENTS ...................................................... 165 6.5.1 Fish and Fish Habitat ................................................................................... 165 6.5.2 Migratory Birds ............................................................................................. 189 6.5.3 Species at Risk ............................................................................................. 205 6.5.4 Human Health ............................................................................................. 219 6.5.5 Socio-Economic Conditions ...................................................................... 231 6.5.6 Archaeological and Heritage Resources ............................................... 245

6.6 OTHER EFFECTS TO CONSIDER ..................................................................................... 264 6.6.1 Cumulative Effects ..................................................................................... 264 6.6.2 Effects of Potential Accidents or Malfunctions ...................................... 289 6.6.3 Effects of the Environment on the Project .............................................. 300

7.0 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ASSESSMENT ...........................................309

8.0 BENEFITS OF THE PROJECT..........................................................................................321 8.1 BENEFITS OF PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS ...................................................................... 321 8.2 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS ................................................................. 322

8.2.1 National and GTHA Benefits...................................................................... 322 8.2.2 Regional and Local Benefits ..................................................................... 323

8.3 SUMMARY OF ECONOMIC BENEFITS .......................................................................... 325 8.3.1 National Benefits ......................................................................................... 325 8.3.2 Regional and Local Benefits ..................................................................... 326

8.4 SUMMARY OF SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY BENEFITS .................................................. 327 8.4.1 National and GTHA Benefits...................................................................... 327 8.4.2 Regional and Local Benefits ..................................................................... 328

9.0 FOLLOW-UP AND MONITORING PROGRAMS ...........................................................331 9.1 OBJECTIVES .................................................................................................................... 331 9.2 FINALIZING THE FOLLOW-UP AND MONITORING PROGRAM .................................. 332 9.3 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT ............................................................................................ 333 9.4 FOLLOW-UP PROGRAMS .............................................................................................. 333

9.4.1 Air Quality .................................................................................................... 333 9.4.2 Acoustic Environment ................................................................................ 334 9.4.3 Groundwater ............................................................................................... 335

File No. 16090844


9.4.4 Surface Water ............................................................................................. 335 9.4.5 Fish and Fish Habitat ................................................................................... 337 9.4.6 Migratory Birds and their Habitat.............................................................. 338 9.4.7 Species at Risk ............................................................................................. 338 9.4.8 Aboriginal Peoples ..................................................................................... 338 9.4.9 Economy and Employment ...................................................................... 339 9.4.10 Community Services and Infrastructure .................................................. 339 9.4.11 Land and Resource Use............................................................................. 339 9.4.12 Heritage Resources .................................................................................... 339 9.4.13 Archaeological Resources ........................................................................ 340

9.5 MONITORING PROGRAM ............................................................................................. 340 9.5.1 Construction Monitoring ............................................................................ 340 9.5.2 Compliance Monitoring ............................................................................ 341

9.6 REPORTING .................................................................................................................... 341 9.6.1 Follow-up Program Reporting ................................................................... 341 9.6.2 Monitoring Program Reporting ................................................................. 342

9.7 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM ................................................................. 342 9.7.1 Policies .......................................................................................................... 342 9.7.2 Guidelines .................................................................................................... 342 9.7.3 Design Standards ........................................................................................ 342

9.8 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN ..................................................................... 343

10.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................345 10.1 SUMMARY OF THE POTENTIAL EFFECTS, ADVERSE RESIDUAL EFFECTS AND

THEIR SIGNIFICANCE ..................................................................................................... 345 10.1.1 Scope of the EIS and Project Interactions ............................................... 345 10.1.2 Residual, Accidental and Cumulative Environmental Effects ............. 353

10.2 SUMMARY OF MITIGATION, MONITORING AND FOLLOW-UP COMMITMENTS ...... 354 10.3 SUMMARY OF PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT ......................................................................... 355 10.4 SUMMARY OF ABORIGINAL ENGAGEMENT ............................................................... 356 10.5 CONCLUSIONS .............................................................................................................. 356

11.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................359

File No. 160960844


LIST OF TABLES Table 1.1: Key Federal Permits / Approvals............................................................................ 9 Table 1.2: Guidelines for the Preparation of an EIS - Concordance Table ..................... 17 Table 2.1: Truck Entrance Alternatives for the Milton Intermodal Hub ............................. 30 Table 2.2: Summary of Alternative Means of Carrying out the Project ........................... 37 Table 3.1: Utility Crossings within the PDA............................................................................. 56 Table 3.2: Wastes and Waste Management Methods for the Project ............................ 67 Table 4.1: Publication Dates for Project Notices ................................................................. 74 Table 4.2: Summary of Comments Received ...................................................................... 78 Table 4.3: Public and Interest Groups Issues ........................................................................ 81 Table 4.4: Agency and Municipality Issues .......................................................................... 84 Table 5.1: Distribution of Project Notices and Reports to Aboriginal Communities ....... 93 Table 6.1: Selected Valued Components ......................................................................... 115 Table 6.2: Present, Approved and Proposed Projects and Activities Considered

In the Environmental Assessment for the Purpose of Evaluating Cumulative Environmental Effects .................................................................... 125

Table 6.3: Summary of Current Contaminants Monitored and Sampling Methodology October 2015 .............................................................................. 131

Table 6.4: Summary of Average Temperature Data ........................................................ 132 Table 6.5: Summary of Average Precipitation Data ........................................................ 133 Table 6.6: Summary of Average Relative Humidity Data ................................................ 133 Table 6.7: Summary of Wind Data ...................................................................................... 133 Table 6.8: Baseline Ambient Nighttime Light Measurements .......................................... 135 Table 6.9: Potential Environmental Effects, Effect Pathways and Measureable

Parameters for Fish and Fish Habitat ................................................................. 169 Table 6.10: Effects Classification Criteria – Fish and Fish Habitat ...................................... 170 Table 6.11: Potential Project-Environment Interactions and Effects on Fish and

Fish Habitat ........................................................................................................... 174 Table 6.12: Quantification of Changes to Fish Habitat: Tributary A to Indian Creek ..... 177 Table 6.13: Quantification of Changes to Fish Habitat: Indian Creek ............................. 179 Table 6.14: Characterization of Residual Environmental Effects: Change in Fish

Habitat .................................................................................................................. 180 Table 6.15: Characterization of Residual Environmental Effects: Change in Fish

Movement, Migration and Fish Passage .......................................................... 182 Table 6.16: Characterization of Residual Environmental Effects: Change in Fish

Mortality ................................................................................................................ 184 Table 6.17: Characterization of Residual Environmental Effects: Change in Water

Quality ................................................................................................................... 186 Table 6.18: Summary of Project Residual Environmental Effects on Fish and Fish

Habitat .................................................................................................................. 188 Table 6.19: Potential Environmental Effects, Effect Pathways and Measureable

Parameters for Migratory Birds ........................................................................... 191 Table 6.20: Characterization of Residual Environmental Effects on Migratory Birds ...... 192

File No. 16090844


Table 6.21: Potential Project - Environmental Interactions and Effects on Migratory Birds ...................................................................................................... 195

Table 6.22 Summary of Project Residual Environmental Effects on Migratory Birds ...... 204 Table 6.23: Potential Environmental Effects, Effects Pathways and Measurable

Parameters for Species at Risk ........................................................................... 207 Table 6.24: Characterization of Residual Environmental Effects on Species at Risk ...... 208 Table 6.25: Potential Project Environmental Interactions and Effects on Species

at Risk Project Components and Physical Activities ....................................... 211 Table 6.26: Summary of Project Residual Environmental Effects on Species at Risk ...... 218 Table 6.27: Potential Environmental Effects, Effect Pathways and Measureable

Parameters for Human Health ........................................................................... 220 Table 6.28: Characterization of Residual Environmental Effects on Human Health ...... 221 Table 6.29: Project Interactions with Human Health........................................................... 225 Table 6.30: Summary of Project Residual Environmental Effects on Human Health ...... 231 Table 6.31: Potential Environmental Effects, Effects Pathways and Measurable

Parameters for Socio-Economic Conditions .................................................... 233 Table 6.32: Characterization of Residual Effects on Socio-Economic Conditions ......... 235 Table 6.33: Project Interactions with Socio-Economic Conditions ................................... 239 Table 6.34: Environmental Effects Mitigation Measures for Change in Demand for

Community Services and Infrastructure ........................................................... 241 Table 6.35: Project-Specific Mitigation Measures for Change in the Quantity and

Quality of Land and Resource Use ................................................................... 243 Table 6.36: Summarizes the Residual Effects of the Project on Socio-Economic

Conditions ............................................................................................................. 244 Table 6.37: Potential Environmental Effects, Effects Pathways and Measurable

Parameters for Archaeological and Heritage Resources ............................. 249 Table 6.38: Characterization of Residual Environmental Effects on

Archaeological and Heritage Resources ........................................................ 250 Table 6.39: Archaeological Locations within the PDA ....................................................... 252 Table 6.40: Summary of Determination of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest ............... 254 Table 6.41: Project Interactions with Archaeological and Cultural Heritage

Resources .............................................................................................................. 255 Table 6.42 Summary of Project Residual Environmental Effects on

Archaeological and Cultural Heritage Resources .......................................... 263 Table 6.43: Potential Cumulative Environmental Effects on Fish and Fish Habitat ......... 265 Table 6.44: Summary of Cumulative Environmental Effects on Fish and Fish

Habitat .................................................................................................................. 268 Table 6.45: Potential Cumulative Environmental Effects on Migratory Birds ................... 271 Table 6.46: Summary of Cumulative Environmental Effects on Migratory Birds.............. 275 Table 6.47: Potential Cumulative Environmental Effects on Species at Risk ................... 278 Table 6.48: Summary of Cumulative Environmental Effects on SAR ................................. 282 Table 6.49: Potential Cumulative Environmental Effects on Socio-Economic

Conditions ............................................................................................................. 286 Table 6.50: Summary of Cumulative Environmental Effects on Socio-Economic

Conditions ............................................................................................................. 288

File No. 160960844


Table 6.51: Potential Interactions between Accidents and Malfunctions and VCs ...... 290 Table 6.52: Environment Canada Meteorological Stations (2015a) ................................ 306 Table 7.1: Summary of Environmental Effects Assessment .............................................. 311 Table 9.1: Proposed Surface Water Post-Construction Follow-Up Studies ..................... 336 Table 9.2: Environmental Management Plan Components............................................ 343 Table 10.1: Project Interactions with VCs ............................................................................. 347 Table 10.2: Summary of Environmental Effects ................................................................... 354

LIST OF DIAGRAMS Diagram 6.1: Overview of Approach .............................................................................. 112 Diagram 6.2: HHRA Risk Components ............................................................................. 227

LIST OF GRAPHS Graph 4.1: Top Topics Raised in a Submitted Comment* ................................................... 79

LIST OF PHOTOS Photo 3.1: Reach Stacker Lifting Container for Truck Transport ........................................ 63

File No. 16090844


LIST OF APPENDICES

FINAL EIS GUIDELINES APPENDIX A

FIGURES APPENDIX BFigure 1: Regional Setting for the Project Figure 2: Alternatives to Project Design Figure 3: Preliminary Design of the Milton Logistics Hub Site Plan Figure 4: Preliminary Watercourse Realignment and Naturalization Figure 5: Aboriginal Reserves Figure 6: Regional Assessment Areas Figure 7: Projects Considered for Cumulative Assessment

RENDERINGS APPENDIX C

RECORD OF CONSULTATION APPENDIX D

TECHNICAL DATA REPORTS APPENDIX EE.1 Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report - Air Quality E.2 Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report - Channel Realignment E.3 Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report - Cultural Heritage Assessment E.4 Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report - Fish and Fish Habitat E.5 Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Geotechnical Investigation E.6 Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report - Hydrogeology E.7 Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report - Human Health Risk

Assessment E.8 Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report - Light E.9 Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Baseline Ambient Noise Study E.10 Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report - Noise Effects Assessment E.11 Planning Justification Report – Bousfields E.12 Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report - Socio-Economic Baseline E.13 Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report - Soil Chemical Analysis E.14 Stage 1 and Stage 2 Archaeological Assessments E.15 Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Hydrology and Surface

Water Quality Baseline Study and Effects Assessment E.16 Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report - Terrestrial E.17 Review of Terminal-Generated Truck Traffic – BA Group E.18 Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Vibration Effects Assessment

SITE SELECTION STUDY APPENDIX F

MITIGATION MEASURES AND COMMITMENTS APPENDIX G

File No. 160960844


This page left blank intentionally

File No. 16090844


Executive Summary

Intermodal transportation is the fastest growing mode of transportation in North America. It provides the ability to offer different modes of transportation and options for shippers. The GTHA represents Canada’s largest population centre and has been experiencing rapid growth resulting in expansion towards the towns and regions surrounding Toronto, particularly toward the west. Canadian National Railway Company (CN) provides intermodal services to the region through its Brampton Intermodal Terminal (BIT) which connects the GTHA with its network of 20 domestic terminals and seven CN-served container ports across North America. BIT, which is Canada's largest inland intermodal terminal (by volume), handles approximately 1 million containers annually. With 50% of CN’s intermodal volumes flowing through BIT, this facility is a key component of CN's rail distribution network. BIT is nearing capacity and in order for CN to meet customer demand and maintain its competitiveness, additional capacity is required. To address the need to support long-term growth, CN made a strategic decision to move forward with plans to develop a satellite intermodal terminal in the western portion of the GTHA, where CN’s growing customer base is located.

In light of the above, CN proposes to construct and operate a new satellite intermodal terminal (the Terminal) including the realignment and extension of the existing mainline tracks, collectively known as the Milton Logistics Hub (the Project). The Terminal is forecasted to handle approximately 350,000 containers annually at the start of operation and 450,000 containers annually at full operation. It is estimated that approximately 650 trucks per day will be entering and subsequently exiting the Terminal at the beginning of operation and at full operation, approximately 800 trucks per day will enter and exit the terminal in support of a planned four intermodal trains per day.

The Project will consist of the construction and operation of:

• yard tracks (3 pad tracks and 3 service tracks);

• work pads and container storage;

• realignment of the existing mainline;

• double track extension of the mainline;

• truck entrance/gate and access road (including CN overpass);

• administration building and maintenance garage;

• stormwater management (SWM) system;

• vegetation clearing, grading and berms

• realignment of Indian Creek;

• realignment of Indian Creek’s Tributary A;

File No. 160960844 i


• naturalization and restoration;

• electrical and communications infrastructure;

• Lower Base Line grade separation (underpass); and,

• realignment of existing petroleum pipelines.

Decommissioning and closure activities were not considered as there is no expectation that the Terminal will be closed. A preliminary schedule for the development of the Project has the construction phase currently planned to start in 2017 extending over an 18 to 24 month period, with the operation of the Terminal to commence in 2019.

The scope of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is focused on matters that are under the jurisdiction of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA). The EIS gives full consideration to all of the applicable factors outlined in Section 19 of CEAA, 2012 and as defined in the Guidelines for the Preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement – Milton Logistics Hub Project (CEAA 2015) (EIS Guidelines). This includes consideration of the environmental effects of the Project, the significance of effects, comments from the public, Aboriginal peoples and regulatory agencies, technically and economically feasible mitigation measures, follow-up and monitoring programs, the purpose of the Project, alternative means of carrying out the Project, and any change of the Project that may be caused by the environment. The EIS also addresses any other matter relevant to the environmental assessment (EA) that government departments and agencies having authority over the Project require to be taken into account.

The EA process is intended to support and better define the Project through early consideration of potential environmental effects as well as mitigation measures. The EA process considers issues and concerns identified through engagement with Aboriginal communities, public, interest groups, municipalities and agencies. Project-related engagement activities have been on-going since 2014, with consultation focused on the EA commencing in March 2015.

The EIS is concentrated on the identification and assessment of potential adverse environmental effects of the Project on Valued Components (VCs). VCs are environmental attributes potentially affected by the Project that are of particular value or interest because they have been identified to be of concern to Aboriginal peoples, regulatory agencies, CN, resource managers, scientists, key stakeholders, and/or the general public. The following VCs are identified for assessment within the EIS:

• Fish and Fish Habitat;

• Migratory Birds;

• Species at Risk;

• Human Health;

• Socio-Economic Conditions; and,

ii File No. 16090844


• Archaeological and Cultural Heritage Resources.

There were no identified traditional land and resource uses by Aboriginal peoples within the PDA and Project-related interactions with traditional resource use do not occur. Other concerns raised during consultation with Aboriginal peoples have been assessed as part of discipline specific assessments (i.e., fish and fish habitat, migratory birds, SAR, archaeological sites and resources).

During public consultations, some have expressed concerns respecting truck routing and congestion. To address this concern, CN has retained a consultant to prepare a traffic analysis of alternative truck routes between the Terminal and 400-series highways. CN will continue to work with the municipalities to inform their on-going traffic planning efforts.

Additional supporting information pertinent to the assessment and discussion in the EIS is provided through a series of technical data reports (TDRs), which are to be read in conjunction with the EIS. The TDRs provide existing baseline conditions based on available background information, site-specific field investigations and discipline-specific modelling, as appropriate, to inform the assessment of environmental effects.

Project components and activities include potential direct and indirect environmental effects from the construction and operation of the Project, which were refined and expanded to address the EIS Guidelines.

Construction related activities assessed include:

• site clearing and grading activities;

• track construction and signals installation;

• terminal infrastructure and paving;

• grade separations;

• utilities;

• watercourse realignment, restoration and naturalization; and,

• construction equipment and operation.

Operational activities assessed include:

• containerized goods handling through truck and train operations;

• lift operations for the loading and unloading of containers;

• temporary storage and movement of containers within the Terminal;

• locomotive fueling in designated areas and minor railcar repair;

• equipment maintenance for Terminal vehicles only; and,

File No. 160960844 iii


• maintenance of the wastewater and SWM systems.

Design features and mitigation measures have been incorporated into the Project to prevent or reduce potential environmental effects and address most of the potential cumulative environmental effects. Additional mitigation measures include best management practices (BMPs), general operational procedures to be employed during construction and operation of the Project and worker education. With the implementation of mitigation measures, adverse residual environmental effects of routine Project activities and components are predicted to be not significant for all VCs.

Accidents and malfunctions that could occur during the construction and operation of the Project, which could potentially result in adverse environmental effects, include hazardous materials spill on land or water, spill of an intermodal container on land, traffic accidents at entry points to the Terminal and derailment were considered. Given the precautionary safety measures in place and the emergency planning and mitigation measures for the Project, the potential environmental effects to the VCs assessed in this EA resulting from an accident or malfunction are considered not significant.

Environmental factors which could potentially affect the Project include extreme weather conditions (i.e., winds, extreme temperatures, severe precipitation, ice storms, tornadoes and lightning), climate change, and geophysical and geotechnical hazards. CN has Emergency Management Systems with response procedures to address extreme weather and climate conditions. The effects of climate change have been accommodated in the design of the Terminal. Potential hazards along Indian Creek will be addressed through channel realignment and restoration opportunities (i.e., natural channel design), with other sediment stability concerns to be mitigated through appropriate construction procedures. As a result, potential effects of the environment on the Project are considered to be not significant.

In summary, with the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, the Project is not likely to result in significant adverse environmental effects, including cumulative environment effects.

A follow-up and monitoring program will be implemented to verify the accuracy of predicted environmental effects through the implementation of the following:

• supplemental technical studies designed to add to the technical data collected as part of the EIS;

• post-construction studies which assist in evaluating the accuracy of the conclusions of the EA and the effectiveness of the mitigation measures;

• compliance monitoring to verify whether required mitigation measures and commitments made through the regulatory approvals process were implemented; and,

iv File No. 16090844


• construction monitoring to assess the effectiveness of construction mitigation measures and whether these measures were revised during construction.

Key environmental, economic and social benefits of the Project will be realized at the national, regional and local scale, as follows:

Environmental

• using more energy efficient intermodal service will reduce Canada’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, as one intermodal train removes as many as 280 heavy long distance trucks from highways;

• adding components to the administration building design to allow for the use of passive energy to offset the demand on energy requirements (e.g., rooftop solar panels);

• planting of vegetation along areas of the Indian Creek and Tributary A realignments will increase vegetation diversity, shade to the watercourses, provide bank stability and result in improvements to water quality and fish habitat;

• reducing existing contaminant loading into Indian Creek and Tributary A as a result of the SWM system; and,

• considering the establishment of a temporary Monarch butterfly habitat study area on CN property.

Economic

• benefits to customers and the economy by improving central Canada’s access to key domestic and trans-border markets as well as the Pacific, Atlantic and Gulf coast trade gateways and generate new supply chain efficiencies within Canada, Ontario and the GTHA;

• creation of more than 1,000 opportunities for employment (including 130 direct jobs at the site, in addition to indirect and induced opportunities) locally during operation (Cushman & Wakefield 2014); and,

• assist with reducing congestion on regional highways and support the Province’s plan for improving transportation infrastructure and reducing congestion providing economic benefit within the GTHA.

Social

• reduced congestion at the rail crossings at Lower Base Line by the creation of a grade separation;

• increased flood control along Tremaine Road by incorporating floodplain design;

• increased income for regional businesses from purchases of goods and services for the Project; and,

• community outreach and partnership programs by CN.

File No. 160960844 v


This page left blank intentionally.

vi File No. 16090844


Abbreviations

“ Inch

AA Archaeological Assessment

AANDC Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada

AAQC Ambient Air Quality Criteria

ANSI Area of Natural and Scientific Interest

ASDB Archaeological Sites Database

BA Group BA Consulting Group Ltd.

B(a)P benzo(a)pyrene

BIT Brampton Intermodal Terminal

Blakes Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP

BMP Best Management Practices

Bousfields Bousfields Inc.

CAAQS Canadian Ambient Air Quality Standards

CACs Criteria air contaminants

CCME Canadian Council of the Ministers of the Environment

CEAA Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency

CEAA, 2012 Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 (S.C. 2012, c. 19, s. 52)

CHR Cultural Heritage Resource

cm centimetre

CN Canadian National Railway Company

CNTL CN Transportation Ltd.

File No. 160960844 vii


CO Carbon monoxide

COPCs Chemicals of potential concern

COSEWIC Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada

COSSARO Committee on the Status of Species at Risk in Ontario

CP Canadian Pacific Railway Company

CRA fishery Commercial, Recreational, or Aboriginal fishery

CTA Canada Transportation Act (S.C. 1996, c. 10)

CWQG-FAL Canadian Water Quality Guidelines for Freshwater Aquatic Life

dB Decibels

DFO Fisheries and Oceans Canada

DO Dissolved Oxygen

Draft EIS Guidelines Draft Guidelines for the Preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement – Milton Logistics Hub Project (May 2015)

EA Environmental Assessment

EIS Environmental Impact Statement

EIS Guidelines Guidelines for the Preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement – Milton Logistics Hub Project (July 2015)

ELC Ecological Land Classification

EPP Environmental Protection Plan

ER Exposure Ratio

ERP

ESA

Emergency Response Plan

Endangered Species Act, 2007, (S.O. 2007, c. 6)

ESC Erosion and Sediment Control

FAQ Frequently Asked Questions

viii File No. 16090844


ft Feet

FTA U.S. Federal Transit Administration

gal Gallon

GGH Greater Golden Horseshoe

GHG Greenhouse gas

GIS Geographic Information Systems

GLC Ground-level concentration

GTHA Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area

ha Hectare

Halton Region Regional Municipality of Halton

Halton TMP Halton Region Transportation Master Plan (2011)

HAP Hazardous Air Pollutant

HHRA Human Health Risk Assessment

Huron Wendat Huron Wendat First Nation

HVAC Heating, ventilation, air conditioning

Hydro One Hydro One Networks Inc.

IBA Important Bird Areas

IDF Intensity-duration-frequency

ILCR Incremental lifetime cancer risk

IOD Intermodal Oriented Development

km Kilometre

kph Kilometre per Hour

kV kilovolt

File No. 160960844 ix


LAA Local Assessment Area

L/min Litres per minute

LED Light emitting diode

m Metres

m2 Square Metres

m3 Cubic Metres

masl Metres Above Sea Level

MBCA Migratory Birds Convention Act, 1994 (S.C. 1994, c. 22)

MDZ Minimal Distance Zone

mm Millimetres

MNCFN Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nation

MNO Métis Nation of Ontario

MNR Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (pre-2014)

MNRF Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (post-2014)

MOE Ontario Ministry of the Environment (pre-2014)

MOECC Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change (post-2014)

MP Member of Parliament

MPOI Maximum point of impingement

mph Miles per Hour

MPP Member of Provincial Parliament

MTCS Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport

MTO Ontario Ministry of Transportation

MVA mega-volt ampere

x File No. 16090844


NAPS National Air Pollution Surveillance Program

NH3 Ammonia

NHIC Natural Heritage Information Centre

NOx Nitrogen oxides

O3 Ozone

OGLA Ontario-Great-Lakes Area

OHA Ontario Heritage Act, (R.S.O. 1990, c. O.18)

OSAP Ontario Stream Assessment Protocol

PAHs Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons

PDA Project Development Area

PIFs Project Information Numbers

PM Particulate matter

PM2.5 Particulate matter less than 2.5 μm in diameter

PM10 Particulate matter less than 10 μm in diameter

PORs Points of reception

PPS Provincial Policy Statement

PPV Peak Particle Velocity

PSW Provincially Significant Wetland

PWQO Provincial Water Quality Objectives

QEW Queen Elizabeth Way

RAA Regional Assessment Area

RAP Restricted Activity Period

ROC Record of Consultation

File No. 160960844 xi


ROPA 38 Halton Region Regional Official Plan Amendment No. 38

ROW Right-of-Way

RSA Railway Safety Act, (R.S.C., 1985, c. 32 (4th Supp.))

RUSLE Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation

SAR Species at Risk

SARA Species at Risk Act, (S.C. 2002, c. 29)

SARO Species at Risk in Ontario

Six Nations Six Nations of the Grand River

SO2 Sulphur dioxide

Stantec Stantec Consulting Ltd.

Sun-Canadian Sun-Canadian Pipeline Company Limited

SWM Stormwater Management

TDR Technical Data Report

TK Traditional Knowledge

TLRU Traditional Land and Resource Use

TLU Traditional Land Use

TOR Terms of Reference

TSP Total suspended particulate matter

TSS Total Suspended Solids

U.S. United States of America

VC Valued Component

VOCs Volatile organic compounds

WMU Wildlife Management Unit

xii File No. 16090844


YOY Young-of-Year

File No. 160960844 xiii



xiv File No. 16090844


Glossary

administration building Building for terminal operations consisting of an office area (offices/cubicles), a lunchroom/kitchen, lockers, washrooms and shower facilities.

Aboriginal A collective name for the original peoples of North America and their descendants. The Canadian constitution recognizes three groups of Aboriginal peoples: First Nations, Métis and Inuit (INAC 2015a).

Adaptive management Consists of a planned and systematic process for continuously improving environmental management practices by learning about their outcomes. It involves, among other things, the implementation of new or modified mitigation measures over the life of a project to address unanticipated environmental effects (CEAA 2013b).

Brampton Intermodal Terminal

CN’s largest intermodal terminal by volume, located within the City of Brampton, Ontario.

bobtail tractor Tractor without a chassis or container.

Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012

An Act respecting the environmental assessment of certain activities and the prevention of significant adverse environmental effects.

chassis Base frame (trailer) pulled by a tractor that supports the container.

Chemical of Potential Concern (COPC)

Project-related chemicals that have the potential to elicit adverse human health effects.

compliance monitoring Monitoring that verifies that mitigation measures were properly implemented (CEAA 2011).

Cumulative environmental effects

The environmental effects likely to result from a designated project in combination with other physical activities that have been or will be carried out (CEAA 2013b).

EIS Guidelines Refers to the document entitled Guidelines for the Preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement – Milton Logistics Hub Project (CEAA 2015b).

File No. 160960844 xv


Environmental Impact Statement

A document prepared to describe the effects for proposed activities on the environment.

Environmental Protection Plan (EPP)

A practical tool that describes the actions required to minimize environmental effects before, during and after project implementation. The plan may include details about the implementation of the mitigation measures identified in the environmental assessment, such as who is responsible for implementation, where the measures are intended to be implemented, and within what timeframe (CEAA 2013b).

First Nation One of the three groups of Aboriginal peoples of Canada. Includes both Status and non-status “Indian” peoples (INAC 2015b).

Follow-up program A program for verifying the accuracy of the environmental assessment of a project and determining the effectiveness of any measures taken to mitigate the adverse environmental effects of the project (CEAA 2013b).

Gradient Another term for slope, as determined by the quotient of rise over run.

Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area

A contiguous urban region consisting of the Regions of Halton, Peel, York and Durham and Cities of Hamilton and Toronto.

hazard A substance or other condition which has the potential to cause

harm to human, ecological or environmental receptors.

Human Health Risk Assessment

Estimates the nature and magnitude of potential adverse health risks in humans following exposure to Project-related chemical emissions.

light trespass Also known as light spill, refers to the transmission of light from fixtures within a facility to the environment and receptors outside the facility.

Local Assessment Area The maximum area within which environmental effects from project activities and components can be predicted or measured with a reasonable degree of accuracy and confidence. It consists of the Project Development Area and adjacent areas where project-related environmental effects are reasonably expected to occur based on available information and professional judgment.

Lower Base Line crossing The existing at grade crossing where Lower Base Line crosses the CN Halton Subdivision.

xvi File No. 16090844


Lower Base Line grade separation

Construction of a grade separation (road underpass) where Lower Base Line crosses beneath the existing mainline and proposed new tracks east of Tremaine Road.

mainline Track that is used for through trains or is the principal artery of the railway system from which branch lines, yards, etc. are connected.

maintenance garage Attached to the administration building for terminal equipment maintenance.

Métis Describes people with mixed Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal ancestry who identify themselves as Métis, distinct from First Nations, Inuit or non-Aboriginal people. One of the three groups of Aboriginal Peoples in Canada.

mitigation measures Measures for the elimination, reduction or control of the potential adverse environmental effects of a designated project, and includes restitution for any damage to the environment caused by those effects through replacement, restoration, compensation or any other means (CEAA 2013b).

monitoring Periodic or continuous surveillance or testing, according to a pre-determined schedule, of one or more environmental components. Monitoring is usually conducted to determine the level of compliance with stated requirements or to observe the status and trends of a particular environmental component over time (CEAA 2013b).

North American Free Trade Agreement

A trade agreement that sets the rules of trade and investment between Canada, the United States of America and Mexico.

pad tracks Type of yard tracks primarily used to accommodate the loading and unloading of intermodal railcars.

Project Satellite intermodal terminal (the Terminal), including the realignment and extension of the existing mainline tracks, collectively known as the Milton Logistics Hub.

Project Development Area Encompasses the immediate area in which project activities and components may occur and as such represents the area within which direct physical disturbance may occur as a result of the Project, temporary or permanent.

rail yard or terminal yard Area in which the yard tracks are located.

File No. 160960844 xvii


Regional Assessment Area The area within which residual environmental effects from project activities and components may interact cumulatively with the residual environmental effects of other past, present, and future (i.e., certain or reasonably foreseeable) physical activities. The Regional Assessment Area is based on the potential for interactions between the Project and other existing or future potential projects.

Regional Storm Event Precipitation event that defines the extent of a riverine flood hazard in this area of Ontario.

Residual environmental effects

An environmental effect of a designated project that remains, or is predicted to remain, after mitigation measures have been implemented (CEAA 2013b).

sediment Unconsolidated earth (e.g., silt, sand, gravel) that may be eroded, transported, and deposited by fluvial processes.

service tracks Type of yard tracks used to hold railcars; where railcars are staged for their next movement.

sky glow Refers to the illumination of the sky and/or clouds by light sources on the surface of the earth such as street lighting, and haze in the atmosphere that replaces the natural night time sky with a translucent to opaque lighted dome.

stormwater management pond

A storage facility that temporarily detains stormwater and releases it gradually to manage the quality and quantity of stormwater run-off.

stormwater management system

Surface drainage collection system consisting of storm sewers, culverts, drainage ditches and stormwater management ponds.

sustainable development Development that meets the needs of the present, without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs (CEAA 2013b).

switching A mechanical action that enables trains to be guided from one track to another.

Terminal Project components, excluding the doubling of the mainline.

Terminal truck gate Truck access into and out of the Terminal; serves as a checkpoint where all drivers, trucks, chassis and containers are checked for documentation and authorization.

xviii File No. 16090844


Trans-Pacific Partnership A trade agreement amongst 11 countries: Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Chile, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, United States, Singapore and Vietnam.

Valued component An environmental effect of a designated project that remains, or is predicted to remain, after mitigation measures have been implemented (CEAA 2013b).

work pads Hard surface area used for train loading/unloading activities as well as for the temporary storage of containers.

yard tracks Tracks branching off from the mainline and located within the rail/terminal yard; comprised of pad tracks and service tracks; used for switching, making up trains, or storing railcars.

File No. 160960844 xix



xx File No. 16090844


Introduction and Overview December 7, 2015

1.0 INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW

1.1 THE PROPONENT

The Proponent, Canadian National Railway Company (CN), is a North American transportation company engaged in transporting approximately C$250 billion worth of goods annually for a wide range of business sectors, ranging from resource products to manufactured products to consumer goods, across a rail network spanning Canada and the United States of America (U.S.). CN’s network spans from the Ports of Vancouver and Prince Rupert in the west to the Port of Halifax in the east and the Port of New Orleans in the south, and transports North American goods to international markets around the world through CN served ports. By connecting three coasts with a 35,000 kilometre (km) network, CN is able to transport essential goods and products to Canadian and American businesses and homes in the most energy-efficient manner.

CN proposes to construct and operate a new satellite intermodal terminal (the Terminal) including the realignment and extension of existing mainline tracks, collectively known as the Milton Logistics Hub (the Project).

The Proponent contact information is as follows:

Name of the Project: Milton Logistics Hub

Name of Proponent: Canadian National Railway Company

Mailing Address of Proponent: 935 de La Gauchetière Street West Montreal, Quebec, H3B 2M9, Canada

Chief Executive Officer: Claude Mongeau

Project Contact Person: Normand Pellerin Assistant Vice-President Environment and Sustainability

Telephone Number of Contact Person:

(519) 399-7400

E-Mail of Contact Person: [email protected]

Facsimile: (514) 399-7707

Website: https://www.cn.ca/ CN’s head office is located in Montreal, Quebec. CN maintains a corporate and management structure that is in line with its peers and other large publicly–traded companies. CN is listed on both the Toronto Stock Exchange and the New York Stock Exchange under the symbols CNR and CNI, respectively.

File No. 160960844 1

mailto:[email protected]

https://www.cn.ca/



CN adopted and adheres to corporate governance practices that either meet or exceed applicable Canadian and U.S. corporate governance standards. The role, mandate and rules of the Board of Directors and of its committees are set forth in CN’s Corporate Governance Manual, which is available on the company website (https://www.cn.ca/). The Board of Directors has clearly delineated its role and the role of management. The role of the Board of Directors is to supervise the management of CN’s business and affairs, with the goal of delivering valuable transportation services for its customers and to grow the business at low incremental cost. The role of CN Management is to conduct the day-to-day operations in a way that will meet this goal. CN directors and officers are disclosed annually in regulatory filings and are also identified on the company website.

CN has retained Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec) to lead the completion of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Project under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 (CEAA, 2012). Stantec also provided technical services for the completion of several supporting documents to the EIS, including environmental, heritage, archaeological and geotechnical expertise. AECOM provided engineering services for the preliminary design and layout of the Terminal, as well as stormwater management (SWM) and floodplain analysis expertise. Cushman & Wakefield performed an economic analysis and land availability review. Bousfields Inc. (Bousfields) provided professional planning advice regarding the rationale and land use implications for the Terminal, while the BA Consulting Group Ltd. (BA Group) provided an analysis of Terminal generated trucks to support the EIS. Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP (Blakes) provided legal advice on planning and environmental related matters.

This EIS report has been completed with guidance from the Guidelines for the Preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement – Milton Logistics Hub Project (EIS Guidelines), which specify the nature, scope and extent of the information required in the EIS issued by the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA) (Appendix A).

1.2 PROJECT OVERVIEW

The Project consists of the construction and operation of the Terminal and the realignment / extension of the existing mainline tracks in the Town of Milton. The proposed Project will accommodate the growing demand for intermodal services and ensure service and fluidity through the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA) as the Brampton Intermodal Terminal (BIT) approaches capacity with limited land available for expansion.

The Project is forecasted to handle approximately 350,000 containers annually at the start of operation and approximately 450,000 containers annually at full operation. The Terminal is anticipated to be operational for 24 hours a day, seven days a week with the predominant flow of truck traffic occurring on weekdays, during the daytime. It is estimated that approximately 650 trucks per day will be entering and subsequently exiting the Terminal at the beginning of operation and approximately 800 trucks per day each way at full operation. Truck access to the Terminal will be through a CN-owned private access road off Britannia Road. The access road

2 File No. 16090844

https://www.cn.ca/



will include a new two-lane overpass to enable truck access over the CN mainline and yard tracks, which will accommodate trucks entering and exiting the Terminal.

The Terminal will be served by four intermodal trains per day. Two of the trains to be handled in the Terminal are part of the 25 to 30 trains per day currently moving along the Halton Subdivision while two new trains are forecasted to be added to service the Terminal. The Terminal is designed to accommodate trains directly from the mainline to either a pad track or to a service track, based on the train’s design.

Once on the pad tracks, containers will be loaded and unloaded from railcars and chassis using mobile reach stacker-type cranes. There will be space available on the work pads to allow for the temporary staging of containers and chassis, loading/unloading activities and to facilitate container, crane and truck movements throughout the Terminal. Service tracks will provide additional space to stage receiving and departing trains.

To avoid disruption to vehicular traffic while trains enter or exit the Terminal, a grade separation is proposed where Lower Base Line crosses the existing mainline, just east of Tremaine Road. An underpass will route Lower Base Line beneath the existing tracks and the Terminal.

Berms and barriers will be constructed, as required, to minimize effects on the community.

A 2,500 square metre (m2) administration building with an attached 1,200 m2 maintenance garage will be built on the site. Employee access to the administration building will be provided through a new entrance off Tremaine Road. Potable water will be transported to the site. Water for washing terminal equipment will be supplemented using a rainwater capture system and/or recycled water. A stormwater collection and drainage system will be installed that includes storm sewers, oil grit separators and stormwater management (SWM) ponds to manage run-off, while drainage ditches will convey external drainage around the Terminal. Sanitary waste will be collected in holding tanks, which will be pumped out and disposed of at a licensed disposal facility. Waste management, including disposal of any hazardous solid and liquid waste, will be hauled off-site by licensed contractors to licensed disposal facilities.

The Terminal will connect into fibre optic cables that will be installed within CN’s right-of-way (ROW) as part of as part of planned upgrades to CN’s communication network, which will facilitate monitoring and control of the facility. In addition, an on-site radio communications system will be required to enable radio communications with terminal equipment and staff and to ensure safe operations.

As part of the Project, relocation of two existing petroleum pipelines will be required. Portions of Indian Creek and Tributary A will be realigned to avoid and mitigate potential impacts of development and operation of the Terminal and will be enhanced to improve existing fish habitat and revitalize riparian and floodplain areas.

File No. 160960844 3



A list of key project components and activities anticipated during construction and operation of the Terminal are listed below. More specific information and a description of the project components and activities are provided in Section 3.3 and 3.4.

1.2.1 Project Components

The Project Development Area (PDA) described throughout the EIS has been defined as the area of physical disturbance directly associated with the Project footprint. The PDA incorporates all project components and area grading, which covers approximately 185 hectares (ha) of CN owned property. Figure 1, Appendix B identifies the location of the Project represented by the PDA relative to the regional setting. Key components of the Project include the following:

• Yard tracks: Six (6) yard tracks, including three (3) pad tracks and three (3) service tracks totaling approximately 20,510 metres (m);

• Work pads: Hard surface areas located in between the pad tracks, each approximately 65 m wide by 2,000 m long;

• Realignment of the existing CN mainline: Realignment of the mainline tracks up to 98 m eastward from the existing railway centre line, resulting in an additional 45 m of new length track to accommodate the Terminal;

• Double track extension of CN mainline: The existing mainline will be doubled from Ash station (Mile 39.50, Halton Subdivision) to a point south of Derry Road (Mile 36.86, Halton Subdivision), extending a second track by approximately 4,155 m, resulting in a combined increase of track length (including realignment of existing mainline track) of approximately 4,200 m;

• Terminal truck entrance/gate and access road (including overpass): Truck entrance/exit off Britannia Road to a controlled access gate, consisting of portal structures, canopies, kiosks and assistance booth. A new two-lane private road and overpass on CN property for access over the mainline and into the Terminal. The approximately 1.7 km private entrance road and designated queuing area will accommodate up to 140 trucks within the Terminal on CN property. A signalized intersection is anticipated on Britannia Road to accommodate the Terminal truck entrance;

• Administration building and maintenance garage: Additional permanent facilities currently planned include an administration building and attached maintenance garage. Employees will access the parking area for the administration building via Tremaine Road;

• SWM system: Stormwater sewers and drainage swales will be used to ensure stormwater run-off from the Terminal drains into two SWM ponds equipped with shut-off valves before draining into Indian Creek or Tributary A. Oil grit separators will be installed. Flow diversion channels will convey external stormwater run-off around the Terminal;

• Clearing and grading: Area clearing and grading to accommodate project components;

• Berms: Vegetated berms will be installed as required, to minimize impact on the community;

4 File No. 16090844



• Realignment of Indian Creek: Realignment of approximately 570 m section of Indian Creek;

• Realignment of Tributary A: Enclosure of a section of Tributary A within an approximately 125 m concrete culvert beneath the yard tracks and work pads, as well as two smaller culverts under the proposed access road near Britannia Road and truck gate. Flows in Tributary A will be diverted around SWM Pond 1 through an approximately 500 m realigned section of Tributary A. The existing on-line agricultural pond will be removed;

• Naturalization and restoration: Incorporation of aquatic habitat features, restoration/enhancement of riparian vegetation and naturalization of disturbed areas within Indian Creek and Tributary A to stabilize the streams, improve habitat and restore natural conditions that support fish habitat;

• Electrical infrastructure: Installation of an 8 mega-volt ampere (MVA) transformer to support power requirements at the Terminal. Electricity will be supplied through Milton Hydro Distribution, with on-site power generators to be used as back-up power sources;

• Communication infrastructure: Installation of an on-site radio communications system and connection to fibre optic cables within the existing CN mainline ROW;

• Lower Base Line underpass: Approximately 40 m to 55 m long, two-lane underpass on Lower Base Line to provide clearance beneath the Terminal and mainline tracks to facilitate public vehicle movements; and,

• Existing petroleum pipelines: Relocation of two existing pipelines owned by Sun-Canadian Pipelines Ltd. (Sun-Canadian) to remain within CN property. Two existing natural gas pipeline crossings (owned by Union Gas) and one electrical transmission crossing located north of Britannia Road that do not require upgrades along the existing CN mainline ROW.

1.2.2 Project Activities

Activities associated with the construction of the Terminal and track facilities will include:





• utilities;



Activities associated with the operations phase of the Terminal will include:

• containerized goods handling through truck and train operations;

File No. 160960844 5



• lift operations for the loading and unloading of containers;

• temporary storage and movement of containers within the Terminal;

• locomotive fueling in designated areas and minor railcar repair;

• equipment maintenance for Terminal vehicles only; and,

• maintenance of the wastewater and SWM systems.

Decommissioning and closure activities were not considered as there is no expectation that the Terminal will be closed.

A preliminary schedule for the development of the Project has the construction phase currently planned to start in 2017 over an 18 to 24 month period, with the operation of the Terminal to commence in 2019. The proposed Project schedule is subject to many factors that may affect the anticipated timing, most notable being the CEAA panel review process and other approvals. As such, the schedule presented here is subject to change.

1.3 PROJECT LOCATION

The Project is located in the GTHA within the Town of Milton in the Regional Municipality of Halton (Halton Region) (Figure 1, Appendix B). The centroid coordinates of the Terminal are: UTM- Easting, 594182, Northing 4812535; Decimal Degrees, Longitude -79.83 Latitude 43.45; Degrees Minutes Seconds, -79° 50’8.88W, 43° 27’35.28N.

The Terminal is located adjacent and parallel to the existing CN mainline on properties entirely owned by CN. There will be no federal lands used for the purpose of carrying out the Project, nor will there be any granting of interest in federal land (i.e., easement, ROW, transfer of ownership).

The Terminal will be built on approximately 400 acres (approximately 160 ha) of the 1,000 acres (approximately 400 ha) of CN-owned land adjacent to CN’s Halton Subdivision, which is one of CN‘s existing mainline corridors in the western half of the GTHA. The extent of the realignment and extension of the mainline are within CN’s property and are bounded by Derry Road to the north and 2nd Sideroad to the south. The Project components as they relate to the Terminal will generally be bounded by Britannia Road to the north, First Line to the east, Tremaine Road to the west, and Lower Base Line to the south.

Portions of the CN-owned lands west of the existing mainline are located within Halton Region’s Urban Boundary for the Town of Milton and are designated as employment lands while the CN-owned lands to the east of the existing are designated future strategic employment areas (Halton Region 2014a). The existing Halton Region Waste Management Site is located east of the Project on First Line, Highway 407 is located to the south and the Burlington Airpark Airport is located approximately 1.4 km to the southwest.

6 File No. 16090844



Land use in this area is composed of agricultural land, the majority of which is row crops (i.e., soybeans, corn, wheat, etc.) with some of the fields also used to grow hay. Properties owned by CN are currently leased to local farmers and residents. The ground surface cover across the Project site is composed largely of farm fields, sparse hedgerows and drainage features including Indian Creek and its tributaries. There are a few residences fronting First Line, Tremaine Road and Lower Base Line, which include landscaped grass and hard cover (driveways, walkways, and similar). Future residential development is proposed north of Britannia Road.

The Project site is located within the Indian Creek sub-watershed of Bronte Creek. The headwaters of much of this sub-watershed drain from the Niagara Escarpment and descend the slopes to the Peel Plain south of Derry Road (Conservation Halton 2002). The characteristic fine textured soils and extensive vegetation clearing over the Peel Plain generally limits the groundwater recharge. Vegetation cover within the sub-watershed is sparse and fields extend to the stream banks (Conservation Halton 2002).

Recognized natural features occur in proximity to the Project, including Trafalgar Moraine Candidate Earth Science Area of Natural and Scientific Interest (ANSI) located several hundred metres south of the PDA and the Indian Creek Wetland Complex and North Oakville-Milton West Wetland Complex, located within approximately 1 km of CN-owned lands. None of these features occur within the PDA.

The Project will not require access to, use of, or the exploration, development, and production of resources or lands currently known to be used for traditional purposes by Aboriginal peoples. The Project site has been privately owned since the 19th century, and is not known to be used for traditional purposes by Aboriginal peoples. CEAA has identified four Aboriginal communities to be consulted in the context of the environmental assessment (EA), as follows:

• Mississaugas of the New Credit: The Project is located within Treaty 13A representing the Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nation (MNCFN). Regular meetings are underway with the MNCFN to ensure that communities are consulted with in a positive manner.

• Six Nations of the Grand River: The Six Nations of the Grand River (Six Nations) assert that the Project is located within the 1701 Nanfan/Fort Albany Treaty area of the Six Nations. CN has and will continue to reach out to Six Nations to ensure that community concerns are addressed and that they are provided with relevant information on the Project.

• Huron Wendat Nation: The Project is located in an area historically occupied by the Huron Wendat Nation (Huron Wendat), and may be the site of artifacts associated with the community. CN is working with the Huron Wendat to assure that their archaeological interests in the Project area are considered.

• Métis Nation of Ontario: Métis represented by the Métis Nation of Ontario (MNO) have asserted Aboriginal rights throughout most of Ontario, including the Project area. CN has and will continue to reach out to MNO to ensure that concerns with the Project are addressed and that they are provided with relevant information on the Project.

File No. 160960844 7



1.4 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK AND ROLE OF GOVERNMENT

CN holds a federal certificate of fitness issued by the Canadian Transportation Agency under Section 92 of the Canada Transportation Act (CTA). Section 95 of the CTA confers onto CN broad powers to construct and operate a railway. Additionally, CN has been declared a work for the general advantage of Canada by Section 16 of the CN Commercialization Act. As a federally regulated railway, CN is subject to applicable federal legislation. Provincial and local legislation that encroaches on CN’s core activities is not applicable to CN. Similarly, provincial or local legislation inconsistent with federal legislation governing CN’s activities does not apply to CN.

1.4.1 Federal Environmental Assessment Framework

A federal EA of the proposed Project is required under the CEAA, 2012. The scope of the federal EA is focused on matters within the care and control of CN and environmental effects as defined in Section 5 of CEAA, 2012.

Under CEAA, 2012, Designated Projects included in the Regulations Designating Physical Activities may be subject to a federal EA. CEAA has confirmed the Project is a Designated Project pursuant to Section 25 (b), specifically for “the construction, operation, decommissioning and abandonment of a new railway yard with seven or more yard tracks or a total track length of 20 km or more.”

Based on a final version of the Project Description dated March 31, 2015 (http://www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca/050/documents/p80100/101296E.pdf), CEAA confirmed that the Project meets the definition of a designated project under CEAA, 2012. The federal EA for this Project commenced on May 22, 2015, with the EIS Guidelines released by CEAA on July 20, 2015 (Appendix A).

As announced by a press release issued on July 20, 2015, the federal Minister of the Environment (the Minister), now Minister of the Environment and Climate Change, referred the EA of the Project to an independent review panel, citing the “potential to cause significant adverse environmental effects and concerns expressed by the public and Aboriginal groups in relation to these effects”.

In referring the EA to a review panel, the Minister has established timelines for the establishment of the panel, submission of its reports and issuance of a decision statement by the Minister under section 54 of CEAA, 2012, which combined is not to exceed 24 months from the date of the referral (excluding time taken by the Proponent to complete work and gather information for the EA).

Documentation related to the EA is available on the Canadian Environmental Assessment Registry (reference number 80100) at: https://www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca/050/details-eng.cfm?evaluation=80100.

8 File No. 16090844

http://www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca/050/documents/p80100/101296E.pdf

http://www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca/050/documents/p80100/101296E.pdf

https://www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca/050/details-eng.cfm?evaluation=80100

https://www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca/050/details-eng.cfm?evaluation=80100



1.4.2 Provincial Environmental Assessment Framework

As a federally regulated railway, CN is subject to relevant federal legislation. As such, the Project is not subject to the provincial EA process.

1.4.3 Other Approvals and Authorizations

Key federal permits and approvals potentially required for development at the site of the Project are listed in Table 1.1.

Table 1.1: Key Federal Permits / Approvals

Permits / Approvals Activities Associated with the Project

Federal EA Legislation: CEAA, 2012 Responsible Agency: CEAA

• Section 25 (b) of the Regulations Designating Physical Activities: “The construction, operation, decommissioning and abandonment of a new railway yard with seven or more yard tracks or a total track length of 20 km or more.”

Application to Construct a Railway Line Legislation: CTA Responsible Agency: Canadian Transportation Agency

• Section 98 (1): “A railway company shall not construct a railway line without the approval of the Agency (Canadian Transportation Agency).”

Road and Utility Crossing Agreements Legislation: CTA Responsible Agency: Canadian Transportation Agency

• 101. (1) An agreement, or an amendment to an agreement, relating to the construction, maintenance or apportionment of the costs of a road crossing or a utility crossing may be filed with the Agency. (2) When the agreement or amendment is filed, it becomes an order of the Agency authorizing the parties to construct or maintain the crossing, or apportioning the costs, as provided in the agreement. (3)If a person is unsuccessful in negotiating an agreement or amendment mentioned in subsection (1) the Agency may, on application, authorize the construction of a suitable road crossing, utility crossing or related work, or specifying who shall maintain the crossing.

Request for Review Legislation: Fisheries Act Responsible Agency: Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO)

• Section 37(1) The Minister may review any work, undertaking or activity that may result in serious harm to fish that are part of a commercial, recreational or Aboriginal fishery, or to fish that support such a fishery.

Notice of Railway Work Legislation: Railway Safety Act Responsible Agency: Transport Canada

• Section 8 (1): The proponent shall not undertake the work unless it has first given notice of the work in accordance with the regulations

File No. 160960844 9



Table 1.1: Key Federal Permits / Approvals

Permits / Approvals Activities Associated with the Project

Approval of communication system Legislation: Radiocommunication Act Responsible Agency: Industry Canada

• Section 5(1)(f): The Minister may approve each site on which radio apparatus is located

1.4.3.1 Provincial

CN, under the Ontario Environmental Protection Act, will apply to the Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change for an Environmental Compliance Approval for all points of discharge from the Project. As a federal undertaking whose works have been declared to the general advantage of Canada and given that CN holds a certificate of fitness issued by the Canadian Transportation Agency, no additional provincial permits or approvals are required.

1.4.3.2 Municipal

As a federal undertaking whose works have been declared to be for the general advantage of Canada, and as CN holds a certificate of fitness issued by the Canadian Transportation Agency, the elements of the Project associated with its construction or operation as a railway are not subject to the need to obtain municipal or local regulatory approvals or permits. Moreover, Section 95 of the CTA provides the Proponent with broad powers to construct and operate a railway. As a result, obtaining municipal permits and approval in relation to the Project is not anticipated.

1.4.4 Policy and Guideline Documents

In preparing the EIS, various federal policy documents and guides were referenced, including but not limited to the following:

• Guidelines for the Preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement – Milton Logistics Hub Project (CEAA 2015b);

• Operational Policy Statement: Addressing “Purpose of” and “Alternative Means” Under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 (CEAA 2015d);

• Operational Policy Statement: Assessing Cumulative Environmental Effects Under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 (CEAA 2015e);

• Guide to Preparing a Description of a Designated Project Under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 (CEAA 2015c);

• Technical Guidance for Assessing Physical and Cultural Heritage or any Structure, Site or Thing that is of Historical, Archeological, Paleontological or Architectural Significance under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 (CEAA 2015h);

10 File No. 16090844



• Reference Guide Considering Aboriginal Traditional Knowledge in Environmental Assessments Conducted under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 (CEAA 2015f);

• Practitioners Glossary for the Environmental Assessment of Designated Projects Under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 (CEAA 2015g);

• Operational Policy Statement: Follow-up Programs Under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA 2011);

• Public Participation Guide: A Guide to Meaningful Public Participation in Environmental Assessments Under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA 2008);

• Incorporating Climate Change Considerations in Environmental Assessment: General Guidance for Practitioners (Federal-Provincial-Territorial Committee on Climate Change and Environmental Assessment 2003); and,

• Determining Whether a Project is Likely to Cause Significant Adverse Environmental Effects (Federal Environmental Assessment Review Office 1994).

Additional policies and guidelines specific to technical disciplines and other aspects of environmental assessment were also consulted, and are referenced as appropriate throughout the EIS and supporting documents.

1.5 PROJECT PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES

The EA process is a planning tool that enables projects to be considered in a careful and precautionary manner in order to avoid or mitigate possible environmental effects. CN is committed to developing the Project in an environmentally responsible manner consistent with the general principles for responsible transportation development retaining the resource-based character of the region while affording benefits to the community, region, province, and the economy of Canada. To this end, CN will implement Project planning and management strategies that avoid or minimize the adverse environmental effects of the Project, and enhance positive ones, in a manner that complies with all applicable laws and regulations. This will be accomplished in a variety of ways, some of which include:

• implementing environmental protection, mitigation, and management strategies and concepts that avoid or minimize adverse environmental effects, and enhance positive ones;

• adopting management procedures for design and implementation of the Project, particularly those that protect surface water and groundwater resources, use geotechnically stable materials and concepts, implement technically and economically feasible components and technologies that are proven, limit the footprint of the Project and design the Project components with no expectations that the Terminal will ever be decommissioned;

File No. 160960844 11



• engaging the public and stakeholders about the Project, including processes to gather information and provide input to the Project team; and,

• incorporating feedback received from the public, stakeholders, Aboriginal communities, and other parties so as to minimize environmental effects and address issues and concerns.

1.5.1 Design Standards and Codes

The Project will be constructed to meet the requirements for industry codes and standards. Compliance with these standards and codes reduces the potential for adverse environmental effects as a result of an accident and malfunction. The engineering design of the Project will consider and incorporate potential future changes in the forces of nature that could affect its operation or integrity (e.g., climate change). The Project components will be designed to meet the National Building Code of Canada and other applicable design codes and standards, including those developed by the Illuminating Engineering Society, International Electrical Testing Association, Technical Standard Safety Authority, American Railway Engineering and Maintenance-of-Way Association, TAC Geometric Design for Canadian Roads, and CN Engineering.

Pursuant to its Decision 144-R-2015 dated May 13, 2015, the Canadian Transportation Agency ordered CN to submit an application for approval to construct railway lines to be known as the Milton Logistics Hub. Specifically, the Canadian Transportation Agency found that an approval under subsection 98(1) of the CTA is required for the construction of the extension of the mainline and two Service Tracks (1 and 2) as they are longer than 3 km and for two Pad Tracks (1 and 2) as they would be located outside the 100 m of the centreline of an existing railway line, the new mainline track. The Canadian Transportation Agency also found that Service Track 3 and Pad Track 1 do not require approval prior to construction, as paragraph 98 (3)(b) applies to those railway lines as they are within 100 m of the centreline of the new mainline track for a distance of no more than 3 km. CN is currently working to submit an application for approval for the Project.

1.5.2 Design Mitigation Measures

CN is proposing to integrate various mitigation measures into detailed design for the Project to minimize adverse environmental effects. These measures, and the effects they are intended to prevent or minimize, are described in more detail in Chapter 6. The following is a brief summary of key environmental design features:

• use of collected rainwater for washing of on-site equipment, landscaping and for on-site sewage requirements;

• use of equipment (such as generators, building heaters/furnaces, muffler systems) that have shown to operate efficiently to minimize air and noise effects;

12 File No. 16090844



• use of solar energy technology within building design including heating, ventilation, air conditioning (HVAC) (cooling and control), solar domestic water heating, window design, etc.;

• use of vegetated berms as required to minimize effects on the community;

• site lighting designed to minimize light pollution;

• use of energy efficient light emitting diode (LED) lighting;

• where feasible, use of non-road mobile and stationary equipment with low emissions and high fuel combustion efficiency engines to reduce atmospheric emissions;

• where possible, minimize Project footprint and site Project facilities to minimize disturbance to surrounding areas and natural features, such as wetlands, watercourses and important habitat types, and to reduce the size and number of natural drainages that may be affected;

• incorporation of oil grit separators and shut off valves in the design of the SWM system to reduce the risk to the downstream environment associated with spills and improve water quality;

• realignment and enhancement of a section of Indian Creek to minimize long term maintenance (along the outer meander) and emulate local stable reaches of the watercourse, including enhancements to aquatic habitat and riparian vegetation;

• progressive compensation through the establishment of additional wetland area by removing an existing on-line agricultural pond along Tributary A; and,

• pro-active mitigation through the development of off-site grassland bird habitat.

1.5.3 Environmental Protection Measures

A variety of environmental protection and management measures have been adopted through the development of the Project in order to guide the planning, design, construction and operation of the Project. These include, but are not limited to, the following measures:

• employing good planning, design and management practices to comply with regulated standards for air emissions, water releases and storage or disposal of solid waste;

• preparing and implementing an Environmental Protection Plan (EPP) to ensure plans and protocols are in place for environmental protection measures required during construction. The EPP will include, but will not be limited to:

− soils handling and storage;

− waste management;

− noise and vibration management;

− air quality, dust and greenhouse gas management;

File No. 160960844 13



− traffic management;

− spill prevention and contingency;

− flood and excessive flow contingency;

− fire suppression contingency;

− historical resources or traditional land use discovery;

− erosion control; and,

− engagement with public, stakeholder, and Aboriginal communities.

• develop a follow-up and monitoring program to verify predicted environmental effects and to inform adaptive management; and,

• implementing the CN Emergency Response Plan, which includes hazard and emergency recognition, response, follow-up and documentation procedures. This document is updated regularly and ensures adequate response equipment is available at key locations. On-going coordination and cross-training with emergency responders is standard practice for CN.

CN has emphasized Project design and siting so that the location and configuration of the Project facilities considers the above measures wherever possible so as to avoid or minimize the potential environmental effects of the Project. To the extent possible, Project facilities have been sited to avoid and reduce interactions with watercourses, wetlands and other sensitive environmental features. Where avoidance was not possible, mitigation or compensation measures have been developed as part of the EIS, and will be implemented in consultation with the applicable regulatory authorities. The above noted plans are typically finalized once the Project design is completed and will be refined in consultation with various stakeholders as applicable to ensure their concerns are addressed during the planning process.

Further discussion and details regarding the environmental mitigation and protection measures are provided in Section 6.5 and Chapter 7. Details regarding the follow-up and monitoring programs are provided in Chapter 9.

1.6 EIS ORGANIZATION AND CONTENT

The EIS report has been organized in accordance with the EIS Guidelines as follows:

• Chapter 1: Introduction

− Provides an introduction to the EIS report, identifies the Proponent, provides a brief Project overview, and outlines the structure and content of the EIS report.

• Chapter 2: Project Justification and Alternatives Considered

− Provides a discussion of the purpose of the Project and evaluates the alternative means of carrying out the Project.

14 File No. 16090844



• Chapter 3: Project Description

− Provides a detailed Project description of the proposed elements of the Project and describes how the Project will be constructed and operated.

• Chapter 4: Community and Stakeholder Consultation

− Provides a discussion of the public consultation program including an overview of public, stakeholder and regulatory consultation efforts held to date regarding the Project and the EA process.

• Chapter 5: Aboriginal Engagement and Concerns

− Provides a discussion of the Aboriginal consultation program including a summary of Aboriginal consultation and engagement efforts held to date.

• Chapter 6: Effects Assessment

− Describes and assesses the potential environmental effects of the Project on the physical environment and valued components (VCs) and discusses mitigation and significance of residual effects after mitigation.

• Chapter 7: Summary of Environmental Effects Assessment

− An overview of the potential changes to the physical environment and VCs as a result of the Project.

• Chapter 8: Benefits of the Project

− An overview of the social, economic and environmental benefits of the Project.

• Chapter 9: Follow-Up and Monitoring Programs

− Describes the proposed monitoring of potential environmental effects resulting from the construction and operation of the Project. A framework is also provided for the proposed environmental management plans.

• Chapter 10: Summary and Conclusions

− Provides a summary of the significance of the potential and residual effects, Project commitments and comments from public and Aboriginal engagement.

The EIS report has organized the Appendices as follows:

• Appendix A: Final EIS Guidelines

− The Guidelines for the Preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement – Milton Logistics Hub Project dated July 20, 2015.

• Appendix B: Figures

− Figure 1: Regional Setting for the Project;

− Figure 2: Alternatives to Project Design;

File No. 160960844 15



− Figure 3: Preliminary Design of the Milton Logistics Hub Site Plan;

− Figure 4: Preliminary Watercourse Realignment and Naturalization;

− Figure 5: Aboriginal Reserves;

− Figure 6: Regional Assessment Areas; and,

− Figure 7: Projects Considered for Cumulative Assessment.

• Appendix C: Renderings

− Visual renderings depicting a conceptual view of the Terminal during operation from a variety of vantage points is provided for illustration purposes only, and is based on a rendering of the current preliminary design of the Project.

• Appendix D: Record of Consultation

− Details CN’s consultation and engagement efforts for the Project, including summary tables for issues and concerns raised by project stakeholders (public, municipalities, agencies and Aboriginal communities), as well as copies of available correspondence (emails, letters, minutes and notices).

• Appendix E: Technical Data Reports

− Additional supporting information pertinent to the assessment and discussion in the EIS is provided through a series of technical data reports (TDRs). The TDRs are to be read in conjunction with the EIS.

• Appendix F: Milton Logistics Hub - Site Selection Study

− A review and assessment of potential sites to determine their suitability for the construction and operation of the proposed Terminal.

An EIS Summary report has also been prepared under separate cover, both in English and French, to provide a concise description of the Project, expected changes to the environment, and an assessment of the environmental effects and proposed mitigation measures of the Project.

1.7 CONCORDANCE WITH THE EIS GUIDELINES

The EIS has been organized to follow the layout and content provided in the EIS Guidelines. Table 1.2 identifies where specific information exists within the EIS to address relevant sections of the EIS Guidelines, including background and content of the EIS.

16 File No. 16090844



Table 1.2: Guidelines for the Preparation of an EIS - Concordance Table

The Guidelines EIS Reference

Part 1 - Background

1. Introduction

2. Guiding Principles

2.1 Environmental assessment as a planning tool EIS Submission

2.2 Public Participation Chapter 4 Community and Stakeholder Consultation Appendix D Record of Consultation

2.3 Aboriginal Engagement Chapter 5 Aboriginal Engagement and Concerns Appendix D Record of Consultation

2.4 Application of the precautionary approach EIS Submission, particularly: Chapter 6 Effects Assessment Chapter 9 Follow-up and Monitoring Program

3. Scope of the Environmental Assessment

3.1 Designated Project Section 1.2 Project Overview Section 3.3 Project Components Section 3.4 Project Activities

3.2 Factors to be considered

EIS Submission (further details provided in Part 2 of this Table)

3.3 Scope of Factors

3.3.1 Changes to the Environment Section 6.4 Predicted Changes to the Physical Environment

3.3.2 Valued Components to be examined Section 6.2.2 Selection of Valued Components

3.3.3 Spatial and Temporal Boundaries Section 6.2.4 Identification of Spatial and Temporal EA Boundaries Section 6.5 Predicted Effects on Valued Components, specifically 6.5.1.5, 6.5.2.5, 6.5.3.5, 6.5.4.5, 6.5.5.5 and 6.5.6.5

4. Preparation and Presentation of the Environmental Impact Statement

4.1 Guidance Section 1.4.4 Policy and Guideline Documents Chapter 4 Community and Stakeholder Consultation

4.2 Study Strategy and methodology Chapter 6 Effects Assessment Section 6.2 Methods Section 6.5 Predicted Effects on Valued Components

4.3 Use of information

4.3.1 Scientific advice Chapter 4 Community and Stakeholder Consultation Section 6.3 Project Setting and Baseline Conditions

File No. 160960844 17




The Guidelines EIS Reference Appendix E Technical Data Reports

4.3.2 Community knowledge and Aboriginal traditional knowledge

Chapter 4 Community and Stakeholder Consultation Chapter 5 Aboriginal Engagement and Concerns

4.3.3 Existing information Section 6.3 Project Setting and Baseline Conditions Appendix E Technical Data Reports

4.3.4 Confidential information Chapter 4 Community and Stakeholder Consultation Chapter 5 Aboriginal Engagement and Concerns Appendix D Record of Consultation

4.4 Presentation and organization of the Environmental Impact Statement

EIS Title Page Table of Contents List of Tables and Figures Abbreviations, Glossary and References Section 1.6 EIS Organization and Content

4.5 Summary of the Environmental Impact Statement

EIS Summary Document (English and French)

Part 2 – Content of the Environmental Impact Statement

1. Introduction and Overview Chapter 1 Introduction and Overview

1.1 The proponent Section 1.1 The Proponent

1.2 Project Overview Section 1.2 Project Overview

1.3 Project Location Section 1.3 Project Location

1.4 Regulatory framework and the role of government

Section 1.4 Regulatory Framework and Role of Government

2. Project Justification and Alternatives Considered Chapter 2 Project Justification and Alternatives Considered

2.1 Purpose of the project Section 2.1 Purpose of the Project

2.2 Alternative means of carrying out the project Section 2.2 Alternative Means of Carrying out the Project Appendix F Site Selection Report

3. Project Description Chapter 3 Project Description

3.1 Project Components Section 3.3 Project Components

3.2 Project Activities Section 3.4 Project Activities

3.2.1 Site preparation and construction Section 3.4.1 Construction

3.2.2 Operation Section 3.4.2 Operations

4. Public Consultation and Concerns Chapter 4 Community and Stakeholder Consultation

• Description of information and materials that were distributed during the consultation process

Section 4.3 Stakeholder Consultation Activities Appendix D Record of Consultation

18 File No. 16090844





• Methods used, where consultation held, persons and organizations consulted, concerns voiced, extent this information was incorporated into the design of the project

Section 4.3 Stakeholder Consultation Activities Section 4.4 Summary of Stakeholder Comments

• Summary of key issues raised related to the EA Section 4.4 Summary of Stakeholder Comments

• Description of outstanding issues and ways to address them

Section 4.4.1 Summary of Public and Interest Group Comments Appendix G Mitigation Measures and Commitments

5. Aboriginal Engagement and Concerns Chapter 5 Aboriginal Engagement and Concerns

• VCs suggested by Aboriginal groups for inclusion in the EIS, whether they were included, and the rationale for any exclusions

Section 5.6.1.1 Comments on Effects of Changes to the Environment on Aboriginal Peoples Section 6.2.2 Selection of Valued Components Section 6.5 Predicted Effects on Valued Components

• Each group’s potential or established rights, including maps and data sets

Section 5.5 Aboriginal Community Profiles Section 6.3.8 Traditional Land and Resource Use for Aboriginal Peoples

• The potential adverse impacts of each of the project components and physical activities, in all phases, on potential or established Aboriginal or Treaty rights.

Section 5.6.1.2 Comments on Potential Adverse Impacts of the Project on Potential or Established Aboriginal or Treaty Rights Section 6.5 Predicted Effects on Valued Components

• The measures identified to mitigate or accommodate potential adverse impacts of the project on the potential or established Aboriginal or Treaty rights

Section 6.2.2 Selection of Valued Components Section 6.3.8 Traditional Land and Resource Use for Aboriginal Peoples Appendix G Mitigation Measures and Commitments

• The effects of changes to the environment on Aboriginal peoples or potential adverse impacts on potential or established Aboriginal or Treaty rights that have not been fully mitigated or accommodated.

Section 6.5 Predicted Effects on Valued Components

• Specific suggestions raised by Aboriginal groups for mitigation or accommodation of measures

Section 5.6 Summary of Views Expressed by Aboriginal Communities Section 6.3 Project Setting and Baseline Conditions

• Views expressed by Aboriginal groups on the effectiveness of the mitigation or accommodation of measures

Section 5.6 Summary of Views Expressed by Aboriginal Communities Section 6.3.8 Traditional Land and Resource Use for Aboriginal Peoples

• Any potential cultural, social and/or economic impacts or benefits to Aboriginal groups

Section 6.5 Predicted Effects on Valued Components Chapter 8 Benefits of the Project

File No. 160960844 19





• Comments, specific issues and concerns raised by Aboriginal groups and how the key concerns were responded to or addressed

Section 5.6 Summary of Views Expressed by Aboriginal Communities Section 6.3.8 Traditional Land and Resource Use for Aboriginal Peoples Section 6.5 Predicted Effects on Valued Components Appendix D Record of Consultation

• Changes made to the project design and implementation directly as a result of discussions with Aboriginal groups

Section 3.7 Summary of Changes to the Project Design since filing with CEAA

• Where and how Aboriginal traditional knowledge was incorporated into the environmental effects assessment

Section 6.3.8 Traditional Land and Resource Use for Aboriginal Peoples

5.1 Aboriginal Groups to Engage & Engagement Activities

Section 5.3 Identification of Aboriginal Communities Section 5.4 Aboriginal Community Engagement Section 5.6 Summary of Views Expressed by Aboriginal Communities

6. Effects Assessment Chapter 6 Effects Assessment

6.1 Project setting and baseline conditions Section 6.3 Project Setting and Baseline Conditions

6.1.1 Atmospheric Environment Section 6.3.1 Atmospheric Environment

6.1.2 Geology and geochemistry Section 6.3.2 Geology and Geochemistry

6.1.3 Topography and soil Section 6.3.3 Topography and Soil

6.1.4 Groundwater and Surface Water Section 6.3.4 Groundwater and Surface Water

6.1.5 Fish and Fish Habitat Section 6.3.5 Fish and Fish Habitat

6.1.6 Migratory birds and their habitat Section 6.3.6 Migratory Birds and their Habitat

6.1.7 Species at Risk Section 6.3.7 Species at Risk

6.1.8 Aboriginal Peoples Section 6.3.8 Traditional Land and Resource Use for Aboriginal Peoples

6.1.9 Other Environmental Changes Arising as a Result of a Federal Decision or Authorization

N/A

6.1.10 Human Environment Section 6.3.9 Socio-Economic Conditions Section 6.3.10 Health Conditions Section 6.3.11 Cultural Heritage Resources Section 6.3.12 Archaeology Section 6.3.13 Paleontology

6.2 Predicted Changes to the Physical Environment Section 6.4 Predicted Changes to the Physical Environment

6.2.1 Changes to the Atmospheric Environment Section 6.4.1 Changes to the Atmospheric Environment

20 File No. 16090844





6.2.2 Changes to Groundwater and Surface Water Section 6.4.2 Changes to Groundwater and Surface Water

6.2.3 Changes to Terrestrial Landscape Section 6.4.3 Changes to Terrestrial Landscape

6.3 Predicted Effects on Valued Components Section 6.5 Predicted Effects on Valued Components

6.3.1 Fish and Fish Habitat Section 6.5.1 Fish and Fish Habitat

6.3.2 Migratory Birds Section 6.5.2 Migratory Birds

6.3.3 Species at Risk Section 6.5.3 Species at Risk

6.3.4 Aboriginal Peoples Section 6.2.2 Selection of Valued Components Section 6.3.8 Traditional Land and Resource Use for Aboriginal Peoples

6.3.5 Other Socio-Economic conditions and Heritage Resources

Section 6.5.4 Human Health Section 6.5.5 Socio-Economic Conditions Section 6.5.6 Archaeological and Heritage Resources

6.4 Mitigation Section 6.5.1.9 Assessment of Residual Environmental Effects on Fish and Fish Habitat Section 6.5.2.9 Assessment of Residual Environmental Effects on Migratory Birds Section 6.5.3.9 Assessment of Residual Environmental Effects on Species at Risk Section 6.5.4.9 Assessment of Residual Environmental Effects on Human Health Section 6.5.5.9 Assessment of Residual Environmental Effects on Socio-Economic Conditions Section 6.5.6.9 Assessment of Residual Environmental Effects on Archaeological and Heritage Resources Section 6.6 Other Effects to Consider Appendix G Mitigation Measures and Commitments

6.5 Significance of residual effects Section 6.5.1.9 Assessment of Residual Environmental Effects on Fish and Fish Habitat Section 6.5.2.9 Assessment of Residual Environmental Effects on Migratory Birds Section 6.5.3.9 Assessment of Residual Environmental Effects on Species at Risk Section 6.5.4.9 Assessment of Residual Environmental Effects on Human Health Section 6.5.5.9 Assessment of Residual Environmental Effects on Socio-Economic

File No. 160960844 21




The Guidelines EIS Reference Conditions Section 6.5.6.9 Assessment of Residual Environmental Effects on Archaeological or Heritage Resources

6.6 Other effects to consider Section 6.6 Other Effects to Consider

6.6.1 Effects of potential accidents or malfunctions Section 6.6.2 Effects of Potential Accidents and Malfunctions

6.6.2 Effects of the environment on the project Section 6.6.3 Effects of the Environment on the Project

6.6.3 Cumulative effects assessment Section 6.6.1.1 Assessment of Cumulative Environmental Effects on Fish and Fish Habitat Section 6.6.1.2 Assessment of Cumulative Environmental Effects on Migratory Birds Section 6.6.1.3 Assessment of Cumulative Environmental Effects on Species at Risk Section 6.6.1.4 Assessment of Cumulative Environmental Effects on Human Health Section 6.6.1.5 Assessment of Cumulative Environmental Effects on Socio-Economic Conditions Section 6.6.1.6 Assessment of Cumulative Environmental Effects on Archaeological or Heritage Resources

7. Summary of Environmental Effects Assessment Chapter 7 Summary of Environmental Effects Assessment

8. Follow-up and Monitoring Programs Chapter 9 Follow-up and Monitoring Programs

8.1 Follow-up Program Section 9.4 Follow-up Programs Appendix G Mitigation Measures and Commitments

8.2 Monitoring Section 9.5 Monitoring Program Appendix G Mitigation Measures and Commitments

22 File No. 16090844


Project Justification and Alternatives Considered December 7, 2015

2.0 PROJECT JUSTIFICATION AND ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED

2.1 PURPOSE OF THE PROJECT

The purpose of the Project is to construct and operate a satellite intermodal terminal to meet CN’s growing operational and commercial needs. Given that the economy, including transportation and warehousing, has grown by 20% between 2001 and 2011 (Hemson Consulting Ltd. 2012),the Project positions CN to serve the growing demand for logistics support in the GTHA and western Ontario markets (Strategic Projections Inc. 2013).

Intermodal is the transportation of containers by rail, truck and ship. It provides the ability to offer different modes of transportation and options for shippers and is the fastest growing mode of transportation in North America (Strategic Projections Inc. 2013).

Typically, intermodal containers are used to transport finished products, either imported internationally or transported domestically, throughout North America. These products include, but are not limited to, items such as toys, furniture, appliances, clothing, electronics, household goods, automotive parts and maintenance products, lawn care equipment, cosmetics/health care, or food products. Moving finished products in containers provides the logistic service industry and retailers, such as major box stores, with greater flexibility in shipping products and distributing them to the consumers. With containers primarily transporting common household goods, the growth in intermodal volumes tends to follow the growth in population centres.

The GTHA represents Canada’s biggest population centre and has been experiencing rapid growth resulting in expansion towards the towns and regions surrounding Toronto, particularly toward the west. CN provides intermodal services to the region through its Brampton Intermodal Terminal (BIT) which connects the GTHA with its network of 20 domestic terminals and seven CN-served container ports across North America. BIT, which is Canada's largest inland intermodal terminal, handles approximately 1 million containers annually. With 50% of CN’s intermodal volumes flowing through BIT, this facility is a key component of CN's rail distribution network. Additional information regarding economic trends and forecasts are provided in the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report - Socio-Economic Baseline (Appendix E.12).

BIT is also a component of the Ontario-Quebec Continental Gateway and Trade Corridor, which is a federal-provincial partnership created between the governments of Canada, Ontario and Quebec in 2007. This partnership is focused on developing a sustainable, secure and efficient multimodal transportation system to support economic growth between the two provinces and to facilitate international trade with the U.S.

File No. 160960844 23



To protect its future obligation to support growing traffic volumes, CN made the strategic decision in 1999 to acquire approximately 1,000 acres of land in South Milton. Expansion projects and productivity initiatives at BIT deferred the immediate requirement to develop the land for intermodal use. After investing over $50 million to support the growing volumes at BIT, this facility is now approaching capacity with limited opportunities for significant expansion. A land review confirmed that sufficient and suitable land could not be acquired around BIT (Cushman & Wakefield 2015). Additional capacity is required to enable CN to continue to support the growing demand for intermodal services in the GTHA.

To address the need to support long-term growth, CN made a strategic decision to move forward with plans to develop a satellite intermodal terminal in the western portion of the GTHA, where CN’s growing customer base is locating. Several sites in the area were evaluated, as outlined in the Milton Logistics Hub - Site Selection Study (Appendix F), with CN’s South Milton property being the best available location to satisfy CN’s operational and commercial needs.

2.2 ALTERNATIVE MEANS OF CARRYING OUT THE PROJECT

The alternative means of carrying out the Project that have been identified, which are technically and economically feasible, and the potential environmental effects of any such alternative means are identified and considered in this section.

Guidance for the consideration of alternative means was obtained from the Operational Policy Statement: Addressing “Purpose of” and “Alternative Means” under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 (CEAA 2013a).

Alternative means of carrying out the Project consider the technical and economic feasibility of the following:

• alternative project site location;

• alternative transportation corridors (i.e., routes for truck traffic for vehicles owned and operated by CN); and,

• location and design considerations of key Project components of the preferred site location, including:

− truck entrance location;

− gate location;

− Lower Base Line crossing ;

− water supply;

− wastewater management;

− SWM;

24 File No. 160960844



− utilities; and,

− Indian Creek realignment.

Descriptions of the considerations of these alternative means of carrying out the project are discussed further in the sections below. A summary is provided in Table 2.2.

2.2.1 Alternative Project Site Locations

A site selection study was completed to evaluate several potential sites that were previously identified by both CN in 2001 and through feedback received through consultative opportunities as described in Chapter 4. This section provides an overview of the site selection process and rationale for the selection of the preferred site, with additional information regarding site selection and alternatives evaluated provided in the Milton Logistics Hub - Site Selection Study (Appendix F).

The first step in the site selection process was to identify potential sites based on location within the GTHA and having sufficient available land parallel to the CN mainline to construct and operate a terminal. Sites that did not meet defined selection principles were disqualified from the site selection process, while sites that met the guiding principles progressed for further evaluation during the second phase based on the engineering, traffic, environmental and socio-economic criteria established for this process. This second phase provided the mechanism to assess the potential environmental effects at each location.

The alternative candidate sites considered for the location of the satellite terminal included Brampton North, Halton Hills, North Milton and South Milton. Details regarding the locations of the alternative sites are provided within the Milton Logistics Hub - Site Selection Study (Appendix F).

The Halton Hills and North Milton sites do not meet the engineering and technical criteria due to the continuous and large elevation change as the CN mainline proceeds to climb between Milton and Halton Hills. The 3,000 m long yard tracks and pad areas within the intermodal terminal must be level for a safe and efficient working surface, with no more than 0.3% average rise in elevation over the length to provide for a safe operation and access to the terminal – the topography at these two sites is such that the yard tracks would require track grades beyond this limit. The Brampton North and South Milton sites are both technically practical with average topographic grades less than 0.3%.

The Brampton North site is located adjacent to an existing residential area and within the North West Brampton Urban Development Area, which is planned to accommodate future residential expansion of Brampton. While environmental effects can be avoided or minimized through design measures, development at the Brampton North site would impact a greater number of watercourses and a larger area of woodlots, as compared to the South Milton site, while the latter would impact a larger portion of ANSI. However, the South Milton site provides better access to several 400-series highways along multiple truck routes than Brampton North.

File No. 160960844 25



Review of the criteria used for the site selection process confirms that the South Milton site is the preferred option. This is further supported by the Land Availability Review for Satellite Intermodal Terminal Facility (Cushman & Wakefield 2015).

The proposed location of the satellite intermodal terminal in South Milton:

• adheres to the guiding site selection principles;

• is compatible with surrounding land uses, including the Halton Region Waste Management Site;

• satisfies the engineering/technical criteria;

• is centrally located with access to several 400-series highways along existing trucks routes;

• was anticipated for industrial rail-based development through various municipal plans, including the Halton Region Transportation Master Plan (2011) (Halton TMP); and,

• comprises sufficient land to accommodate development outside of major natural features/areas and to incorporate avoidance and mitigation measures through detailed design.

The South Milton site is considered the most feasible amongst the alternatives as it meets the engineering requirements, requires the least environmental mitigation and is compatible with the existing land use. Details regarding the site selection process are provided in the Milton Logistics Hub - Site Selection Study (Appendix F).

2.2.2 Transportation Corridors (Truck Routes)

It was determined that the South Milton site included the potential for a variety of truck routes to access several 400-series highways in the area to move containerized goods to and from CN customers.

BA Group was retained to complete a Review of Terminal-Generated Truck Traffic (BA Group 2015) (Appendix E.17) to assess the impact of the truck traffic generated by the development of the proposed terminal. This study includes the identification of available truck routes, including planned conditions at the time of the commencement of operations in 2019, the identification of truck routes most likely to be followed and an assessment of the comparative impacts of additional Project-generated truck traffic.

The Project will generate approximately 800 trucks per weekday entering and exiting the Terminal, which will include approximately 650 trucks per day entering and subsequently exiting the Terminal at the beginning of operation and approximately 800 trucks per day each way at full operation. These trucks are planned to access the terminal from Britannia Road

26 File No. 160960844



approximately 250 m west of First Line. Further discussion on the assessment of alternative truck entrance locations is provided in Section 2.2.3.1.

The Halton TMP indicates that Halton Region “does not have a specifically designated truck route network as the purpose of a major arterial is to carry truck traffic” and accommodate goods movement. Further, the Halton TMP indicates that as all arterial roads within the jurisdiction of Halton Region are upgraded to the current standards of the Region, they will be designed to accommodate truck traffic (BA Group 2015). Town of Milton roads do not permit trucks unless they are specifically designated. A number of potential routes used by truck traffic to/from the Terminal were identified in the Review of Terminal-Generated Truck Traffic (Appendix E.17). CN Transportation Ltd. (CNTL), a subsidiary of CN, trucks would be directed to use Highway 407 whenever practical and feasible. The feasible routes identified by BA Group considered the following general corridors:

• Britannia Road east to Highway 407.

• Britannia Road east to RR25, James Snow Parkway, Trafalgar and north to Highway 401.

• Britannia Road east to RR25 and south to Highway 407 and Queen Elizabeth Way (QEW).

• Britannia Road west to Tremaine Road and north to Highway 401.

These potential routes are identified on Figure 4 of the Review of Terminal-Generated Truck Traffic (BA Group 2015) (Appendix E.17), along with details of each feasible option.

To estimate the proportion of trucks that would follow each of the designated truck routes, BA Group looked at trip origin and/or destination based surveys completed by the Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO). The relative attractiveness of each route was determined using a consistent application of factors such as route length, speed limits, travel time, possible congestion, number of signalized intersections, number of roundabouts, number of required right/left turns, presence of bike lanes, and the degree of potential friction caused by uncontrolled intersections and driveways (BA Group 2015).

CN has further indicated that in order to reduce potential impact of project-generated truck traffic on the Town of Milton, it would direct trucks within their care and control (i.e., those operated by CNTL), to utilize Highway 407 when its use would be practical and feasible. According to CN, these trucks are estimated to constitute approximately 20% of the total project-generated truck trips.

Overall truck movements would be dispersed over a 24 hour period, with the peak access and egress to the terminal occurring outside of the morning and evening peak traffic periods. BA Group assessed the relative impact of new truck traffic generated by the Terminal against morning and afternoon peak hour traffic conditions when the volume of background (i.e., non-project generated) traffic is generally much higher than during the rest of the day.

File No. 160960844 27



It is predicted that noticeable and considerable change would be experienced along Britannia Road and Tremaine Road. It is anticipated that the impact of truck volumes on Britannia Road and Tremaine Road can be mitigated through reasonable and conventional traffic engineering and operational control measures that would not result in a significant increase in road congestion. These measures would be developed in consultation with Halton Region and could include signaling, signage, adjustment to queuing lanes, turn lanes and provisions to ensure the safety of pedestrians and cyclists (BA Group 2015).

There is a relatively good, and rapidly improving, network of arterial roads under the jurisdiction of Halton Region, which includes several connections to the Provincial highway network (BA Group 2015). These roads, specifically arterial roads, are designed, built and maintained by Halton Region to carry truck traffic and accommodate goods movement. The truck volumes forecasted for the first phase of rail serviced industrial land in 2008 would generate comparable volumes of truck traffic as the proposed Project (BA Group 2015). The Project at this location was anticipated as part of CN’s long-term plans for rail serviced land in the Official Plan and Goods Movement appendix to the Halton TMP and is consistent with the policies of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) (Bousfields 2015).

A review of the potential air quality effects of the number of trucks at the entrance of the Project was conducted, along with the total using Britannia Road to and from the Project (Appendix E.1). Air emissions effects from the proposed gate location are predicted to be below criteria concentrations. The maximum predicted contributions from CN traffic account for 8% and 5.3% of its 24-hour and annual cumulative concentrations. The cumulative maximum annual average for PM2.5 is about 81% of its criterion, of which 78% is from background sources (Appendix C of Appendix E.1). Trucks will be dispersed once travelling along Britannia Road to arterial roads towards 400-series highway.

Truck traffic to and from the Terminal will be dispersed on Regional roads, along various routes, with the majority (55%) occurring during day-time hours outside of the am and pm peak traffic periods. For those CNTL trucks within the care and control of CN (approximately 320 or 20%), these trucks will be directed to follow Britannia Road east of the Terminal to Highway 407 where practicable. Britannia Road is planned to be upgraded to a four to six lane road by 2020 to accommodate planned increases in traffic.

The planning, design, development, maintenance and control of the road system within Milton is the responsibility of Halton Region and the Town of Milton. CN has reviewed the plans of the local municipalities and has reflected the planned development of the road system in the EIS. CN is committed to continuing to work with the Region and the Town to identify and mitigate the impacts of the change in truck traffic on the Region’s arterial road network.

28 File No. 160960844



2.2.3 Key Project Components

Alternative means were considered for the location and design of the following key project components:

• truck entrance location;

• gate location;

• Lower Base Line crossing;

• water supply;

• wastewater management;

• SWM;

• utilities; and,

• Indian Creek realignment.

2.2.3.1 Truck Entrance Location

To determine the preferred location for the truck entrance, several potential entrances were considered, including:

• South Tremaine (Tremaine Road, south of Lower Base Line);

• North Tremaine (Tremaine Road, south of Britannia Road);

• Britannia Road (east of the existing CN mainline);

• First Line; and,

• Extension from First Line to Regional Road 25 (north of the Halton Region Waste Management Site).

The general location of these entrances is identified on Figure 2, Appendix B. During the conceptual design and layout of the terminal, all of these alternatives were considered and assessed against a variety of criteria (Table 2.1), which include the following:

• land availability on CN controlled land;

• access to an existing arterial road or designated truck haul route that permits truck movements;

• facilitates efficient truck movements within the Terminal;

• limits negative environmental effects;

• limits conflict with existing residential uses;

• provide opportunities for direct access to 400 series highways;

File No. 160960844 29



• potential for a variety of dispersion opportunities on existing designated truck haul routes; and,

• economic considerations (financial considerations).

Table 2.1: Truck Entrance Alternatives for the Milton Intermodal Hub

Criteria South Tremaine

North Tremaine

Britannia Road First Line Regional Road

25

Land Availability (entirely on CN property)

Designated truck road at full operation

– indirectly, but has to

cross First Line

Facilitates efficient truck movements within Terminal

Limits negative environmental effects

Limits potential conflict with existing Residences

Straight line access to 400-series highway

Dispersion Opportunities

Economic Considerations

Based on the assessment, the Britannia Road entrance is the preferred truck entrance as this alternative addresses all criteria and is within the care and control of CN. Other potential entrances considered would require additional upgrades, approvals or engineering design considerations that would be beyond the control of CN.

The proposed entrance for container trucks to enter and exit the Terminal is planned to be from the north via Britannia Road, approximately 250 m west of First Line and east of the proposed Britannia Road grade separation over the CN mainline.

The intersection where the truck entrance meets Britannia Road will most likely warrant a signal controlled, and through consultation with the Region of Halton, will be configured with suitable auxiliary eastbound right turn and westbound left turn lanes (BA Group 2015). Further, the traffic signal phasing and timing at the intersection will be operated in an optimal manner to permit sufficient capacity for container-truck movements in and out of the entrance so as to reduce the impact on traffic operations on Britannia Road (BA Group 2015).

The location of the truck entrance requires a new private overpass on CN property to enable trucks to enter the Terminal.

30 File No. 160960844



2.2.3.2 Gate Location

An entrance gate within the Terminal is required to provide secure access. Each truck will pass through a portal and gate that will record the container and chassis identifier and condition of the container. Additional information on the gate and truck operations is found in Chapter 3 (Section 3.4.2.1).

Locating the gate directly off of Britannia Road would not be preferred for the purposes of the Project as it would not provide the necessary space for queuing of trucks entering the terminal. Potential delays at the terminal may prevent trucks from entering onto CN property, thereby resulting in queuing along Britannia Road. This concern was raised during public and municipal consultation as a concern to be addressed based on past experiences and observations at BIT.

The preferred location of the gate is on the southwest boundary of the work pad (Figure 2, Appendix B). Staging of inbound trucks on CN-owned property is proposed in order to avoid congestion on regional roads. The location of the gate at the end of the 1.7 km CN-owned internal access road and the incorporation of six gate entry lanes will facilitate truck movement into the Terminal, will prevent back-ups onto regional roads and provide ample space for the queuing of trucks on CN property.

2.2.3.3 Lower Base Line Crossing

The existing CN mainline crosses Lower Base Line between Tremaine Road and First Line. There is an existing signalized level crossing on Lower Base Line. However, based on the footprint of the Terminal, additional service tracks will cross Lower Base Line thereby increasing potential disruption to vehicular traffic on Lower Base Line and increasing potential safety concerns. As such, alternative crossing options were considered to eliminate this intersection.

Two alternatives were considered to avoid disruption to vehicular traffic along Lower Base Line, specifically a new grade separation along Lower Base Line (consisting of a 40 to 55 m long underpass) or the diversion of Lower Base Line southward across CN property to a new grade separation to line up with 2nd Sideroad. These alternatives are identified in Figure 2, Appendix B.

Considerations for the assessment of these alternatives included environmental impacts, costs and disruption to existing traffic patterns. The diversion of Lower Base Line to an overpass that would line up with 2nd Sideroad would require the closure of Lower Base Line at the CN tracks and construction of a new 1.7 km roadway across CN property. In order to line up with 2nd Sideroad, the new roadway would be constructed through an existing woodland and wetland feature on CN property, which is designated as part of the North Oakville-Milton West Provincially Significant Wetland Complex, and would encroach on the Trafalgar Moraine Provincially Significant Earth Science ANSI and Greenbelt Plan Area. This feature also provides a variety of wildlife habitat, as documented in the Milton Logistics Hub: Technical Data Report - Terrestrial (Appendix E.16).

File No. 160960844 31



The preferred alternative includes the construction of an underpass where Lower Base Line crosses the CN mainline at grade just east of Tremaine Road. The new proposed underpass would accommodate the realignment of the existing CN mainline and proposed service tracks. Temporary diversion of the existing tracks will be required to construct the underpass. However, doing so will allow for the existing traffic patterns in the area to be maintained. Tributary C flows along the south side of Lower Base Line near this crossing. Mitigation measures are feasible during construction to protect this feature, maintain flows and prevent erosion or other disturbances to this intermittent tributary of Indian Creek. Although the anticipated construction costs for the underpass are higher than for the diversion of Lower Base Line, this alternative is preferred due to the potential adverse environmental effects associated with the realignment through the woodland and wetland feature, and associated habitat effects. CN would be responsible for the costs of this grade separation alternative.

2.2.3.4 Water Supply

Potable and non-potable water supply is required to support activities at the site during operation of the terminal. Potable water is required for domestic consumption at the administration building, while non-potable water is required to wash on-site equipment and for on-site irrigation.

There is currently no municipal water service available to the site. As such, alternative potable water sources considered include either drilling a new on-site well or delivering potable water and storing it in tanks on-site. Existing groundwater conditions in the area are generally not of high quantity or quality for drinking water. While some residential wells occur in the area for private residences, water quality issues have been noted by area residents. The municipal water supply for the Town of Milton originates from Lake Ontario and not from a groundwater source. Further information on the quality and quantity of groundwater in the area is provided in the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Hydrogeology (Appendix E.6). As such, CN is proposing to use a licensed bulk water delivery contractor to deliver potable water to the site. Potable water will be stored within underground storage tanks for use at the administration building.

In the absence of a municipal water supply, and the desire to supplement wash water using alternate sources of water, CN explored non-potable wash water alternatives such as rainwater collection and/or water recycling activities. Both alternatives are being proposed for incorporation into the design and operation of the Terminal. Rainwater will be collected from the roofs of the proposed on-site buildings, including the administration building and maintenance garage, and will be stored in underground tanks. The collection and re-use of rainwater will supplement non-drinking water uses at the Terminal thereby reducing the water supply demand. Also, water generated from washing on-site equipment in the maintenance garage will be collected and treated for re-use as wash water to supplement rainwater and non-potable water supplies. In the event that a municipal water supply is extended to the Project location, CN would explore opportunities at that time to connect into this system through discussions with the

32 File No. 160960844



local municipality. However, at this time, the alternatives described above are planned to be implemented.

2.2.3.5 Wastewater Management

Wastewater management is required for domestic sewage and excess wash water from maintenance operations (i.e., washing on-site equipment). There is no municipal sanitary service available to the site. As such, alternatives for managing waste water include:

• Construction of an on-site wastewater treatment system consisting of a septic tank with subsurface distribution trench disposal field; and,

• Use of on-site storage tanks with contracted services for regular cleanout that would be handled by licensed haulers to approved wastewater treatment facilities.

A review of the soil types present at the Project site indicates material (e.g., silt and clay) that may not be suitable for the construction of a subsurface disposal field system (i.e., septic bed) for on-site wastewater treatment. While operational costs of a subsurface treatment system are typically lower than other options, this alternate was not considered feasible for this site.

Soils across the PDA are characterized as sandy silty clay till and silty clay till in the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Geotechnical Investigation (Appendix E.5). The Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Hydrogeology (Appendix E.6) indicates groundwater conditions with a surficial aquifer at depths ranging for 0.67 to 9.03 m BGS and vertical hydraulic conductivity estimates ranging from 10-7 to 10-8 m/s. The Ontario Building Code Part 8 of Division B - Sewage Systems provides sizing and design criteria for septic systems. Based on the proposed number of workers on site, a potential septic leaching system would be classed as a large system (>10,000 L/d). Two critical septic leaching system criteria include soil percolation rates, and minimum vertical elevation above groundwater levels. Soils types on-site are characterized as having reduced percolation rates (over 50 min per cm), which are classified as unacceptable and thus would require a raised bed of higher percolation materials. The shallow nature of groundwater implies that the minimum 900 mm vertical elevation separation requirement between the leaching bed trench bottom and the groundwater surface would constrain localized septic leaching bed siting. Based on soils present on site, the relatively shallow nature of groundwater and limited available land areas for an extensive septic leaching system, a septic leaching system is not considered feasible.

As such, the preferred alternative is that domestic sewage generated on-site will be collected in a holding tank on-site. The contents of the tank will be pumped out and disposed at a licensed disposal facility. This option comes at a higher operational cost than a septic bed alternative, but provides a technically feasible alternative for the management of wastewater at this site.

File No. 160960844 33



In the event that a municipal sewage disposal system is extended to the Project location, CN would explore opportunities at that time to connect into this system through discussions with the local municipality. However, at this time, the alternatives described above will be implemented.

2.2.3.6 Stormwater Management

Stormwater run-off is being managed on-site through the use of a treatment train approach consisting of lot-level or at source controls, conveyance and end of pipe controls. Components of the SWM system include a series of culverts, flow channels and SWM retention ponds, along with oil grit separators, parking lot storage and rainwater harvesting. Further details on the individual components, sizing and design criteria used to develop the SWM system for the Terminal are provided in the Milton Logistics Hub - Stormwater Management Strategy (AECOM, 2015) (Appendix B of Appendix E.15).

The selection of the location of these facilities is based on conceptual engineering design that maintains catchment areas, water balance and run-off quality/quantity while minimizing impacts or encroachment of natural features. Two SWM ponds have been designed and located to manage run-off to Tributary A and Indian Creek. SWM Pond 1 is located adjacent to Tributary A to the west of the gate and SWM Pond 2 is located to the east of the administration building discharging to Indian Creek.

Alternate locations for SWM Pond 1 were explored in conjunction with the design and layout of the Terminal gate. Alternate locations relative to the existing Tributary A channel and on-line pond were considered, with attempts to avoid or minimize encroachment while minimizing disturbance to existing drainage patterns. The preferred SWM Pond location avoids the existing Tributary A channel and associated wetland features, which will be maintained, and has been located to accommodate a relocation of Tributary A around the SWM Pond to maintain existing natural flows through a meandering channel. Further discussion on the design of the realigned channel is provided in the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report - Channel Realignment (Appendix E.2).

Alternate locations for SWM Pond 2 were also considered while maintaining discharge to Indian Creek. Preliminary designs were adjusted to accommodate information pertaining to the floodplain and meander belt along Indian Creek, and to accommodate preservation of an existing barn structure identified through field investigations as supporting Barn Swallow nesting habitat. The ultimate design and location being proposed avoids these natural hazards and heritage features while treating stormwater quantity and quality draining to Indian Creek.

2.2.3.7 Utilities

Utility options required and reviewed for the Project include power requirements for electricity and natural gas supply.

34 File No. 160960844



Electricity will be required on-site for lighting and operations of the administration building, gate stations and communications. There is no need for on-site generation of electricity to supply the Terminal. Through discussions with Milton Hydro, opportunities exist for the extension of services to the site through upgrades to the existing supply network. To date, it is understood that no new transmission lines are required for the Project. CN has proposed emergency back-up power generators to be installed near the administration building to supply temporary power to the Terminal in the event of a power outage.

There are no natural gas supply lines available at the site, for use as heat source for the administration building and to power terminal equipment (i.e., shunt trucks). Several high pressure natural gas lines occur in the area, and services have been extended to existing residential developments north of the Terminal. In the event that future services are extended to the Terminal, possibly as developments north of Britannia Road proceed, CN would explore this opportunity at that time. At this time, site equipment will be powered by diesel fuel that will be transported to the site and stored in tanks located near the equipment maintenance garage. Additional information regarding equipment maintenance is found in Chapter 3 (Section 3.4.2.4).

2.2.3.8 Indian Creek Realignment

The Project considered two alternatives for how the construction and development of the Terminal would protect the integrity of Indian Creek and the Terminal as designed. Based on the design and layout of the proposed Terminal, encroachment into a portion of Indian Creek currently flowing along the CN mainline was identified. To address this and considering the long-term impacts on the Terminal and Indian Creek, the following two options were explored:

(a) a retaining wall immediately adjacent to Indian Creek; and,

(b) in-filling and realignment of Indian Creek.

The retaining wall would involve the construction of a 4 m high (maximum height) by approximately 285 m long concrete retaining wall along the northeast bank of Indian Creek. To avoid in-water works a smaller work pad, used for the temporary storage and movement of containers, must be implemented.

A retaining wall at this location was not considered a long-term solution to stabilizing the banks near the mainline as it minimized the potential for the maintenance of natural stream functions and implementation of riparian habitat along Indian Creek to the level of habitat enhancement opportunities provided with a relocation option. Since there are no plans to decommission the Terminal, this structural solution to the protection of the Terminal and CN’s existing mainline would result in the hardening of the outer bank of Indian Creek.

The re-alignment and infilling alternative provides for a larger work pad area and addresses worker safety concerns. The Indian Creek channel realignment option will impact approximately

File No. 160960844 35



1,075 m of Indian Creek, which will be replaced with approximately 570 m of realigned and enhanced channel reconnecting with Indian Creek approximately 150 m upstream from Tremaine Road. This option directly addresses an existing erosion/geohazard along Indian Creek, where flows near the existing CN mainline have created or aggravated slope instability causing erosion and slumping in this area. To provide a long-term solution to this hazard, to accommodate the Terminal and to create a naturalized channel enhanced for aquatic and terrestrial habitat, this alternative was preferred.

The realignment option provides the opportunity for a greater separation between Indian Creek and the Terminal operations, and the opportunity to incorporate naturalization, restoration and enhancement to improve aquatic and terrestrial corridor functions. This option would minimize future maintenance requirements along the outer meander of Indian Creek. Maintenance of flood conveyance and connection of Indian Creek to its floodplain, which benefits flood management and corridor functions of Indian Creek, would be provided. Further details regarding the Indian Creek channel realignment are provided within the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Channel Realignment (Appendix E.2).

2.2.4 Summary of Alternatives Assessment

A summary of the assessment of alternative means for carrying out the Project is presented in Table 2.2. Note that the discussion of relative biophysical and socio-economic effects is limited to alternatives that were considered technically and economically feasible. The purpose of this table is to provide a summary of the consideration of alternatives described within this Chapter of the EIS. Additional details regarding the Project Site Location are found in the Milton Logistics Hub - Site Selection Study (Appendix F).

36 File No. 160960844



Table 2.2: Summary of Alternative Means of Carrying out the Project

Component of Analysis

Alternative Means of

Carrying Out the Project

Considered

Technical Feasibility

Economic Feasibility Biophysical Effects Socio-Economic Effects Preferred

Option

Project Site Location (Milton Logistics Hub -Site Selection Study, Appendix F)

Brampton North Yes

Yes, land ownership would have to be secured

Environmental effects can be mitigated through detailed design; potential greater encroachment on watercourses/ fish habitat and natural features.

Located in planned urban expansion area (North West Brampton); land use not compatible.

Halton Hills

No – mainline grades beyond acceptable limit

Not applicable (not technically feasible)

Not applicable (not technically feasible).


North Milton

No – mainline grades beyond acceptable limit




South Milton Yes Yes – property owned by CN

Environmental effects can be mitigated through detailed design.

Located in an area anticipated for rail-based development, with access to several 400-series highways.

Transportation Corridors

Variety of routes available for dispersion of truck traffic to/from the Terminal

Existing and planned arterial roads and/or truck routes identified as alternatives

Truck movements based on various factors, including travel time, congestion to

No new roads or upgrades required. Biophysical effects limited.

CN intermodal terminal at this location anticipated in the Halton Region Transportation Master Plan (2011). Less than 3% increase in truck traffic with majority to occur

Multiple routes available

File No. 160960844 37







Considered



Option

minimize cost outside am and pm peak traffic periods.

CNTL trucks to be directed to Highway 407 along Britannia Road, where practicable

Britannia Road will be 4 to 6 lanes by operation

Most direct route to Highway 407 for majority of truck trips; alternates where feasible

No new roads or upgrades for CNTL trucks required. Biophysical effects limited.

CN intermodal terminal at this location anticipated in the Halton Region Transportation Master Plan (2011). Minor increase in truck traffic with majority to occur outside am and pm peak traffic periods.

Truck Entrance Location

South Tremaine Yes Yes Minimal potential effects on natural features.

No access to an arterial road or designated truck route; adjacent to existing residential houses.

North Tremaine No – Not owned by CN




Britannia Road Yes Yes Minimal potential effects on natural features.

Access to arterial road permitting truck use at start of operation; future residential development to the north.

First Line Yes Yes Minimal potential effects on natural features.

No access to an arterial road or designated truck route. Adjacent to Halton Region Waste Management Site.

38 File No. 160960844







Considered



Option

Extension to Regional Road 25 Yes

Additional cost for extra intersection/ overpass and construction of longer private road

Minimal potential effects on natural features.

Access to arterial road permitting truck use at start of operation; minimizes truck volumes along section of Britannia Road.

Gate Location Setback from entrance – Adjacent to work pad

Yes Yes Minimal potential effects on natural features.

Provides opportunity for queuing of trucks on CN private access road (1.7 km long to accommodate up to 140 trucks) to avoid disruption to traffic along Britannia Road; addresses public and municipal concern.

Lower Base Line

Diversion to 2nd Sideroad Yes Yes

Direct effects on wetland, woodland and wildlife habitat resulting from encroachment on recognized significant natural features.

Improves east-west connection across south Milton.

Grade Separation Yes Yes

Minimal potential effects on natural features; mitigation required to protect Tributary C.

Maintains traffic patterns and removes level crossing, thereby reducing disruption to existing or future vehicular traffic.

File No. 160960844 39







Considered



Option

Potable water supply

Connection to municipal system

No connection available




Drill a new well No – limited groundwater potential




Transport and on-site storage Yes

More costly than drilled well during operation

Minimal potential effects on natural features.

No impact on existing public infrastructure. Licensed contractor to provide delivery service.

Non-potable water supply (vehicle washing)

Rainwater harvesting/ collection

Yes Yes Contributes to maintain water balance and reducing demand on water supply.

No impact on municipal infrastructure.

Water recycling Yes Yes Contributes to maintain water balance and reducing demand on water supply.


Wastewater Management

Connection to municipal system

No connection available




On-site wastewater treatment system

No Not applicable (not technically feasible)



On-site storage tanks with contracted

Yes Yes Minimal potential effects on natural features.


40 File No. 160960844







Considered



Option

services

Stormwater Management

SWM Pond 1 east of Future Tributary A

Yes Yes

Encroachment into Tributary A, associated natural vegetation and realignment of Tributary A to west of SWM Pond.

No effect

SWM Pond 1 west of Future Tributary A

Yes Yes

Avoidance of encroachment into Tributary A and associated natural vegetation, realignment of Tributary A to south of SWM Pond.

No effects

SWM Pond 2

Yes – minor adjustments to revise location of the Pond

Yes

Pond location adjustments minor to avoid floodplain, meanderbelt and Barn Swallow nesting habitat.

No effects

Indian Creek Realignment

Retaining Wall Yes Long-term maintenance costs

Structural solution encroaches on Indian Creek; reduced setback to creek; minor opportunities for naturalization.

Worker safety concerns and on-going maintenance.

Realignment of Indian Creek Yes

Greater upfront construction and restoration costs

Long-term solution to increase separation between Indian Creek and Terminal; enhancements to aquatic and terrestrial habitat; addresses erosion/slope hazard.

No effects

File No. 160960844 41




42 File No. 160960844


Project Description December 7, 2015

3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

3.1 OVERVIEW

This section provides an overview and description of the location and layout, main facilities and components and associated construction and operation activities that will comprise the Project as proposed by CN. The Project is generally consistent with the description provided in the Project Description report submitted to the CEAA dated March 31, 2015, with any changes identified in Section 3.7.

CN originally proposed that an intermodal terminal be developed in south Milton in 2001. A public meeting was held on April 18, 2001 providing general information regarding the proposed project and intent of CN to pursue railway activities in south Milton. CN decided not to proceed with a new intermodal terminal and rather focused efforts toward the optimization of BIT by improving processes and thereby creating capacity in Brampton (2001 to 2005). This was followed by a decrease in intermodal demand (starting in 2008) (Strategic Projections Inc. 2013).

In 2008, CN submitted plans to Halton Region through their invitation for public comment as part of the “Sustainable Halton” planning process. In this submission, CN indicated its intention to use the site in south Milton for railway activity as a direct rail-serviced industrial site. As a result, Halton Region brought some of the land owned by CN into the urban area of Milton. Lands west of the mainline were designated as employment lands while the CN lands east of the mainline were designated as future strategic employment areas (Halton Region 2014a). Additional information is provided in the Milton Logistic Hub Technical Data Report - Socio-Economic Baseline (Appendix E.12) and the Planning Justification Report prepared by Bousfields (Appendix E.11).

Since 2010, the rail industry has seen significant growth in demand for intermodal services rather than rail-serviced industrial sites. CN’s intermodal terminal in Brampton is now reaching capacity and cannot be easily expanded due to a lack of available land. Therefore, its ability to accommodate the anticipated growth is limited, despite the investments made between 2001 and 2014. CN has determined that a satellite intermodal terminal is required to accommodate western GTHA intermodal market growth (Strategic Projections Inc. 2013).

The location and design of the Terminal is based on an iterative planning process that has been undertaken by CN to address market demand for intermodal service.

The Project as described in this document is the result of collaboration between CN and its engineering and environmental assessment team of consultants to provide opportunities to incorporate environmental management considerations into the Project design concepts. Engineering and feasibility assessments are on-going, and refinements to the Project design may result as detailed engineering designs advance through permitting, during construction and as intermodal services are optimized on an ongoing basis during operation.

File No. 160960844 43



3.2 PROJECT SETTING

Details regarding the location of the Project are provided in Section 1.3. The location of the Project relative to the regional setting is provided in Figure 1, Appendix B.

The PDA described throughout the EIS has been defined as the area of physical disturbance directly associated with the Project footprint. The PDA incorporates all project components and area grading, which covers approximately 185 ha of CN owned property. Figure 2, Appendix B identifies the PDA for the Project and the components that are proposed within this area.

As described in Section 1.3, the Project will be built on approximately 400 acres (approximately 160 ha) of the 1,000 acres (approximately 400 ha) of CN-owned land adjacent to CN’s Halton Subdivision, which is one of CN’s existing mainline corridors in the western half of the GTHA. The area of the PDA that encompasses the realignment and extension of the double track within the CN ROW is bounded by Derry Road to the north and 2nd Sideroad to the south. The area of the PDA that encompasses components of the Terminal is generally bounded by Britannia Road to the north, First Line to the east, Tremaine Road to the west, and Lower Base Line to the south.

The PDA primarily consists of agricultural land, the majority of which is row crops (i.e., soybeans, corn, wheat, etc.) with some of the fields also used to grow hay. Properties owned by CN are currently leased to local farmers and residents. The ground surface cover across the Project site is comprised largely of farm fields, sparse hedgerows, and three watercourses. There are also a few residences fronting First Line, Tremaine Road, and Lower Base Line. The existing Halton Region Waste Management Site is located east of the Project on First Line, Highway 407 is located to the south and the Burlington Airpark Airport is located approximately 1.4 km to the southwest.

These lands are located south of the developed portion of the Town of Milton. Halton Region has designated the lands located west of the CN mainline as employment lands and the lands located east of the existing mainline as future strategic employment area. Future residential development is proposed by the Town of Milton for the area north of Britannia Road.

Further details on the existing conditions are provided in Section 6.3 and in the TDRs found in Appendix E.

3.3 PROJECT COMPONENTS

CN proposes to construct and operate the Terminal and realign/extend the existing mainline on CN-owned property. Figure 3, Appendix B identifies the preliminary design of the Terminal and the proposed project components contained within the PDA. The project components will include:

• yard tracks;

44 File No. 160960844






• truck entrance/gate and access road (including overpass);


• SWM system;

• vegetation clearing, grading and berms;


• realignment of Tributary A;



• Lower Base Line crossing; and,


As engineering studies progress and consultation continues with elected officials, all levels of government, affected agencies, Aboriginal communities and other stakeholders, some of the details of the Project described in the following sections may be refined.

3.3.1 Yard Tracks

The Project will have a total of six yard tracks, three service tracks and three pad tracks that will be parallel to the existing mainline (Figure 3, Appendix B). These yard tracks will support the intermodal operation, including tracks to accommodate the loading and unloading of intermodal railcars (pad tracks) and tracks to hold and switch railcars (service tracks). As designed, the six yard tracks are estimated to total approximately 20,510 m of new yard trackage constructed on CN-owned property, as follows (distances are approximate):

• Service Track 1 – 4,614 m 1;

• Service Track 2 – 5,261 m 2;

• Service Track 3 – 2,552 m;

• Pad Track 1 – 2,623 m;

• Pad Track 2 - 2,680 m; and,

1 2,550 m outside existing ROW. 2 2,556 m outside existing ROW.

File No. 160960844 45



• Pad Track 3 – 2,780 m.

The length and layout of the pad and service tracks minimizes the need for switching activities. Switching is an activity where railcars or groups of railcars are positioned from one track to another. Track switches will be installed where the tracks connect, and will be equipped with propane heaters for winter maintenance to prevent ice build-up.

3.3.2 Work Pads and Container Storage

An intermodal work pad will be located adjacent to each of the three pad tracks (Figure 3, Appendix B). Each of the three work pads will measure approximately 65 m wide by 2,000 m long and will serve as the hard surface areas designated for loading and unloading activities as well as temporary container storage. Further detail regarding lift operations are provided in Section 3.4.2.3.

Work pads will also be used for the temporary storage of containers that have been unloaded from trains that are awaiting pick-up by truck, or that have been delivered by truck and are awaiting being loaded onto a train for another destination. Containers are either stored in stacks on the pad, or stored on a parked chassis (wheeled storage) awaiting pick-up.

Compressed air will be available on the work pad, which will be housed in a metal-clad building that will be located near the administration building and maintenance garage. The building will be approximately 7.5 m by 7.5 m and will be equipped with an electric compressor with reservoirs and piping. Final location and sizing will be determined following the design of the air system.

3.3.3 Realignment of the Existing Mainline

The existing mainline will be realigned eastward by a maximum distance of 98 m from the centre line of the existing mainline to accommodate the Terminal and facilitate rail operations through this area. The realignment of the existing mainline will occur on CN property between Ash station and a point south of Lower Base Line (Figure 3, Appendix B). There will also be minor realignment of the existing mainline between Ash station and Derry Road, within the existing CN ROW.

3.3.4 Double Track Extension of the Mainline

The existing mainline, which consists of a single track, will be doubled to improve the fluidity of train movements through this area. Doubling of the tracks will allow trains to pass without delay and will mitigate disruptions to local vehicle movement.

The combined increase of new mainline track length is approximately 4,200 m. The existing north mainline will be extended by approximately 45 m. The south mainline will be extended by approximately 4,155 m from Ash station (Mile 39.50, approximately half way between Lower Base Line and Britannia Road) to a point south of Derry Road (Mile 36.86) (Figure 3, Appendix B). No new property or ROW is required to accommodate this double track extension as it will

46 File No. 160960844



remain within CN’s property, allowing for improved mainline rail movement along the existing corridor.

3.3.5 Truck Entrance/Gate and Access Road

Truck access in and out of the Terminal will be off Britannia Road at a location east of the existing mainline crossing at Britannia Road. The entrance will be located east of Halton Region’s proposed Britannia Road overpass. This entrance will be signalized to accommodate safe truck movements, and is anticipated to include a turning lane for trucks entering the Terminal from the east, the details of which will be refined in consultation with Halton Region.

Trucks will enter the Terminal via a new private access roadway built entirely on CN property. The access road will include a new two-lane overpass to enable truck access over the CN mainline and yard tracks, which will accommodate trucks entering and exiting the Terminal (Figure 3, Appendix B).

The new paved access roadway will be made up of two lanes, each being approximately 5.5 m wide and approximately 1.7 km long to accommodate truck queuing entirely on CN property. Inbound access into the Terminal will be controlled through a gate at the end of the access roadway located west of the mainline, which includes six asphalt queuing lanes, each 5.5 m wide and 200 m long. Queuing capacity at the entrance gate is approximately 50 trucks within these six lanes. A total queuing capacity along the truck entrance access roadway is approximately 140 trucks, which will accommodate queuing on CN’s property. Facilities at the gate include secured access entry via a portal building and a temporary parking area for trucks.

Outbound access consists of four queuing lanes of similar dimensions as the inbound access. Further details regarding truck gate operations are discussed in Section 3.4.2.1.

A single storey driver’s assistance building, approximately 100 m2 in size, will be located near the gate. It will have an open portion accessible to the drivers that will house several kiosks and printers. There will also be a secure, climate controlled section that will house a small workshop and spare parts storage for the gate system.

3.3.6 Administration Building and Maintenance Garage

The administration building will be a 2,500 m2 building consisting of an office area (offices/cubicles), a lunchroom/kitchen, locker room, washroom and shower facilities for employees (Figure 3, Appendix B). The administration building will be equipped with the following:

• solar specific elevation treatments (solar energy technology such as window design, HVAC (cooling and control), solar domestic water heating, etc.);

• natural daylight through rooftop light monitors;

File No. 160960844 47



• rooftop solar panels;

• wastewater management to be handled using holding tanks;

• potable water for office use to be transported to the Terminal;

• water treatment plant (recirculation system) with storage tank for wash water;

• rainwater catchment system for wash water, landscaping and on-site sewage requirements;

• fire protection water supply to be stored in steel tanks; and,

• working capacity for approximately 130 employees (working various shifts).

A 1,200 m2 garage will be connected to the administration building for maintenance and washing of yard equipment and vehicles. The garage will be equipped with the following:

• three reach stacker bays;

• two truck bays; and,

• one cistern for rainwater collection.

Major garage equipment will include:

• overhead cranes;

• truck washing equipment;

• truck lifts; and,

• small mechanical tools (including welding equipment and air compressors).

Access to the administration building and maintenance garage for employee and service/delivery vehicles will be via a new entrance on Tremaine Road. It is anticipated that access to the Terminal from Tremaine Road will operate under stop control on the driveway and without traffic control on Tremaine Road. Improvements associated with this entrance will be determined at a later stage through discussions with Halton Region.

The asphalt access road will lead to an asphalt parking lot intended for employee vehicle parking only, with a parking capacity of 150 vehicles. A second parking area accessible from the truck access roadway via Britannia Road will provide parking for CNTL tractors.

3.3.7 Stormwater Management System

To maintain water quality and quantity, stormwater run-off from the Terminal, including the work pads, access roads, parking areas, gate area and administration building, will be collected and conveyed through a network of storm sewers and drainage swales to two SWM ponds before draining into Indian Creek or Tributary A (Figure 3, Appendix B).

48 File No. 160960844



SWM Pond 1 is located adjacent to the Terminal truck gate and has a maximum capacity of approximately 40,770 m3 (AECOM 2015). SWM Pond 2 is adjacent to the administration building and maintenance garage and has a maximum capacity of approximately 43,760 m3 (AECOM 2015). Both ponds have been designed as wet detention ponds.

Each SWM pond will be equipped with shut-off valves to be engaged in the event of an accidental spill to protect the downstream environment. The surface drainage collection system includes a series of storm sewers that will be installed beneath the Terminal and drainage ditches for the collection and direction of surface water into one of two on-site SWM ponds.

A series of grassed swales are provided between the yard and gate/administration building to collect, store, treat and convey storm run-off from the work pads and yard tracks to the SWM ponds. Oil grit separators, which capture litter, coarse sediment, some nutrients, oils and greases (hydrocarbons) will be provided for the administration building and gate area. Both of these features provide pre-treatment of run-off prior to discharge to the SWM ponds.

Flow diversion channels will capture off-site or external run-off draining from adjacent properties and will convey it around the Terminal to Indian Creek and its tributaries. Flows will be collected and discharged downstream of the SWM ponds. Further details on the SWM plan are provided in the Milton Logistics Hub - Stormwater Management Strategy (AECOM 2015) (Appendix B in Appendix E.15).

3.3.8 Clearing, Grading and Berms

Area grading is required to provide a level surface for work pads and tracks during operations, as well as to accommodate the construction of the administration building and other project components. All grading will occur within the PDA on CN property (Figure 3, Appendix B).

Excess material from grading activities will remain on-site. This material will be used to construct berms around the Terminal that will act as noise barriers during operations. Further detail regarding the locations and extent of the berms is provided in the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report - Noise Effects Assessment (Appendix E.10). Additional berms may also be constructed within the PDA to act as visual barriers; the extent and location of which will be determined during detailed design.

3.3.9 Construction Materials and Stockpile Areas

Temporary construction laydown areas for the storage of materials and equipment will occur entirely on CN property (Figure 3, Appendix B). Two construction laydown areas have been identified for the temporary storage of equipment and vehicles, one near Britannia Road and the other adjacent to the proposed maintenance garage. Additional construction areas may be identified during the detailed design phase and will occur within the PDA.

File No. 160960844 49



There will be minimal stockpiles of earth and granular material on-site in order to limit/avoid double handling of material. Topsoil will be stripped and stored on site to accommodate restoration of vegetative cover on berms, SWM ponds, and manicured grassed areas. No imported topsoil will be required.

Materials to be brought onto the site to construct the Terminal include granular material which will form the base of the following:

• roadways (approximately 15,000 cubic metres (m3));

• pad including two yard tracks (approximately 330,000 m3);

• four yard tracks and the mainline realignment on the east side of the Terminal (approximately 30,000 m3); and,

• extension and additional track from Britannia Road to Derry Road (approximately 15,000 m3).

Materials required for the construction of the Terminal will be brought to the site along approved truck routes and sourced from licensed gravel facilities. Ballast for construction of the mainline and yard tracks is most likely to be brought on site by railcar.

3.3.10 Realignment of Indian Creek

As discussed in Chapters 1 and 2, the realignment of a 570 m portion of Indian Creek is proposed to mitigate potential impacts of the Project and to address existing bank stability along Indian Creek, where flows have created or aggravated slope instability causing erosion and slumping along the CN ROW. The realigned portion of Indian Creek east of Tremaine Road is identified on Figure 4, Appendix B.

The channel realignment is designed based on natural channel design principles to emulate local stable reaches of Indian Creek, which would include aquatic habitat enhancements and riparian vegetation planting. Goals of the channel realignment include creating an opportunity for a healthy and diverse fish population, designing a stable channel, installing instream structures, conveying and storing flood flows, and establishing riparian vegetation along the Indian Creek corridor.

Further details are provided within the Milton Logistic Hub Technical Data Report – Channel Realignment (Appendix E.2).

3.3.11 Realignment of Tributary A

Tributary A currently flows across the CN property to its confluence with Indian Creek immediately west of Tremaine Road. To accommodate the Terminal, while maintaining flows across the site, flows in this tributary will be conveyed through two twin box culverts approximately 125 m in length beneath the yard tracks and work pad area. Flows will also be

50 File No. 160960844



conveyed through two twin box culverts approximately 75 m in length beneath the Terminal truck gate, and a smaller culvert beneath the truck access roadway near Britannia Road.

The lower reaches of Tributary A will be realigned to meander around SWM Pond 1 using natural channel design methods before connecting into Tributary A upstream of the existing berm (Figure 3, Appendix B). Maintaining separation between the Tributary A flows originating upstream of the Terminal and the stormwater run-off collected within the Terminal will allow run-off from the Terminal to be treated through the SWM Ponds prior to discharge or mixing with off-site flows. The new Tributary A channel will be approximately 500 m long.

Further details are provided within the Milton Logistic Hub Technical Data Report – Channel Realignment (Appendix E.2).

3.3.12 Naturalization and Restoration

To offset potential effects on Indian Creek and Tributary A, several measures are proposed to minimize impacts, stabilize the streams, improve habitat and restore natural conditions that support fish habitat. Habitat enhancement components along the realigned portion of Indian Creek are proposed, such as placement of habitat structures, woody debris toe protection, floodplain enhancements and riparian vegetation planting (Figure 5, Appendix B).

Naturalization and restoration of a portion of Tributary A will be completed through the removal of an existing on-line agricultural pond and rupture/breach of an existing berm. This work is proposed in accordance with recommendations made in the Bronte Creek Subwatershed Study (Conservation Halton 2002). The removal and naturalization of this impoundment area and realigned section of Tributary A is intended to improve water quality in Indian Creek, remove a source of thermal heating, and to improve fish and riparian habitat.

Further details will be finalized during the detailed design phase. Preliminary information is provided in within the Milton Logistic Hub Technical Data Report – Channel Realignment (Appendix E.2).

CN will be consulting with DFO to request a review of the proposed realignment of Indian Creek and Tributary A. The DFO review will determine if the proposed works are likely to result in serious harm to fish that are part of a commercial, recreational or Aboriginal fishery (CRA fishery), or to fish that support such a fishery. If this is the case, an Authorization under the Fisheries Act will be required.

3.3.13 Electrical and Communications Infrastructure

To support the electrical demands of the Project, an 8 MVA transformer will be installed near the administration building. Any electrical lines crossing the work pads or yard tracks will be installed underground, while lines in other areas will be installed above ground. On-site power generators will be used as back-up power sources in the event of a failure. CN is currently in discussions with

File No. 160960844 51



Milton Hydro Distribution to determine appropriate feed locations as well as pole upgrade requirements for servicing requirements for the Terminal.

An on-site radio communications system will be required to enable radio communications with terminal equipment and staff and to ensure safe operations. Many options are available, including one transmission antenna and four receiver antennas all collocated on five new approximately 30 m light poles with 7.6 m extensions, or one approximately 45 m free standing transmission tower supported by approximately four receiver antennas on structures less than 15 m high. The preferred option will be determined during the detailed design phase.

CN operates and maintains a communications network within their ROW that facilitates communication and control within and between CN terminals and yards. Upgrades of this system between Georgetown and Burlington are planned, whereby a new fibre optic line will be trenched into the existing ROW. The cable will be encased in a 3 inch (“) pipe approximately 1.25 m to 1.75 m from the nearest rail track with the CN ROW.

While this work is not proposed as part of the Project, the Terminal will use this new upgraded fibre optic system to enable communication connection of the Terminal to other CN facilities, including the BIT.

3.3.14 Lower Base Line Crossing

To avoid disruption to vehicular traffic while trains enter or exit the Terminal, a grade separation via an underpass will be created where Lower Base Line (Mile 40.68) crosses the existing mainline at grade just east of Tremaine Road (Figure 3, Appendix B). The two lane underpass will be approximately 40 m to 55 m long and will route Lower Base Line traffic beneath the existing tracks and the Terminal within the existing municipal ROW.

A temporary two track diversion of existing tracks will be required to accommodate construction of the Lower Base Line underpass. The tracks will be built to the permanent alignment upon completion of the grade separation. Temporary redirection of road vehicles will be required during the construction of the Lower Base Line underpass.

CN will be responsible for the design, construction, and future maintenance of the underpass and will work collaboratively with the municipal road authority to incorporate its requirements. The bridge structure supporting the tracks and Terminal will be owned by CN, while Lower Base Line will remain in public ownership.

3.3.15 Existing Petroleum Pipelines

Two existing underground pipelines owned and operated by Sun-Canadian that transect the PDA (Mile 39.13) require realignment due to construction of the Terminal (Figure 1, Appendix B). These two pipelines are described in Table 3.1. Standard protection measures are required to accommodate the relocation of the pipelines entirely on CN property.

52 File No. 160960844



Through discussions with Sun-Canadian, these pipelines will be relocated around the north end of the proposed work pads on property controlled by CN. The relocated pipelines will be installed via directional drill at a depth ranging from approximately 3 m to 6 m below grade.

3.4 PROJECT ACTIVITIES

Development of the Terminal has been divided into the following Project phases:

• Construction; and,

• Operation.

A more detailed description and schedule of proposed activities is provided in Section 3.4.1.

3.4.1 Construction

Construction of the Terminal will commence once all applicable permits are in place, including the decision by the Minister following the CEAA panel review process. As such, the schedule presented here is subject to change.

Terminal construction is scheduled to begin in 2017 and is expected to take approximately 18 to 24 months, with opening in 2019. Further details are provided in Section 3.6.

The main construction activities will include:





• utilities;



These activities are common to construction projects. Different phases of construction are expected to occur at different times. It is expected that construction equipment will operate in different areas of the PDA at different times during the construction phase.

3.4.1.1 Site Clearing and Grading Activities

The construction of the Terminal will require approximately 180 ha of existing land to be disturbed to accommodate construction. Site disturbance will include clearing and removal of trees and brush, stripping of all surficial organics and topsoil, site grading, including cut and fill earthworks, to accommodate the Terminal and realigned tracks to create a level working area.

File No. 160960844 53



The limit of disturbance, including all site grading, clearance and construction activities, occurs within the PDA and accommodates grading associated with the proposed project infrastructure (i.e., work and service pads, access roads, buildings, SWM ponds, ditches, tracks and berms), as well as potential areas required for the realignment of Indian Creek, Tributary A and corresponding restoration and enhancement areas. All grading activities will be confined to the CN property.

Grades within the PDA generally slope down from north to south, but for safe and efficient operation of the Terminal, the pad area is to be level. Material suitable for the grade will be excavated from the north end of the pad area and moved to the south end to raise the ground elevation over the length of the terminal to create a level surface.

Any topsoil to be salvaged will be stripped during dry periods to the greatest extent practical. Topsoil will be stored in accordance with the sediment and erosion control measures described in the EPP, until it is required for site reclamation.

There will be minimal stockpiles of earth and granular material on-site in order to limit/avoid double handling of material.

Surplus topsoil and earth will be used for the construction of the perimeter berms, which will be seeded and planted with native Ontario trees. CN intends to reuse the majority, if not all excess soils generated during grading for use in the construction of berms, channel realignments and landscape top cover on-site for the Project. Soil samples from several proposed areas in which the Project components will be constructed in the PDA were analyzed to determine if excess soils can be reused as planned. Further details are provided within the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Soil Chemical Analysis (Appendix E.13).

An erosion and sediment control plan will be prepared for the construction phase of the Project. A multi-barrier approach will be utilized and include silt fencing, rock check dams, straw bale filters, filter fabric under catch basins frame and gates and mud mats, as required.

The SWM ponds also provide a degree of erosion control, whereby storage volumes will be provided as extended detention in the wet ponds and will be released gradually through the low flow orifice outlet of the ponds.

3.4.1.2 Track Construction and Signals Installation

The realigned mainline tracks east of the existing mainline will be built and put in service prior to commencing work on the Terminal pads. This requires stripping, grading and placement of sub-ballast prior to building the track structure. Disruptions to train activities on the mainline will occur during cutovers of mainline tracks. The construction staging scheme for the Terminal and track work is a process commonly executed by CN.

54 File No. 160960844



Once construction of the railway grade is complete, ties and rails will be distributed and placed accordingly along the track alignment. Ballasting, final surfacing with mechanized lifting and lining equipment, thermite welding, grinding and destressing will complete track construction. Signals and switching equipment will be installed as required.

3.4.1.3 Terminal Infrastructure

Following site preparation, construction of terminal infrastructure will include the following activities:

• placement of imported granular material along access roads, parking areas and Terminal;

• placement of pavement structures for access roads, entrance gates and pads;

• installation of culvert and drainage structures, including inlet and outlet protection;

• construction of the administration building and maintenance garage; and,

• construction of SWM ponds.

Stockpiles of sand and granular material will occur during paving activities, which will be imported to the site from approved facilities.

While the final method and materials to be used for the construction of the work pads have not been finalized, likely materials include either asphalt or roller compacted concrete. The type of pavement for the Terminal pads will be determined during detailed design. In the event of a concrete surface, a temporary batch plant will be constructed at or immediately adjacent to the Terminal (within the PDA), in order to construct the work pads.

The level area for the Terminal pads created during site grading activities will be compacted. Granular material will be placed on the grade and compacted. Site roads and drainage system components will be constructed concurrent to this work. Work on the office building/garage and gate infrastructure will also take place at this time.

The yard tracks, including three pad tracks and three service tracks, will be constructed after the granular material is placed. The materials and method of construction will be similar to the construction of mainline tracks.

The pavement for roadways (asphalt) and the pads (asphalt or roller compacted concrete) will be installed after construction of the tracks and will be placed on the leveled and compacted granular base.

The location of temporary construction offices will be confirmed during detailed design, but will be located on site within the PDA. Options include using temporary mobile offices or existing buildings within the PDA as construction offices.

File No. 160960844 55



3.4.1.4 Grade Separations

Two grade separations are proposed for the Project, including a new overpass across the CN track for the truck access and a new underpass at Lower Base Line. In the case of Lower Base Line, CN will collaborate with the road authority to ensure appropriate design and construction are achieved and that appropriate environmental mitigation measures are incorporated for the construction of the underpass and bridge structure supporting the Terminal and tracks.

Construction of the grade separation (overpass) within the Terminal along the private access road will include excavation of material for reuse on-site (i.e., berms), construction of concrete abutments and retaining walls and concrete pre-cast or cast-in-place girders. This structure will be constructed entirely on CN property. Temporary construction offices (trailers) and a staging area will be at the site during construction. Grade separation work will be ongoing for the duration of the construction project.

3.4.1.5 Utilities

For third party infrastructure, CN will work with other affected parties, including the Town of Milton and Sun-Canadian, to develop methods and timing for construction to keep on CN’s schedule and allow for the protection of the environment.

CN possesses existing agreements with the utility entities. The majority of the existing utility crossings will not interact with the Project components as they are located at an appropriate depth or possess adequate wall or casing thickness.

Table 3.1 outlines the existing utility crossings within the CN ROW in the area affected by the Project.

Table 3.1: Utility Crossings within the PDA

Crossing Approx. Mileage Utility Details

Gas, Oil, and Other Flammable/ Hazardous Substances

37.17

Union Gas Limited

26" (660 mm) Ø Steel Carrier through ROW



30" (762 mm) Ø Steel Casing through ROW

37.77 6" (168 mm) Ø Steel Carrier through ROW

37.82 40" (1016 mm) Ø Steel Casing through ROW

39.13 Sun-Canadian Pipelines Co. Ltd

16" (406 mm) Ø Steel Casing through ROW

12"5/8 (321 mm) Ø Steel Casing through ROW

56 File No. 160960844



Table 3.1: Utility Crossings within the PDA

Crossing Approx. Mileage Utility Details

41.15 Imperial Oil 15" (381 mm) Ø Steel Casing through ROW

41.16

Imperial Oil 16" (406 mm) Ø Steel Casing through ROW

Interprovincial Oil (Enbridge Pipelines

Inc.) 36" (914 mm) Ø Steel Casing 80' of ROW

Water, Sanitary, and Other Non-Flammable/ Non-Hazardous Substances

37.01 Sanitary 24" (600 mm) Ø Steel Casing through ROW

37.78 Twin Sanitary Forcemain 53" (1350 mm) Ø Steel Casing through ROW

38.00

Sanitary 35"1/2 (900 mm) Ø Steel Casing through ROW

35"1/2 (900 mm) Ø Steel Casing through ROW

Overhead Wire Crossings - Electrical

38.00 Milton Hydro Distribution 1-27.6kV, 1-16.0kV Power Lines, 1-Neutral Ground

40.61

Milton Hydro Distribution

3-27.6kV, 1-08kV Power Lines, 1-Neutral Ground

3-27.6kV, 1-08kV Power Lines, 1-Neutral Ground

Standard protection measures are required for the relocation of the Sun-Canadian petroleum pipelines on CN property, as noted in Section 3.3.15.

For details regarding electricity supply to the Terminal refer to Section 3.3.13.

No connection to municipal water supply is available at this time. As such, three holding tanks for potable water will be installed near the administration building to supply potable water for washroom, showers and lunch room facilities. Potable water demand is anticipated at 30 gallons (gal)/person/day resulting in 3,000 gal/day. Potable water will be transported to the Terminal and stored in the underground water storage tanks with a capacity of approximately 5,000 gal each (15,000 gal total) to meet the potable water demand. A separate rainwater catchment and recycling system with an area of 3,700 m2 will be installed to capture rainwater to supplement the water supply for vehicle washing, landscaping and on-site sewage.

Water for fire protection will be stored in a 35,000 gal steel tank system designated for fire protection at an anticipated flow rate of 3,600 litres per minute (L/min). The separate steel tanks will be installed below grade to supply fire suppression at the administration building and within the Terminal yard.

No connection to municipal sanitary sewers is available at this time. As such, on-site sanitary sewage containment will be provided through a 10,000 gal capacity septic tank that will be

File No. 160960844 57



installed below grade adjacent to the administration building to meet the anticipated wastewater flow of 3,500 gal/day (30 gal/person/day plus 500 gal/day for wash water).

3.4.1.6 Watercourse Realignment, Restoration and Naturalization

The realignment of Indian Creek and diversion of Tributary A will proceed in a manner that minimizes potential disturbance to the existing environment while creating new features that will stabilize over the long-term.

The approach will be to minimize the amount of in-water construction and surface water diversion activities and to time such activities during periods when flows are low and that consider species timing windows. New channels will be constructed in the dry (i.e., isolated from flows using diversion, pumping or potentially piping) to reduce potential impacts.

Channels will be stabilized and enhancements incorporated prior to receiving flows. Once flows are diverted into the new channels, the old channels would be decommissioned in a manner that salvages existing materials (i.e., boulders for habitat features, soil for seed sources) and minimizes impacts on wildlife (i.e., timing of construction, fish rescue).

Construction mitigation measures will be implemented, monitored and maintained during all phases of construction, as outlined in Section 9.5. Examples include erosion and sediment controls, avoiding in-water work during fisheries timing windows, timing the clearing of vegetation to avoid sensitive breeding bird periods and other construction best management practices.

3.4.1.7 Construction Equipment and Operation

The following equipment is expected to be used during the construction phase of the Project:

• excavators (16);

• dozers (10);

• graders (4);

• loaders (11);

• backhoes (4);

• dump trucks (8 to 10 during paving);

• compactors (5);

• rollers (7, including vibratory rollers);

• generator sets (10);

• water pumps (10);

58 File No. 160960844



• scrapers (4);

• augers/drill rigs (3);

• water trucks (4);

• off-road dump trucks (rock trucks) (9);

• concrete trucks (12);

• gravel trucks (20);

• dump trucks for paving (5);

• temporary lighting (for security and night time work as required);

• mobile offices and washrooms;

• a portable concrete plant;

• crane (for building, light pole, and communications systems) (2 to 3);

• track construction machinery (tamper, regulator, spiker, welder, rail heater);

• pavers (2);

• shuttle buggy (2);

• man lifts (3);

• pipe layer (2);

• boom trucks (2);

• chain saw (2); and,

• concrete saw (6) and support vehicles (3).

Note that not all equipment will be on site and/or operating simultaneously as the equipment required varies for different construction activities and phases. Detailed construction plans and equipment counts have not been confirmed, however, will be finalized through the detailed design and procurement process by the contractor.

Equipment will operate in different areas of the Project at different times during the construction period. Construction is planned to take place between 07:00 and 21:00, with the majority of activities likely occurring between 07:00 and 19:00 (daytime hours). However, periodic night time construction may be required during some components of Project work. For example, paving of the work pad may occur around-the-clock to minimize the number of joints and reduce daily startup/shutdown lags. In the event nightly construction is necessary, residents will be given notice.

As noted in Section 3.4.1.3, the surface material and construction method for the work pads has not yet been determined. The decision to use asphalt or roller compacted concrete will be

File No. 160960844 59



determined during detailed design. For the purposes of the EIS, equipment associated with the installation of both surface materials has been identified.

3.4.2 Operations

The Project will be designed to allow efficient transfer of containerized cargo between trains and the Terminal. Once completed, the Terminal will operate 24 hours a day, 7 days a week and is projected to handle approximately 350,000 containers annually at the start of operation and is designed for approximately 450,000 containers annually at full operation.

The use of intermodal containers to move products to market provides flexibility and efficiency to the overall supply chain facilitating the transition between rail, trucks or ships. A variety of products are shipped using this mode of transportation, which generally includes any products available through big box stores or hardware stores.

The Terminal will only handle containerized goods. On any given day, the products in an intermodal container vary based on client demand, destination and season. Products include, but are not limited to, items such as toys, furniture, appliances, clothing, electronics, household goods, automotive parts and maintenance products, lawn care equipment, cosmetics/ health care, or food products. Some containers are temperature controlled to accommodate products that must be chilled/frozen or heated in the winter.

Some containerized goods may be categorized as dangerous goods, such as household cleaning products, automotive parts and maintenance products, lawn care equipment, which account for approximately 2.7% of the shipments of intermodal containers. These containers would be placarded accordingly and handled in accordance with the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act. The terminal will not handle dangerous goods in bulk.

The Terminal will be served by four intermodal trains per day. Two of the trains to be handled in the Terminal are part of the 25 to 30 trains/day currently moving along the Halton Subdivision while two new trains are forecasted to be added to service the Terminal.

As trains enter the Terminal, they will pull onto the pad track where containers will be lifted off the railcars and chassis using mobile cranes. Once unloaded, containers that were delivered to the Terminal via truck will be loaded on to the railcars.

Generally, the Terminal can be divided into four operating functions: truck entrance/exit (Terminal truck gate), train operations, lift operations, and equipment maintenance. Further information specific to each of these functions is provided in the sections below.

60 File No. 160960844



3.4.2.1 Truck Operations (Entrance/Exit and Movements)

All trucks entering or exiting the Terminal will use the proposed entrance off Britannia Road, which is currently designated by Halton Region as an arterial road and which functions to accommodate truck traffic (Halton Region 2014b).

It is estimated that approximately 650 trucks per day will be entering and subsequently exiting the Terminal at the beginning of operation and approximately 800 trucks per day each way at full operation. At this time, it is anticipated that the majority of truck movements will occur during the daytime. More specifically, it is estimated that approximately 85% of truck movements will occur between 06:00 and 21:00 as identified in the Review of Terminal-Generated Truck Traffic (Appendix E.17).

Trucks entering the Terminal will travel along CN’s private 1.7 km inbound/outbound access road. The length of the inbound access road allows for fluid movement and queuing of approximately 140 trucks into the Terminal. Although a queue of this length is uncommon, it ensures trucks will not back up onto public roads. A gate reservation system regulates truck activity to reduce queuing and to smooth traffic movements throughout the day.

The trucks then approach the gate and it is at this check point where the condition of the containers and the container documents are reviewed. CN will use its Speed Gate™ system to reduce the time trucks idle in line. Each truck will pass through a portal building which houses a series of lights, cameras and sensors. These record high definition images of the truck, container and chassis as well as record the container and chassis identifiers through optical character recognition.

Once through the portal the truck will proceed to a kiosk (similar to an ATM) where the driver will self-identify (using a license number/fingerprint scan). The driver will then provide the information required to complete the transaction (e.g., seal numbers, container weight). Once the transaction is complete, the driver will receive a gate receipt and will proceed into the Terminal. In the background, clerks will troubleshoot any issues the drivers may have completing their transactions.

Exiting the yard, drivers will complete the same process. Transactions normally take about three minutes entering the Terminal and one minute exiting the Terminal allowing for the safe and fluid movement of trucks.

All drivers wishing to pick up or drop off a container in the Terminal must be registered with CN. The registration process involves recording their driver’s license information, the companies for which they may drive, obtaining a picture of the driver and an encrypted digital representation of a fingerprint.

A second secure access point will exist near the administration building off of Tremaine Road where employees, service vehicles and delivery trucks including trucks transporting potable

File No. 160960844 61



water will enter the Terminal. Movement of vehicles will be controlled using company issued radio frequency identification device pass cards and monitored by closed circuit television.

A variety of container types are used for intermodal shipments resulting in a variety of truck and chassis combinations for different operating conditions. The following truck movements are expected to/from the Terminal:

• truck pulling bare chassis;

• truck pulling chassis with a container (container may be either loaded or empty); and,

• bobtails tractor (tractor without chassis).

3.4.2.2 Train Operations

Based on the existing CN customer base, the Terminal is planned to be served by four intermodal trains per day, including two existing trains that currently operate on the Halton Subdivision.

Based on the train’s design and destination, trains will enter the Terminal and be directed to a pad track or to a service track. The length of the pad and service tracks enables trains to enter the Terminal with minimum need to break down into smaller components. Longer trains can also be assembled on the service tracks in preparation for the next destination. These design features minimize train movements and the need for switching within the Terminal. In some cases a train will have railcars destined to more than one track, in which case the locomotive will place the railcars into the correct track upon arrival. Through trains will then couple onto the railcars they are picking up and depart from the Terminal.

Containers will be loaded and unloaded from rail cars and chassis using mobile reach stacker-type cranes. There will be space available on the work pads to allow for the temporary staging of containers and chassis, loading/unloading activities and to facilitate container, crane and truck movements throughout the Terminal.

Groups of railcars on the pad tracks are assigned to specific outbound destinations and containers are directed to specific railcars based on their destination. As a result, appropriate marshaling on the trains is achieved through minimal switching. All railcars that arrive on one of the pad tracks will be inspected by the mechanical department. Minor repairs (e.g., wheel and brake shoe changes) to the railcars will be completed in-situ.

Prior to departure, the locomotives will couple to the railcars from either or both the service and pad tracks and move onto the mainline.

If required, locomotives will be fueled via a direct truck to locomotive process. Major repairs and overhauls of locomotives will be completed at an alternate CN facility.

62 File No. 160960844



3.4.2.3 Lift Operations

The Terminal will use mobile reach stackers to lift containers on/off a chassis and on/off a railcar.

For every container that needs to be lifted on or off a railcar or moved within the Terminal, a work order is created in the Terminal operating system. This allows CN to manage the workload in the yard and track the location of every container. These work orders are visible on a computer in each of the work vehicles in the yard as well as on computers in the office.

For outbound movements, containers are assigned to specific railcars, taking into consideration each railcar’s destination, size and weight among other things. This creates a work order for the container to be moved to the railcar either by a hostler truck or a reach stacker.

Reach stackers will travel along the paved pads accessing different areas of the Terminal via an access road that connects the administration building to the work pads. This access road provides sufficient space to allow trucks and reach stacker to flow adjacent to one another.

To load the railcars, reach stacker lifts the container and places it onto a railcar (Photo 3.1). Four interbox connectors are placed onto the container. The reach stacker then places a second container on top of the first one and the interbox connectors are locked. This secures the top container to the bottom container. The reverse operation occurs to unload the railcars and the containers are then either loaded directly onto chassis or temporarily stacked on the paved work pads.

Photo 3.1: Reach Stacker Lifting Container for Truck Transport

File No. 160960844 63



Rail controlled containers (i.e., containers used by CN as part of its direct-to-customer service offering) may remain parked on a chassis or on the ground within the Terminal in order to allow for easy access by CN’s driver.

3.4.2.4 Equipment Maintenance

A full service garage will be built where CN will maintain and repair all the cranes, hostler trucks and other CN vehicles operating in the Terminal. CN has a rigorous maintenance program to ensure its equipment is safe and efficient. The components of this program range from daily inspections through to annual non-destructive testing. The garage will be capable of accommodating any repair necessary on the equipment, including full engine overhauls and boom replacements.

Containers and chassis may be repaired on-site (in the garage or at a specifically designated area) or may be transported off-site for repairs. The following equipment will be required as part of operations at the Terminal:

• reach stacker cranes (forecasted at 8 to 12);

• yard tractors (hostler tractors for use within the Terminal only - forecasted at 8 to 10);

• light vehicles (pick-up trucks, vans – forecasted at 3 to 4); and,

• maintenance vehicles (welding truck, fork lift, front-end loader – forecasted at 3 to 4).

To accommodate maintenance and operation activities within the Terminal, certain materials will be stored within the maintenance garage for use during regular operation. Products may include hydraulic fluids, brake fluids, coolants, biodegradable surfactants, lubricants and general process chemicals required for equipment maintenance. There will be no bulk storage of reagents or solvents on-site. The following is a representative list of materials that will be located and properly stored within the maintenance garage area:

• Unitrac tractor Hydraulic Fluid – 1 x 1200L totes

• SAE 32 Hydraulic Fluid – 1 x 1200L totes

• Dextron Transmission Fluid – 1 x 1200L totes

• 10W30 Engine Oil – 1 x 1200L tote

• 15W40 Engine Oil – 1 x 1200L tote

• 5W30 Synthetic Engine Oil – 12 x 1 qt bottles

• 5W20 Engine Oil – 25 x 1 qt bottles

• Karcher KD-340 Degreaser – 1 x 55 gal drum

• 50/50 Premixed Universal Anitfreeze (SCA) – Approx. 10 x 3.78L jugs

64 File No. 160960844



• All Season Windshield Washer Antifreeze – Approx. 12 x 3.78L jugs

• Allison TranSynd Synthetic Transmission Fluid – 1 x 5 gal pail

• Bio-Circle L biomediating parts cleaner and degreaser – 2 x 5 gal pails

• Shell Gadus S2 V220 Extreme Pressure grease – 2 x 110 lb pails

• Greenlube EP-0 Grease – 1 x 120 lb pail

• Shell SHIRAX HD SAE 80W-90 Gear Oil – 1 x 55 gal drum

• Conoco Rock Drill Oil – 1 x 55 gal drum

• Lubrico Transdraulic Fluid – 1 x 55 gal drum drum

In addition, exterior fuel storage in above ground tanks will consist of diesel fuel for yard equipment. Propane containers may also be on-site to fuel lift trucks within the maintenance garage.

3.4.3 Emissions, Discharges and Wastes

The construction and operation of the Terminal will produce air emissions, acoustic emissions, liquid discharges and solid wastes.

3.4.3.1 Air Contaminant Emissions

There will be no point source continuous air emissions associated with the Project. Intermittent air emissions as a result of the Project construction and operation from primary mobile sources will consist of products of combustion and will be limited to the following sources:

• Terminal Construction:

− mobile equipment (trucks);

− construction equipment (e.g., excavators, loaders, graders); and,

− fugitive dust from grading and equipment movements on unpaved surfaces.

• Terminal Operation:

− two incremental trains using this section of the CN mainline, resulting in an incremental increase of two trains per day for an average of 27 to 32 trains per day;

− trains servicing the Terminal;

− non-road equipment (e.g., reach stackers, hostlers and heated/refrigerated containers);

− stationary equipment (e.g., generators, building heaters/furnaces, switch heaters); and,

− on-site truck movements.

File No. 160960844 65



Operations will be conducted 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, however at this time, it is anticipated that most of the truck movements will occur during the daytime.

3.4.3.2 Noise Emissions

Noise emissions are expected throughout all phases of construction. Sound levels might vary as construction activities change in location and intensity (i.e., types and numbers of construction equipment operating). Equipment expected to operate during the construction phase are identified in Section 3.4.1.7. Most construction activities are scheduled between the daytime hours of 07:00 and 19:00.

Operations will be conducted 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, however at this time, it is anticipated that most of the truck movements will occur during the daytime. Equipment expected to be used during operations are identified in Section 3.4.2.

3.4.3.3 Sources and Location of Liquid Discharges

Liquid discharges from the Project will consist of domestic sewage and wash water from maintenance operations. Domestic sewage from the administration building and maintenance garage located on-site will be collected in holding tanks. The contents of the tanks will be pumped out and disposed at a licensed disposal facility.

A SWM plan has been developed for the Project to allow for surface water run-off from the Terminal to be collected and managed, maintaining water quality and quantity draining to Indian Creek. Further details on the SWM system are provided in the Milton Logistics Hub - Stormwater Management Strategy (AECOM 2015) (Appendix B of Appendix E.15).

Flows associated with Tributary A will be conveyed into a realigned channel around the SWM pond through separate culverts beneath the yard tracks and Terminal truck gate. Tributary A flows that are upstream from the Terminal will remain separate from the water collected and treated from the Terminal.

3.4.3.4 Types of Wastes and Plans for Disposal

Solid wastes will be generated during construction activities and operation of the Terminal. All wastes are identified in Table 3.2 and will be disposed of in accordance with provincial regulations. Solid wastes will be either recycled or disposed of through licensed waste disposal companies at licensed facilities.

66 File No. 160960844



Table 3.2: Wastes and Waste Management Methods for the Project

Waste Stream Management Method

Domestic and Shop Contracted waste disposal

Recyclables (wood, paper, metal) Contracted recycling

Hazardous waste Licensed disposal facility

Waste oil Licensed recycler

3.4.4 Decommissioning

There are no expectations that the Project will ever be decommissioned. In the unlikely event that Terminal operations cease, levels of activity associated with decommissioning will be similar to those during construction. The decommissioning of the Terminal would include removing major buildings and equipment and returning the PDA to an industrial land use standard. All decommissioning activities will be conducted in accordance with the applicable regulations.

3.5 EMPLOYMENT REQUIREMENTS

The Project will require approximately 150 to 200 workers during construction, with the numbers varying over the course of the construction period. The construction phase of the Project will require typical construction professionals and occupations such as project managers, engineers, administrators, superintendents, surveyors, carpenters, pipefitters, crane operators, equipment operators and ironworkers.

Temporary parking will be accommodated within CN property for these employees. No overnight accommodations (i.e., bunk houses, camps) will be provided on site. During operation, approximately 130 direct, full-time jobs will be created by the Terminal.

3.6 SCHEDULE

Construction of the Terminal and associated facilities will commence once all required permits, approvals or other forms of specific authorizations are obtained. Construction is scheduled to begin in 2017 and to continue for a period of 18 to 24 months. Immediately following construction, operation will begin on a 24 hours per day, 7 days per week basis. Operation is expected to begin in 2019 and be continuous.

3.7 SUMMARY OF CHANGES TO THE PROJECT DESIGN SINCE FILING WITH CEAA

Based on a final version of the Project Description dated March 31, 2015, CEAA confirmed that the Project meets the definition of a designated project under CEAA, 2012.

File No. 160960844 67



Since the filing of the Project Description report, engineering design has advanced and will continue to evolve as basic engineering, planning and detailed engineering is carried out. In consideration of the results of the baseline studies, assessment of alternatives, the conceptual design of the Project described in the Project Description report (Stantec 2015a) has since been revised to consider the various environmental and engineering constraints and opportunities, as well as input from Aboriginal communities and the public. A summary of changes that have been made to the Project design since March 2015 include:

• Site layout and design refinements have occurred to improve efficiencies and minimize the footprint area proposed for development to the extent practicable;

• Minor adjustments to the location of the administration building and maintenance garage to accommodate shifts in the location of SWM Pond 2 to avoid the meander belt and floodplain along Indian Creek;

• Refinement of restoration and naturalization areas and measures;

• Determination of power supply/electrical connection. Potential for electrical connection from either Tremaine Road or Lower Base Line with overhead transmission to be used where possible and the transformer and switchgear to be located on CN property;

• Connection to proposed fibre optic cables as part of planned upgrades to CN’s communication network;

• Identification of on-site communication system alternatives;

• Inclusion of an emergency access road to access the work pad area;

• Widening of main road connecting the truck gate/maintenance garage area to the work pads (to accommodate equipment including bidirectional reach stackers);

• Identification of preliminary construction laydown/staging areas, one near Britannia Road and other near the maintenance garage, as well as additional areas that may be disturbed within the PDA;

• Identification of proposed berm locations;

• Re-sizing of SWM ponds for optimal collection of run-off from Project components; and,

• Refinements to watercourse diversions to reduce the overall environmental effects to flow regimes, water transfer between subwatersheds, fish and fish habitat, and to maximize Project efficiencies.

68 File No. 160960844


Community and Stakeholder Consultation December 7, 2015

4.0 COMMUNITY AND STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION

4.1 OVERVIEW

CN recognizes the importance of consultation with stakeholders (community members, agencies, interested parties) and Aboriginal communities as an integral aspect of the Project. Active participation through consultation during the planning and preparation of the EIS ensures an open and fair process, and strengthens the quality and credibility of results. Consultation efforts with Aboriginal communities are described in further detail in Chapter 5.

CN’s consultation plan reflects the requirements of the EIS Guidelines, as follows:

• describe ongoing and proposed consultations and information sessions held on the Project;

• describe efforts to distribute Project information and describe information and materials distributed during the consultation process;

• indicate methods used, where consultation was held, persons and organizations consulted, concerns voiced, the extent to which this information was incorporated in the design of the Project and EIS; and,

• provide a summary of key issues raised related to the EA, as well as any outstanding issues and ways to address them.

Key strategies used by CN to achieve successful engagement include:

• understanding the information needs so that those who want to participate in the process can do so easily, and tailoring consultation opportunities to the local context;

• identifying key stakeholders and community leaders;

• working with the community to develop the consultation and engagement program, and asking participants for feedback on how the program is working for them;

• involving participants early in planning;

• being open and transparent;

• providing clear, concise and relevant information;

• focusing timing of engagement and consultation activities at key decision milestones;

• demonstrating how comments and questions from previous consultations have or will be considered;

• providing flexible communication tools to provide information and collect feedback; and,

• adapting to the changing needs of interest groups, the public, municipalities and agencies.

File No. 160960844 69



CN has utilized a variety of consultation tools to provide stakeholders, including the public, interest groups, municipalities and agencies, with the opportunity to receive information about, and provide meaningful input into, the review and development of the Project. These tools include:

• Project contact list;

• Project team meetings with government agencies;

• Project team meetings with representatives of affected and interested municipalities;

• Public Information Centre;

• Public Open House;

• Project Notices;

• Project dedicated 1-800 line;

• Project email address; and,

• Project website.

CN initiated the formal consultation process for the Project through its public announcement on March 19, 2015 and with the official opening of the Public Information Centre on March 28, 2015. From the initial stages and throughout the EA process, CN is committed to on-going consultation with Aboriginal communities, community organizations, residents, elected officials and staff, and government agencies. The Record of Consultation (ROC) detailing CN’s consultation and engagement efforts is provided in Appendix D.

4.1.1 Preliminary Consultation

Meetings with stakeholders, agencies and municipal representatives have been held since 2014 regarding the Project, as detailed in Appendix D. CN initiated consultation with the local community, municipalities and agencies in advance of a formal EA determination for the Project, including:

• Contacting agencies and municipalities such as Conservation Halton, the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF), the Ontario Heritage Trust, Halton Region, and the Town of Milton to request existing background information to supplement publicly available documents;

• Press release forwarded to individuals representing government agencies, Aboriginal communities, community representatives and the public (March 17, 2015);

• Invitation to the Project announcement on March 19, 2015 hosted by the Milton Chamber of Commerce was sent to its membership, elected and Town officials ; and,

70 File No. 160960844



• Opening a Public Information Centre in Milton to receive comments, feedback and concerns regarding the Project, which officially opened on March 28, 2015.

4.1.2 Environmental Impact Statement Consultation

Consultation regarding the EIS for the EA was conducted by CEAA throughout the EA process, as follows:

• Consultation regarding the Project Description report between April 7 and April 27, 2015 to review a description of project components and activities; and,

• Consultation regarding the Draft Guidelines for the Preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement pursuant to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 (Draft EIS Guidelines) (CEAA 2015a) between May 22, 2015 and June 21, 2015.

Regulatory consultation was supplemented through meetings with agencies and municipalities, as well as public interest groups, to provide information about the Project, to exchange information relating to technical studies, and to discuss the EIS process.

To supplement regulatory consultation, CN also held a Public Open House on July 16, 2015 to present the preliminary findings of the technical studies, identify additional information about project components and activities and to gather public concerns, comments and questions to be addressed as part of the EA process.

Comments received during the EA process have been considered during the preparation of the EIS, as detailed in Appendix D. CN reviewed all comments received and provided a response where appropriate and commits to continuing consultation with the community throughout all phases of the Project.

4.2 IDENTIFICATION OF STAKEHOLDERS

In the early stages of the Project, CN identified various stakeholders, including members of the public, interest groups, municipal contacts and regulatory agencies, with a potential interest in the Project, and developed a contact list that was used for consultation activities. As the Project advanced through the EA process, the contact list was updated, with interested parties added and contacts removed upon request.

It is anticipated that this list will continue to evolve throughout the various project phases and with the variance of stakeholders’ level of interest over the life of the Project. Appendix D presents the public, interest groups, agencies and municipalities contacted to date, including:

• General public, through mailings to residences and businesses in the Town of Milton (approximately 36,000 addresses);

• Non-government organizations and groups with an interest in the proposed Project;

• Agencies with an interest in the proposed Project; and,

File No. 160960844 71



• Federal, Provincial, Regional and Municipal elected officials and staff.

Of note, personal information identifying members of the public has been redacted, where appropriate.

4.2.1 Public and Interest Group Stakeholders

This category includes non-governmental organizations, residents and businesses in the Project area, and those requesting to be added to the contact list, either by calling CN, sending an email or written letter, registering on the Project website, or by registering at a consultation event (such as the Public Information Centre and Public Open House). Key stakeholders potentially interested in and/or impacted by the Project were identified early in the consultation efforts. These stakeholders were added to the Project contact list and were forwarded information, as appropriate.

By way of unaddressed mail delivery, approximately 36,000 households and/or businesses were invited to CN’s Public Open House held in July 2015. The Public Open House was also advertised in the local newspaper, the Milton Canadian Champion, weekly for a month prior to the Public Open House.

4.2.2 Municipal and Agency Stakeholders

Federal and Provincial agencies, as well as Regional and local municipalities, were consulted throughout the preparation of the EIS.

4.2.2.1 Federal Agencies and Elected Officials

A list of potentially interested federal agencies/contacts was also developed by CN. These parties were invited to participate in consultation events and provide comments on EA documentation. A list of federal agencies and elected officials contacted to-date is provided in Appendix D.1.

4.2.2.2 Provincial Agencies and Elected Officials

CN created a list of potentially interested provincial government ministries, agencies and representatives. An initial notice was circulated to all relevant agency contacts. The list was updated, as required, when contacts requested to be added or removed from the contact list. All ministries identified in Appendix D.1 have been invited to participate in consultation events and provide comments on EA documentation.

Provincial background information was obtained through publicly available sources, such as ministry websites, and through discussions with provincial staff.

72 File No. 160960844



4.2.2.3 Municipalities

The Project is located within the Town of Milton, in Halton Region. Staff from The Town of Milton and Halton Region have been consulted since 2014 and will continue to be consulted for the life of the Project. Other surrounding municipalities, including the City of Burlington, Town of Halton Hills and Town of Oakville were added to the contact list and included in consultation efforts as they expressed interest in the Project.

CN has continued to ensure that all publicly available consultation materials are circulated to these municipalities and they will continue to be consulted throughout the EA process, as well as throughout the life of the Project. CN staff have presented to municipal and regional councils in May 2015, providing a description of the Project, community benefits and information on the EA process. Details regarding these meetings are provided in Appendix D.

Municipal background information was obtained through publicly available sources, such as municipal websites, and through discussions with municipal staff. Requests to obtain information from Halton Region in support of the traffic study, including forecast information, turning movement and volume forecasts, were provided through email and various meetings with Regional staff. An informal request for traffic data was made on February 3, 2015. At that time, Halton Region identified that traffic modelling would be conducted by Regional staff with input from CN. During this time, the Project was designated under CEAA, 2012, and CN followed with a formal request for traffic modelling data sent on May 25, 2015. The majority of data pertaining to current traffic flows was provided to CN on October 19, 2015, however, it was confirmed by Halton Region on November 11, 2015 that traffic volume forecasts were not available.

4.3 STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION ACTIVITIES

CN’s consultation approach for the EIS process was developed to allow CN to identify and consider concerns, provide stakeholders with an opportunity to receive information about, and provide meaningful input into, the development of the Project. Consultation was initiated early and continued throughout the process in an open and transparent manner.

CN continues to actively engage a wide range of stakeholders on the Project at key decision milestones. The draft and final EIS Guidelines were made available for stakeholder review. Comments received have allowed CN to identify any outstanding issues or concerns that need to be addressed in the EIS.

Through the consultation process, CN has:

• provided information to agencies, municipalities, interest groups and members of the public;

• engaged with those who may be affected or have an interest in the Project;

• ensured all agencies, municipalities, interest groups, and members of the public were notified early and often throughout the EA process;

File No. 160960844 73



• welcomed input from the community, agencies, municipalities, and other stakeholders;

• considered all input, regardless of source, intention, or viability;

• used input, where applicable, to focus the ongoing field studies, scope the EIS, and ultimately influence Project design; and,

• transparently documented input and comments received, how the Project team responded, and how the input and comments were considered, if applicable. If input could not influence the study or the design, the rationale was documented.

CN recognizes the importance of consultation with stakeholders (community members, municipalities, agencies, interest groups, etc.) as an integral aspect of the Project. The following activities were used to consult with the various stakeholders listed above.

4.3.1 Project Notification

CN published various Project announcements and notices throughout the EA process in the local newspaper, the Milton Canadian Champion, with general distribution in the Town of Milton as detailed in Table 4.1. These notices were supplemental to the notifications provided by CEAA in accordance with regulatory requirements.

In addition to publication in a local newspaper, the Invitation to the Public Open House and Public Information Centre was mailed to approximately 36,000 addresses (July 6, 2015), distributed to stakeholders on the contact list (July 8, 2015), and posted on the Project website and on digital signage throughout the community to notify as many stakeholders as possible. Copies of the Project notices are provided in Appendix D.2. There may have been additional notifications from government agencies, such as CEAA, outside of those listed below.

Table 4.1: Publication Dates for Project Notices

Notice Publication Date(s)

Project Announcement Provided an introduction of the Project.

March 19, 2015

Invitation to the Official Opening of the Public Information Centre Provided an overview of the Project and details regarding the opening of the Public Information Centre.

March 26, 2015

Thank You Provided a thank you to those that attended the opening of the Public Information Centre.

April 2, 2015

Site Selection Provided information regarding the selection of the Project location and details on the Public Information Centre.

April 9, 2015

74 File No. 160960844





Trucks and Traffic Provided information regarding truck traffic and details on the Public Information Centre.

April 16, 2015

Environmental Initiatives and Benefits Provided information regarding environmental initiatives associated with the Project and details on the Public Information Centre.

April 23, 2015

Movement of Goods Provided information on the type of goods the Project would transport and details on the Public Information Centre.

April 30, 2015

Delivering Goods and Jobs Provided information on the job opportunities related to the Project and details on the Public Information Centre.

May 7, 2015

Requesting Feedback on the Project Provided details on the Public Information Centre and other avenues (e.g., website telephone, email, Twitter) that can be used to find out more Project information.

May 14, 2015

Project Update – CEAA Process Provided information regarding CEAA’s review of the Project and details on the Public Information Centre.

May 21, 2015

Requesting Participation in the EA Process Provided updates on the EA process and requested comments on the Project and details on the Public Information Centre.

May 28, 2015

Requesting Feedback and Participation in the EA Process Provided updates on the EA process and requested comments on the Project and details on the Public Information Centre.

June 4, 2015

Requesting Feedback on the Project Provided updates on the EA process, requested comments on the Project and provided details on the Public Information Centre.

June 11, 2015

Requesting Feedback and Participation in the EA Process Requested comments to be provided as part of the EA process and provided details on the Public Information Centre.

June 18, 2015

Invitation to Public Open House and Public Information Centre Provided updates on the EA process, including CEAA’s Environmental Assessment Determination requiring an EA, details for the Public Open House to be held on July 16, 2015 and details on CN’s Public Information Centre open weekdays and Saturdays.

June 25, 2015 July 2, 2015 July 9, 2015 July 16, 2015

Thank You Provided a thank you to those that participated at the Public Open House, advised that CN will consider the feedback in the EA process, and provided details on CN’s Public Information Centre open weekdays and Saturdays.

July 23, 2015

File No. 160960844 75





The Right Way (referral of the EA to an independent review panel) Provided an update on the Environmental Assessment, including the referral of the EA to an independent review panel, and provided details on CN’s Public Information Centre open weekdays and Saturdays.

July 30, 2015

Invitation to Public Information Centre Provided details for the Public Information Centre open weekdays and Saturdays.

August 6, 2015 August 13, 2015 August 20, 2015 August 27, 2015 September 3, 2015

Invitation to Public Information Centre and Revised Hours of Operation Provided the revised hours of operation of the Public Information Centre.

Weekly as of September 10, 2015 to present

In addition to the above, on-line banner advertisements relating to the Project were posted on news sites targeting local users from April 8 to May 6, 2015.

4.3.2 Public and Interest Group Consultation Opportunities

4.3.2.1 Project Website, Telephone, and Email

A Project website (http://www.cnmilton.com) was established and will be maintained throughout the EA process and construction. The site provides a widely accessible venue for a large number of stakeholders to obtain and download Project information and documents in a timely manner. The Project website also allows stakeholders to directly submit comments to the Project team through a feedback section. The site contains information on the proposed Project and EA process, a frequently asked questions (FAQ) section, a Project 1-800 number (1-800-216-9466) and Project email address ([email protected]), Public Open House information including downloadable display panels, and a link to where the Project documents can be downloaded from CEAA’s website are also available on the Project website.

Comments and concerns received throughout the Project by email, website and telephone are detailed in Appendix D. The Project website will be maintained through the approvals process until the opening of the Terminal.

4.3.2.2 Public Information Centre

CN established a Public Information Centre on March 28, 2015 on the second floor of 61 James Snow Parkway in Milton, to have a local presence and focus consultation efforts in the community. The Public Information Centre was open weekdays and Saturdays throughout the summer and is currently open Tuesdays to Thursdays 12:00 to 20:00, Fridays 12:00 to 17:00, and Saturdays from 09:00 to 14:00. CN has an open door policy to encourage openness and

76 File No. 160960844

http://www.cnmilton.com/

mailto:[email protected]



transparency, and the Public Information Centre is staffed with CN staff who can answer questions on the Project. CN encourages members of the community to visit and ask questions, seek information, provide input and discuss problems or concerns. It is also advertised on four electronic signs throughout Milton.

Public Information Centre comment cards and discussions are documented for inclusion in the ROC (Appendix D), and visitors can provide contact information to receive Project updates.

4.3.2.3 Public Open House

A Public Open House was held on July 16, 2015 at the Best Western Plus Milton located at 161 Chisolm Drive, Milton. CN and their consultants provided general Project information, including an overview of the Project, EA process and considerations, improvement opportunities, and preliminary technical report results. Copies of the Project Description report and Draft EIS Guidelines were available at the sessions for review. Attendees were encouraged to sign a register at the door to be placed on the Project contact list. Approximately 350 people attended the Public Open House Sessions (13:00 to 16:00 and 18:00 to 20:00), with 148 people signing in to receive Project information. Project representatives encouraged attendees to fill out and return comment forms following the session, to gather feedback on the Project and any questions and concerns. 72 comment forms, 187 signed form letters and three individual letters were submitted to CN during the meeting.

Participants provided comments on the Project including opportunities for employment and potential business with CN. Concerns were expressed regarding potential environmental impacts of the Project, as it was known at that time, including potential:

• traffic impacts;

• impacts to air quality;

• impacts to water quality;

• noise impacts; and,

• light impacts.

A summary report detailing the planning and outcomes of the Public Open House is included in Appendix D, including comments received and responses from CN. Individuals submitting comments at the Public Open House received a response in writing from CN.

4.3.2.4 Meetings with Public and Interest Groups

Throughout Project development, CN has welcomed opportunities to meet with the public and interest groups. CN has participated in meetings with several stakeholders, such as a local resident’s group that has expressed interest in the Project and environmental protection. CN will

File No. 160960844 77



share the results of follow-up technical studies and monitoring programs with this group and continue ongoing discussions.

These face-to-face meetings supplement information provided by email, telephone, and at the Public Information Centre and Public Open House events, and allow CN to focus attention on the specific concerns and questions of a particular stakeholder. Meetings held with the public and interest groups to date are detailed in Appendix D.

4.3.2.5 Summary of Public and Interest Group Consultation Efforts

Appendix D.3 details all consultation efforts (phone, email, letter and face-to-face meetings) with members of the public and interest groups involved in the Project. An overall summary of the number of comments received during the various consultation sessions is provided in Table 4.2.

Table 4.2: Summary of Comments Received

Comment Source Comment Type and Total Number % of Comments

Public Information Centre (comment cards)

175 comment cards (357 total attendees)

28.3%

Email/website 144 23.3%

Toll-free Number 38 6.1%

Public Open House (comment forms, and other written comments)

75 Comment Forms and other comment letters

187 Petitions (348 total attendees)

42.3%

Total: 619 100% *Note: Current as of November 6, 2015.

4.3.3 Agency and Municipal Consultation Opportunities

As mentioned, an invitation to the Project’s Public Open House and Public Information Centre was circulated to all agencies on the Project contact list. The list was updated when individuals requested to be removed from the contact list or if there was a change in contact information. All contacts identified on this list have been invited to participate in consultation events and provide comments on EIS documentation. In addition to these consultation opportunities, CN engaged agency and municipal representatives through phone calls, meetings and presentations to discuss and resolve issues regarding the Project. Agency and municipal consultation records are provided in further detail in Appendix D.

78 File No. 160960844



4.3.3.1 Meetings with Agencies and Municipalities

CN participated in numerous meetings with Federal and Provincial agencies, as well as Regional and local municipalities, as detailed in the ROC (Appendix D). These meetings enabled CN to present and discuss appropriate Project information. Comments raised, materials provided and meeting minutes are provided in Appendix D.

4.4 SUMMARY OF STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS

Comments received from Project stakeholders, and responses to these comments, are documented in Appendix D. This section provides a summary of stakeholder comment topics, as well as the issues raised and where they have been addressed in the EIS.

4.4.1 Summary of Public and Interest Group Comments

Comments received as of November 6, 2015 have been identified and considered for the purposes of preparing the ROC and summarizing consultation activities in this Chapter. These comments have been grouped according to topic and key comment areas, as summarized below in Graph 4.1.

Graph 4.1: Top Topics Raised in a Submitted Comment*

* Percentages in chart do not include social media. Percentages represent the number of times a topic was raised

relative to the number of comment card/emails received (current as of November 6, 2015) with multiple topics raised on

a single comment card/email.

Based on the submitted comments, the following key concerns have been considered towards shaping the EIS:

File No. 160960844 79



• Traffic Routing and Congestion: BA Group was retained by CN to prepare an analysis of alternative truck routes between the Terminal and 400-series highways as presented in Appendix E.17. Alternative routes are considered in Chapter 2.

CN will continue to work with the municipalities to inform their on-going traffic planning efforts;

• Rationale for Site Location: A Milton Logistics Hub - Site Selection Study (Appendix F) was included as part of the EIS and summarized in Chapter 2 of the EIS;

• Noise: A Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Noise Effects Assessment (Appendix E.10) of both the construction and operation of the Project was included as part of the EIS;

• Pollution: A Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Air Quality (Appendix E.1) and Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Human Health and Risk Assessment (Appendix E.7) were included as part of the EIS;

• CEAA Process: Details on the CEAA Process have been provided in Project communications, and at consultation events;

• Impact on Roads: As a percentage of predicted traffic volumes, by 2020, even on those roads and intersections most effected, Terminal-generated truck traffic will be less than 3% of the total traffic on arterial roads, as documented in the Review of Terminal-Generated Truck Traffic (Appendix E.17);

• Safety: The safety of the public, employees, and environment, including consideration for accidents and malfunctions, are included in Chapter 6 of the EIS;

• Job Request: Employment demand for the construction and operation of the Project is discussed in the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Socio-Economic Baseline (Appendix E.12) and in Chapter 8 of the EIS;

• Require only federal approval: The legal context for the preparation of the EIS is provided in Chapters 1 and 6 of the EIS, and planning jurisdiction discussed in the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Planning Justification Report (Appendix E.11);

• General environment: Effects on the environment are addressed in Chapter 6 of the EIS, including documentation of baseline conditions as determined through the various TDRs and assessment of environmental effects; and,

• Light: Mitigation measures were incorporated into the design of the Terminal and an assessment of light environmental effects documented in the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Light (Appendix E.8), as part of the EIS.

More specifically, Table 4.3 provides a more detailed description of the comments and concerns raised by stakeholders and illustrates how the EIS has been shaped as a result of public and stakeholder comments.

80 File No. 160960844



Table 4.3: Public and Interest Groups Issues

Issue / Concern Raised During Consultation Applicable Technical Data Report (TDR) or Chapter of the EIS

TRUCK ROUTES / TRAFFIC

The facility will be processing too many trucks. • Chapters 6 and 7 • Appendix E.17

Traffic will become worse due to the trucks, which will affect commuters and others (i.e., reduced response time from EMS/first responders).

• Chapters 2 and 9 • Appendix E.17

Which roads will trucks use to access and leave the Milton Logistics Hub?

• Chapter 2 • Appendix E.17

How can traffic be predicted and regulated? • Chapter 2 • Appendix E.17

Tremaine Road should not be used due to the recently built roundabouts.


SITE LOCATION

The Project should be closer to highways and busier/larger streets. • Chapters 1 and 2 • Appendix F

The Project will be removing pristine agricultural lands. • Chapter 6 • Appendices E.11 and F

The Project is not compliant with local planning (i.e., Halton’s Regional Plan, Milton’s Official Plan, industrial in non-industrial area)


The Project is in contradiction to the Greater Golden Horseshoe Growth Plan.

• Appendix E.11

NOISE

Trains and trucks are loud; this will affect nearby residents. • Chapters 6 and 7 • Appendix E.10

What is the plan to ensure noise levels are not exceeded? • Chapters 6 and 7 • Appendix E.10

Concerned that the noise study does not account for the elevation of the track as it crosses the CP rail line (north of the Project).

• Appendix E.10

Concerned that the noise studies do not account for the coupling / uncoupling of trains.

• Appendix E.10

AIR QUALITY / POLLUTION

Potential health problems due to air pollution (i.e., diesel emissions) produced by the Milton Logistics Hub and trucks.

• Chapters 6 and 7 • Appendices E.1 and E.7

Concerned regarding the dust created by the Project. • Chapters 6 and 7 • Appendices E.1 and E.7

Concerned how air quality can be predicted and assessed. • Chapters 6 and 7 • Appendices E.1 and E.7

File No. 160960844 81





WATER QUALITY / POLLUTION

Appropriate management of dirty water. • Chapters 6 and 7 • Appendix E.15

Potential water pollution (i.e., groundwater) and depletion. • Chapters 6 and 7 • Appendices E.6 and E.7

SOCIO-ECONOMIC EFFECTS

Housing markets and property values of nearby homes may suffer due to the close proximity to the Project.

• Chapters 6, 7 and 10

The Project is taking up prime real-estate that would have created many jobs and revenue through taxes.

• Chapters 2, 6 and 8 • Appendices E.11 and F

The Derry Green Business Park may become less desirable due to trucks.

• Chapter 2 • Appendices E.12 and E.17

Further industrialization may be triggered from this Project. • Chapters 6 and 8 • Appendix E.11

ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS

Destruction of natural features (i.e., wetlands, creeks). • Chapters 6, 7 and 9 • Appendices E.2, E.4, E.15

and E.16

Impacts on sensitive and protected natural features (i.e., Trafalgar Moraine, sensitive environments, Protected Natural Heritage Systems, the Greenbelt and Niagara Escarpment).

• Chapters 6 and 7 • Appendices E.16 and F

Environmental impacts during operations should be addressed in the EA reports.

• Chapters 6 and 7

Environmental monitoring should be undertaken during operation. • Chapter 9

Concern regarding whether problems will be fixed if environmental monitoring determines impacts are exceeding acceptable levels.

• Chapter 9

Concern regarding littering/pollution from wind carried garbage off CN trains and trucks.

• Chapter 9

Wildlife and birds (i.e., migratory birds) will they be driven away by the Project.

• Chapter 6

Concerned that the impacts to fauna and flora that rely on Indian Creek (i.e., disturbance will have a ripple effect).


APPROVAL PROCESS

This proposal contravenes the municipal direction provided in 2008 and CN’s commitment.

• Chapters 1 and 2 • Appendices E.11, E.12 and F

CN should be adhering to the municipal approval processes. • Chapters 1 and 6 • Appendix E.11 and E.12

CN should be consulting with the municipalities affected by the Project.

• Chapters 1 and 4 • Appendix D

82 File No. 160960844





SAFETY

Risks to the public by trucks passing through school zones or residential areas.


Pedestrians and cyclists/velodrome users will be put at risk by increased truck traffic.


Trucks/trains will be moving hazardous materials which will put the community at risk (i.e., spills).


Adequacy of mitigation measures for spills. • Chapters 6 and 9

IMPACTS TO ROADS

The existing roads cannot support the trucks. • Chapter 2 • Appendix E.17

What further road development/improvements will be needed to accommodate the increased truck traffic?


Will road improvements, if any, be completed prior to operation of the facility?


Roads will be damaged from increased truck traffic. • Appendix E.17

Who will bear the cost of road improvements or repairs? • Chapters 8 • Appendix E.17

LIGHT AND VISUAL EFFECTS

There will be light pollution from 24 hrs / day truck traffic and the Milton Logistics Hub itself.


Light from the Milton Logistics Hub and trucks will affect nearby residents (i.e., sleeping patterns).


Light from the Milton Logistics Hub and trucks will affect the behavior of spawning fish, bats, birds (i.e., migratory birds), and frogs.

• Chapter 6

Light from the Milton Logistics Hub and trucks will result in increased mortality of moths, and small rodents and carnivores (i.e., increased mortality).

• Chapter 6

The Milton Logistics Hub is visually unappealing and will be detrimental to beauty of the area (i.e., nearby Niagara Escarpment).


IMPACTS ON TOURISM

The Project may negatively impact local tourism. • Chapter 6 • Appendix E.12

EFFECTS FROM VIBRATION

Vibration from the Project may impact soil stability. • Chapter 6 • Appendix E.18

Vibration from the Project may impact Indian Creek and its tributaries. • Chapter 6 • Appendices E.2 and E.18

File No. 160960844 83





PROJECT BENEFITS

Few employees will be hired for the Project • Chapters 3 and 8

Employment may not be local. • Chapters 3 and 8

Adequacy of the benefits from the Project • Chapter 8

Suggested that Project benefits should include educational components (for young children).

• Chapter 8

CONSTRUCTION

Concerned regarding an elongated construction plan. • Chapter 3

4.4.2 Summary of Agency and Municipal Comments

Comments received to date from agencies and municipalities on the Project and responses to comments, are documented in Appendix D. A more detailed description of the comments and concerns raised by agencies and municipalities, and an indication of where such comments have been addressed in the EIS, are described in Table 4.4.

Table 4.4: Agency and Municipality Issues


TRUCK ROUTING / TRAFFIC

Road use changes impacting municipalities. • Chapters 3, 6 and 7 • Appendix E.17

Areas to be included in the traffic study and impacts to traffic in the municipalities.

• Chapters 3, 6 and 7 • Appendix E.17

SITE LOCATION

Proposal in 2001 was withdrawn with the understanding that CN would not re-propose the Project in this location in the future.

• Chapter 2 • Appendices E.11 and F

No municipal or provincial planning for this type of project in the proposed location.

• Chapters 1 and 2 • Appendices E.11

APPROVAL PROCESS

No acknowledgement or adherence to municipal approval processes. • Chapter 1 • Appendix E.11

No acknowledgement or adherence to provincial approval processes. • Chapter 1 • Appendix E.11

No acknowledgement or adherence to other federal approvals (i.e., CTA).


84 File No. 160960844





Identifying the proper scope of the Project (i.e., more than construction and operation of a railway yard).


ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS

Terrestrial species, including options/considerations for enhancement. • Chapters 6 and 7

Protecting the environment and human health and applying the precautionary principle.


Potential for the Project to adversely affect migratory birds. • Chapters 6 and 7

Baseline assessment and effects assessment on significance of and effects to woodlands, wetlands, natural heritage features, vegetation communities, wildlife and wildlife habitats.

• Chapters 6 and 7 • Chapter E.16

An assessment of dust is needed from the Project. • Chapters 6 and 7 • Appendix E.1

A baseline assessment of groundwater and surface water conditions. • Chapters 6 and 7 • Appendices E.6 and E.15

Stormwater management considerations. • Appendix E.15

Fish and fish habitat options/considerations available for site enhancement.

• Chapters 6, 7 and 9 • Appendix E.4

Additional potential opportunities for enhancement within the Indian Creek/Bronte Creek watershed.


Re-alignment of Indian Creek and the construction/excavation of a new permanent stream to replace the stream removed.


Potential for adverse effects on fish and fish habitat. • Chapters 6, 7 and 9

Affects to drainage on adjacent lands. • Chapters 6, 7 and 9 • Appendix E.15

Potential for significant adverse cumulative effects of the Project when combined with existing and other foreseeable future projects (e.g., Halton Region Landfill).


Human health and socio-economic effects of the Project (e.g., land changes).


How the change in noise levels will affect health and socio-economic conditions in the area.


Effects from railway air pollution (i.e., particulate matter and greenhouse gases).


Environmental monitoring during construction and operation (e.g., noise monitoring, complaints and remediation).

• Chapter 9

PROJECT COMPONENTS

The location and length of the new mainline tracks in the area of Lower Base Line.

• Chapter 3 • Appendix B

File No. 160960844 85





Details on the new rail crossings. • Chapter 3 • Appendix B

Pipeline crossings and relocations. • Chapter 3 • Appendix B

The location of all Project components mentioned in the Project reports.

• Chapter 3 • Appendix B

Contents of stored containers on-site. • Chapter 3

Crossings of roads and utilities, and the required approvals. • Chapter 3

Fuel storage and mitigation measures. • Chapters 3 and 6

SAFETY

Risk of significant accidents (e.g., Lac Megantic railway accident). • Chapter 6

Concern expressed that doubling of the mainline would increase train traffic along the mainline.

• Chapter 1 and 3

REPORTING

Reports should include definitions of key terms. • Glossary

4.5 ONGOING AND FUTURE CONSULTATION

Consultation during the EA process has clearly outlined the Project, the decision-making process followed by CN, the VCs identified for assessment, the alternatives identified for assessment, where possible, the mitigation measures proposed, and the net impact of the Project. CN has provided information on the process being followed, and has worked with interested parties to ensure comments on the process, the Project, and the studies being conducted were considered and incorporated into Project planning, where appropriate.

CN remains committed to continuing and expanding its outreach activities to ensure stakeholders are aware of and understand the Project, are provided with opportunities to discuss the EA results, and are able to provide feedback. These activities will serve to inform stakeholders about the EIS and its results, and assist them in reviewing the EIS Report and engaging in the EIS review process. They will also assist CN in addressing any outstanding issues and strengthening relationships with stakeholders.

Following EA approval and permitting, CN will continue its ongoing engagement with stakeholders throughout the construction of the Terminal and its operation. Key objectives of the ongoing engagement program are:

• to ensure transparency and accountability about the company’s environmental management and social responsibility performance;

86 File No. 160960844



• to ensure there are continuing opportunities to discuss interests and concerns, and to resolve issues, related to the Project; and,

• to work in partnership with local communities to have the Project contribute to the achievement of their own development goals based on their priorities.

File No. 160960844 87




88 File No. 160960844


Aboriginal Engagement and Concerns December 7, 2015

5.0 ABORIGINAL ENGAGEMENT AND CONCERNS

5.1 OVERVIEW

CN recognizes the importance of consultation with Aboriginal communities as an integral aspect of the EA process. Participation through consultation in all phases of the project, including the planning and preparation of the EIS helps to achieve an open and transparent process, enhances awareness of the Project and facilitates meaningful consideration of Aboriginal communities’ comments, issues and concerns.

The goal is to inform Aboriginal communities of the Project and nature of proposed works, to explain the purpose of the EIS and how the assessment is conducted, to identify Aboriginal interests, issues and concerns related to the Project and to consider such interests, issues and concerns, where feasible, within the context of Project planning, assessment and design.

CEAA has identified Aboriginal communities that may be affected by the Project. CN has initiated engagement with these communities that seeks to identify identified potential concerns or opportunities to be addressed during the EA process. CN has followed guidance provided in the Guidelines released by CEAA on July 20, 2015, and has sought to obtain views from the identified Aboriginal communities on:

• effects of changes to the environment on Aboriginal peoples (health and socio-economic issues, physical and cultural heritage, including any structure, site or thing that is of historical, archaeological, paleontological or architectural significance, and current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes); and,

• potential impacts of the project on potential or established Aboriginal or treaty rights.

CN recognizes that all Aboriginal communities have unique rights recognized under Section 35 of the Canadian Constitution Act. Engagement is an on-going process during the EA.

This section describes efforts taken to date, information exchanged and commitments by CN for future engagement opportunities. Chapter 6 also documents where and how Aboriginal traditional knowledge obtained through engagement activities was incorporated into the various aspects of the environmental effects assessment.

5.2 CONTEXT

Aboriginal communities have a traditional relationship with the land that is used as part of their way of life. The exercise of Aboriginal and treaty rights may be potentially affected by the Project based on where they practice traditional activities, or they may have a more general interest in the Project.

File No. 160960844 89



The Crown has a duty to consult Aboriginal communities when it has knowledge of established or asserted Aboriginal or treaty rights that might be adversely affected by its decision or action. Although the ultimate responsibility for consultation rests with the Crown, certain procedural aspects of this consultation may be delegated to project proponents.

In the EIS Guidelines, CEAA provided direction that CN consult with the Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nation (MNCFN), the Six Nations of the Grand River (Six Nations), the Huron Wendat Nation (Huron Wendat) and the Métis Nation of Ontario (MNO) as part of the EA. These three First Nation communities were all considered for the purpose of consultation on the basis that the Project may potentially have effects on their Aboriginal or treaty rights for the purpose of consultation on the project. CEAA, in the Guidelines, have identified MNO, as an Aboriginal group that is expected to be less affected by the Project and its related effects. CN will, in compliance with the EIS Guidelines, make key EA summary documents accessible to MNO and will ensure their views are heard and recorded.

The purpose of this section is to outline the process and results of consultation with Aboriginal communities, both on a rights basis (those communities where there may be a potential effect on the exercise of Aboriginal or treaty rights), and on an interest basis.

5.3 IDENTIFICATION OF ABORIGINAL COMMUNITIES

CN conducted an initial screening of Aboriginal communities within the vicinity of the Project as part of early project planning efforts to identify the communities that would potentially be engaged during the Project. The list of communities was further informed through consultation with the CEAA and within the EIS Guidelines.

The list of Aboriginal communities for this Project has evolved since preparation of the Project Description (March 31, 2015) and issuance of the Draft EIS Guidelines (May 22, 2015). Based on comments received by CEAA during the public review period in June 2015, one community (Huron Wendat) was added to the list of Aboriginal communities.

The four Aboriginal communities identified by CEAA have been informed of, and have had the opportunity to participate in, the Project’s Aboriginal engagement activities.

5.4 ABORIGINAL COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

Engagement with these Aboriginal communities has primarily focused on the dissemination of information about the Project, establishing community relationships and contacts, coordination with environmental monitors at the Project site, initiation of a Traditional Land Use (TLU) study with MNCFN and commitments for future engagement. A summary of engagement with Aboriginal communities is provided in the ROC (Appendix D).

90 File No. 160960844



5.4.1 Relationship Building

CN is a neighbor to more than 200 Aboriginal communities across Canada. CN’s approach to Aboriginal relations is governed by its corporate Aboriginal Vision, which includes two important elements:

• To develop respectful and mutually-beneficial relationships with all Aboriginal people, while ensuring service to CN customers;

• To be recognized by all stakeholders, including customers and Governments, as having a sound approach to dealing with Aboriginal communities and having a respectful and sustainable relationship with Aboriginal people across the CN network.

In keeping with this approach, CN has engaged with the four Aboriginal communities identified by CEAA. A brief summary of the community engagement undertaken with each of them is included below.

CN and MNCFN have worked extensively and cooperatively together on matters such as environmental and archeological field testing and a TLU study. CN has also supported the community’s role as Host First Nation of the 2015 Toronto Pan Am – Para Pan Am Games (2015). CN and MNCFN have agreed that information relating to environmental, archeological or TLU that is developed in partnership will be made available for review by all Aboriginal communities wishing to do so.

Six Nations has indicated to CN that it chooses to work directly with the Crown and has presented its own alternative consultation process. CN has supported Six Nations community activities by providing sponsorship of the Six Nations Girls Lacrosse Team. CN has also offered to provide funding to Six Nations to undertake a project-specific TLU study. At the time of EIS filing, CN has not received a response to this offer.

CN has communicated with Huron Wendat by telephone and email exchange. The community has expressed a specific interest in archeological matters, and CN has committed to provide this information as it became available and has done so. CN also invited the community to take part in a TLU study.

CN has reached out to the MNO Credit River Métis Council and the MNO Clear Water Métis Council by telephone and email. The goal of this correspondence was to discuss the Project and general matters of engagement. CN has received no response from either Council.

Overall, CN has sponsored and participated in a number of activities which have supported Aboriginal culture, youth and community pride for all Aboriginal peoples. Some of these have included: Participation at Pow Wows, the Public Open House, Chamber of Commerce events acknowledging the traditional territory on which the Project is located, community celebrations in conjunction with the 2015 Toronto Pan Am – Para Pan Games Torch relay, and sacred fire ceremonies at Toronto Island and Fort York. CN also participated in a historic canoe journey with

File No. 160960844 91



First Nation Chiefs from Toronto Island to the Toronto waterfront on the morning of the 2015 Toronto Pan Am – Para Pan Games opening ceremonies.

CN will continue to engage with Aboriginal communities for the duration of the Project.

5.4.2 Project Notification

The following is a summary of project notifications provided to the identified Aboriginal communities for this Project. A summary of the notifications and corresponding dates is provided in Table 5.1 at the end of this section.

5.4.2.1 Notice of Project Description

Correspondence from CEAA was provided to MNCFN, Six Nations and MNO on April 7, 2015 advising each community of the public comment period seeking input on the Project Description report for the Project. Information on where to obtain a copy of the Project Description and Project Description Summary reports was provided.

CN reached out to MNCFN, Six Nations and MNO following notice of the Project Description offering to review and discuss the Project.

5.4.2.2 Notice of EA Determination and Draft EIS Guidelines

Correspondence from CEAA was provided to MNCFN, Six Nations and MNO on May 22, 2015 providing each community with a copy of the Draft EIS Guidelines (CEAA 2015a), notifying them of the corresponding public comment period and inviting each community to review and provide comment on these guidelines.

Further notification pertaining to issuance of the EIS Guidelines (CEAA 2015b) on July 20, 2015 and corresponding notice of referral to a review panel were made via the CEAA website. It is anticipated that notification throughout the EA process will continue to be directed to the Aboriginal communities as part of the Crown’s duty to consult. CN will continue to work with CEAA to enhance this consultation, where appropriate.

5.4.2.3 Notice of Public Open House

On July 3, 2015, CN provided an invitation to the MNCFN, Six Nations and MNO to participate in the Public Open House on July 17, 2015 to gather information and learn about the Project. The notice was published in the July 2, July 9, and July 16 issues of the Milton Canadian Champion and was provided by email to each Aboriginal community on July 3. Copies of the Public Open House panels were forwarded to each community on August 6, 2015.

92 File No. 160960844



5.4.2.4 Notification of Independent Review Panel

Notification that the Project was being referred to an EA by independent review panel was provided publicly on July 20, 2015. Follow-up correspondence from CEAA was provided to MNCFN, Six Nations, Huron Wendat and MNO on August 7, 2015 advising them of the referral of the Project to an EA by independent review panel. The letter included a summary of potential adverse effects of the Project on the exercise of potential or established Aboriginal or treaty rights, a draft outline of the consultation approach between CEAA and each community and potential funding available through CEAA’s Participant Funding Program.

On November 3, 2015, CEAA announced that two Aboriginal communities were allocated federal funding to assist their participation in the EA. Specifically, MNCFN was allocated $95,600 and the Huron Wendat allocated $78,500 as part of the Participant Funding Program administered by CEAA.

5.4.2.5 Supplemental Notification

As noted in Section 5.2, Huron Wendat was added to the list of Aboriginal communities potentially affected by the Project through the issuance of the EIS Guidelines (CEAA 2015b). This addition occurred after the issuance of the Project Description and after the CN Public Open House was held.

In order to ensure similar information was provided to each community, CN provided a map identifying the location of the Project to Huron Wendat on August 4, 2015 and forwarded a copy of the Project Description Summary and panels presented at the Public Open House.

5.4.2.6 Notice of Panel Draft Terms of Reference

At the time of preparing the EIS, the Terms of Reference (TOR) for the independent review panel have not been issued by CEAA. Upon issuance, notification will be provided to the Aboriginal communities by CEAA and circulated for their review as part of the public review process.

Table 5.1: Distribution of Project Notices and Reports to Aboriginal Communities

Project Notices MNCFN Six Nations Huron Wendat MNO

Notice of Project Description

April 7, 2015* April 7, 2015* August 4, 2015 April 7, 2015*

Notice of EA Determination and Draft EIS Guidelines

May 22, 2015* May 22, 2015* August 4, 2015 May 22, 2015*

Notice of Public Open House

July 3, 2015 July 3, 2015 August 4, 2015 (Public Open House info provided)

July 3, 2015

File No. 160960844 93



Table 5.1: Distribution of Project Notices and Reports to Aboriginal Communities

Project Notices MNCFN Six Nations Huron Wendat MNO

Notice of Referral to a Review Panel*

July 20, 2015 July 20, 2015 July 20, 2015 July 20, 2015

Notification of Independent Review Panel*

August 7, 2015 August 7, 2015 August 7, 2015 August 7, 2015

Circulation of Milton Logistics Hub Archaeological Stage 1 and Stage 2 Report

November 3, 2015

November 3, 2015

November 3, 2015

November 3, 2015

*Note: (*) indicates notification of Aboriginal communities provided by CEAA.

5.4.3 Engagement in Environmental Baseline Studies

CN has engaged Aboriginal environmental monitors to supplement field teams in collecting environmental baseline information. The environmental monitors act as the Aboriginal community’s eyes and ears on-site and also gain relevant experience and knowledge regarding various technical aspects of the existing baseline conditions and data collection methods employed.

In May 2015, MNCFN identified a desire to participate in the site investigation of the Project. Representatives from MNCFN attended and participated in all field programs conducted in 2015, including archaeology, fish and fish habitat, terrestrial, surface water, hydrogeology, geotechnical, and air quality surveys. In some cases, representatives monitored survey activities, while in others (i.e., fish and fish habitat) they were actively involved in the collection of information. MNCFN monitors participated in approximately 20 separate site visits in this capacity.

Coordination and cooperation among field staff and MNCFN representatives was facilitated by the MNCFN Field Program Coordinator, CN and technical leads of the various disciplines.

5.4.4 Public Open House

During the Public Open House held by CN on July 17, 2015, representatives from the MNCFN were present to provide and discuss information on their treaty rights, history and interest in the Project. A table was set-up containing pamphlets, figures and maps showing MNCFN traditional territory and history of their community. Two documents, specifically The History of the Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nation (MNCFN n.d. a) and Toronto Purchase Specific Claim: Arriving at an Agreement (MNCFN n.d. b), were central to the information provided by MNCFN.

94 File No. 160960844



5.4.5 Traditional Land Use Study

The objective of the TLU studies is to understand and document Aboriginal communities’ current use of land and resources for traditional purposes, describe project interactions, identify mitigation strategies and characterize anticipated project effects.

At the time of filing this EIS, MNCFN had been engaged in a CN funded TLU study. Scoping discussion for this TLU study took place between August 7, 2015 and October 8, 2015. MNCFN agreed to enter into a collaborative TLU study process in which they would receive capacity training from Stantec traditional knowledge (TK) facilitators.

MNCFN invited Stantec TK facilitators to attend their annual Pow Wow on August 22 and 23, 2015. At the Pow Wow, Stantec TK facilitators and two members of MNCFN conducted first round of TLU interviews with members of MNCFN attending the Pow Wow. The MNCFN members who participated in the TLU interviews were selected by MNCFN TLU coordinators to represent the traditional knowledge of the community in this study process. Additional interviews and mapping sessions were conducted the days following at the MNCFN Department of Consultation and Accommodation Office, located on the MNCFN Reserve. All information collected from MNCFN during the first round of interviews and mapping sessions was reviewed and approved by MNCFN for use on the Project. A second round of interviews and a series of field visits were conducted with MNCFN on October 14 to 16, 2015. Field visits took place on October 12, 2015 at Bronte Creek Provincial Park, Sidrabene, and Rattlesnake Point and on October 13, 2015 at Turkey Point, Long Point Provincial Park and Dundas Valley Conservation Area. During the field visits, any TLU observations made by MNCFN study participants, as well as other relevant comments, were recorded by the Stantec TK facilitators. The second round of interviews was conducted on October 15, 2015 on the MNCFN Reserve. The results of the October interviews and field visits are still under review by MNCFN and have not been approved for release in the EIS. All TLU information collected during the first and second round of interviews, mapping sessions, and field visits will be included in the MNCFN TLU final report. MNCFN TLU information collected during the first round of interviews and mapping sessions has been summarized in Section 5.6.1 and considered in the Traditional Land and Resource Use (TLRU) baseline and assessment of this EIS (Section 6.3.8).

MNCFN and CN have agreed upon a scope and budget for further TLU study phases. As part of this study, MNCFN TLU field work included a tour of the Project site and other areas of MNCFN TLU on Crown land within MNCFN Traditional Territory, as described in Section 5.4.6. Further data obtained from this ongoing TLU study will be used to inform project planning and the regulatory process. With the approval of MNCFN, a copy of the final TLU report will be filed with CEAA. MNCFN have not yet determined the terms of release for the TLU final report. MNCFN may choose to release the TLU final report as a public document, as a confidential document for the consideration of the Project and CEAA, or release a summary of results with confidential information buffered or removed.

File No. 160960844 95



Engagement with the Six Nations and Huron Wendat is on-going at the time of this filing and both communities have been offered an opportunity to participate in a TLU study, through correspondence dated September 2, 2015. At the time of the filing, neither Six Nations nor Huron Wendat responded to CN’s offer of completing a TLU study as part of the EA process. Huron Wendat did identify an interest in archaeological resources for the Project.

5.4.6 Site Tours

As part of the TLU study, a site tour with MNCFN members occurred on October 13, 2015 to provide members with an understanding of current site conditions, to explain the proposed project components and layout of the Terminal and to discuss potential concerns or issues. The site tour was attended by five MNCFN members, CN representatives and Stantec TK facilitators. During the site tour, observations, comments, concerns or issues noted by MNCFN study participants were recorded by the Stantec TK facilitators. A separate MNCFN spiritual ceremony is also planned at the site on November 25, 2015.

CN has offered a site tour of BIT to the MNCFN, which is planned to take place in early 2016. CN also plans to invite Six Nations, Huron Wendat, and MNO to tour BIT in early January.

5.4.7 Document Review

The Project Description Summary (Stantec 2015b) was provided to the MNCFN, Six Nations and MNO for review during the public comment period. A link to the CEAA website containing information relevant to the CEAA process and supporting documents was also provided.

As noted above, copies of the Public Open House panels were provided to all Aboriginal communities following the Public Open House for their information and review.

Based on comments received from various Aboriginal communities with respect to archaeological resources, as outlined in Section 5.6, CN provided copies of the Stage 1 and Stage 2 archaeological assessment reports to each of the identified Aboriginal communities for their information and review. Comments received from these communities will be incorporated into the final versions of these reports.

Following submission of the EIS to CEAA, digital copies of the EIS and EIS Summary will be provided to the Aboriginal communities.

5.4.8 Community-Specific Correspondence

CN has endeavored to engage the Aboriginal communities identified in Section 5.3, throughout the Project lifespan. Ongoing engagement with Aboriginal community representatives has included communications via email, mail and telephone regarding a range of items such as project notices, invitations, baseline fieldwork, and TLU studies. These efforts have provided Aboriginal communities several opportunities to discuss interest and concerns, and resolve issues

96 File No. 160960844



related to the Project. As noted above, a summary of engagement with Aboriginal communities is provided in the ROC (Appendix D).

CN has undertaken community-specific correspondence with MNCFN, Six Nations, Huron Wendat, MNO Clear Waters Métis Council, and MNO Credit River Métis Council.

5.4.9 Meetings

CN has met frequently and routinely in the community with the Chief and Councilors of the MNCFN as well as with the Director and staff of the MNCFN Department of Consultation and Accommodation.

5.4.10 Memoranda of Understanding

CN has five agreements with the MNCFN. These agreements cover consultation matters, field work, the TLU Study, and CN’s support of the MNCFN as the Host First Nation of the 2015 Toronto Pan Am – Para Pan Games.

5.5 ABORIGINAL COMMUNITY PROFILES

Understanding the people, history and organization of each Aboriginal community identified above is important to understand and assess possible effects on the exercise of potential or established Aboriginal or treaty rights of the communities. The information in the following Aboriginal community profiles has been compiled from a review of publically available documents, including general historical and ethnographic literature, as well as relevant Internet resources, such as the Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC) website, public land claims documents, and sources from academic libraries and databases.

Aboriginal communities whose traditional territories are within proximity to the Project are signatories of multiple treaties in southern Ontario, as follows:

• MNCFN is a signatory of Treaty 13, the Toronto Purchase in 1787, Treaty 13-A, known as the First Purchase (Heritage Mississauga) in 1805, Treaty 19 in 1818, and Treaty 22 and 23 in in 1820 (FitzGibbon 2009);

• Huron Wendat is a signatory of the Anglo Huron treaty of 1760. The Treaty grants Huron Wendat members the freedom to practice their religious and customs and trade with the British (AANDC 2011); and,

• Six Nations is a signatory of the Nanfan Treaty and Jay Treaty (Six Nations Land and Resources 2008).

The Métis, represented by the MNO, under Section 35 of the Constitution Act have asserted Aboriginal rights throughout most of Ontario. Métis Harvesting rights have been recognized under the Powley decision (2003) and in November 2008, MNO entered into an Ontario-Métis

File No. 160960844 97



Nation Framework Agreement with Ontario. Under the Métis Harvesting agreement, Ontario has agreed to recognize MNO Harvester’s Certificates issued to members (Métis National Council 2011).

The following is a summary of each Aboriginal community and status of relevant treaty claims specific to the Project:

5.5.1 Mississaugas of the New Credit

Mississaugas of the New Credit (Band No. 120) is a Mississauga Nation, part of the larger Anishinaabe (Ojibwa) Nation. Mississaugas of the New Credit are one of seven Nations affiliated with the Association of Iroquois and Allied Indians. Mississaugas of the New Credit has one reserve: New Credit 40a (2,392 ha), located 16 km south east of Brantford Ontario (AANDC 2014p), near Hagersville, Ontario. The reserve is located approximately 60 km south west of the proposed Project. The New Credit 40a reserve abuts the larger, Six Nations Reserve.

As of September 2015, the total registered population of MNCFN is 2,357, with 934 members living on reserve, 40 members living on other reserves, no members living on crown land and 1,382 members living off reserve (AANDC 2014p).

MNCFN is governed under an Indian Act electoral system and represented by a Chief and seven Councilors, elected every four years. Mississaugas of the New Credit are Signatories of the 1787 Toronto Purchase (FitzGibbon 2009). As of September 2015, Mississaugas of the New Credit has seven concluded, four settled and one ongoing claim, all related specifically to Land and Treaty Land Entitlement (AANDC 2015b).

Concluded:

• Lake Ontario Lakeshore: Mississaugas of the New Credit allege that the lakeshore spanning through Oakville, Burlington, Mississauga and Etobicoke was never ceded in a treaty or other manner. The legal opinion was signed on March 1, 1995 and the claim as not accepted for negotiations on June 16, 1993 (AANDC 2015b).

Settled:

• Brant Tract Purchase: Mississaugas of the New Credit allege that the Nation retains rights and title to Burlington Bay lakeshore, 200 acres of Burlington Heights, and that the 1797 cessions of lands at Burlington Bay were illegal. Canada offered to negotiate in October 16, 2008. The settlement was signed by Canada in October 8, 2010 (AANDC 2015b).

• Toronto Purchase: Mississaugas of the New Credit allege non-fulfillment of the 1805 Surrender terms. Canada offered to negotiate in October 16, 2008 and the settlement was signed by Canada in October 8, 2010 (AANDC 2015b).

98 File No. 160960844



Active Litigation:

• 1923 Williams Treaty: Mississaugas of the New Credit (and Alderville, Beausoleil, Chippewas of Georgina Island, Chippewas of Mnjikaning, Curve Lake, Hiawatha, Mississauga of Scugog Island) allege that the Williams Treaty is invalid, that the Crown failed to provide reserves, there was inadequate compensation for land taken. The legal opinion was signed June 15, 1992 and the litigation became active July 27, 2000 (AANDC 2015b).

Each of these claims is either related to lands in proximity to the Project or encompasses a portion of the Bronte Creek watershed. The Williams Treaty Claim is the only active litigation and should it be determined that a settlement is required, this is not anticipated to be affected by the Project, as any settlement will likely entail a cash settlement, transfer of Crown Lands, or purchase of Lands from a willing seller.

5.5.2 Six Nations of the Grand River

Six Nations (Band No. 121) is a unified Iroquois Nation, consisting of Mohawk, Oneida, Cayuga, Seneca, Onondaga and Tuscarora. Six Nations is a conglomerate of thirteen individual First Nations, with members from each First Nation living on the Six Nations reserve and falling under Six Nations governance. Six Nations has two reserves, Glebe Farm 40B (41 ha), located on the north shore of the Grand River, south east of Brantford, Ontario, and Six Nations 40 (182,789 ha), located 8 km south east of Brantford, Ontario (AANDC 2014a). The Six Nations reserve is located approximately 60 km southwest of the proposed Project.

As of September 2015, the total band membership was 25,600, with 14,209 members living on reserve. Six Nations is governed under a custom electoral system, and is represented by one Chief and 12 Councilors (AANDC 2014a).

• Bay of Quinte Mohawk (Band No. 244) has a total population of 758, with 335 members living on the Six Nations Reserve (AANDC 2014b).

• Upper Mohawk (Band No. 257) has a total population of 6,246, with 2,922 members living on the Six Nations Reserve (AANDC 2014c).

• Bearfoot Onondaga (Band No. 248) has a total population of 637, with 264 members living on the Six Nations Reserve (AANDC 2014d).

• Delaware (Band No. 253) is an Algonquin Nation and has a total population of 679, with 233 members living on the Six Nations Reserve (AANDC 2014e).

• Konadaha Seneca (Band No. 251) has a total population of 559, with 200 members living on the Six Nations Reserve (AANDC 2014f).

• Lower Cayuga (Band No. 250) has a total population of 3,660, with 2,293 members living on the Six Nations Reserve (AANDC 2014o).

• Lower Mohawk (Band No. 254) has a total population of 4,168, with 1,075 members living on the Six Nations Reserve (AANDC 2014h).

File No. 160960844 99



• Oneida (Band No. 246) has a total population of 2,080, with 774 members living on the Six Nations Reserve (AANDC 2014m).

• Onondaga Clear Sky (Band No. 247) has a total population of 808, with 438 members living on the Six Nations Reserve (AANDC 2014g).

• Tuscarora (Band No. 245) has a total population of 2,210, with 981 members living on the Six Nations Reserve (AANDC 2014i).

• Upper Cayuga (Band No. 249) has a total population of 3,655, with 1,469 members living on the Six Nations Reserve (AANDC 2014l).

• Upper Mohawk (Band No. 257) has a total population of 6,246, with 2,922 members living on the Six Nations Reserve (AANDC 2014j).

• Walker Mohawk (Band No. 255) has a population of 487, with 303 members living on the Six Nations Reserve (AANDC 2014k).

As of September 2015, Six Nations had 24 claims related specifically to Land and Treaty Land Entitlement (AANDC 2015a), none of which relate to lands in the vicinity of the Project.

5.5.3 Huron Wendat Nation (Wendake)

Prior to 1650, the Huron Wendat occupied a large territory in the Georgian Bay region extending across what is now portions of southern Ontario, the United States and Quebec. Composed of five distinct Iroquoian-speaking Nations, the Huron Wendat lived in large villages and cultivated corn, beans and squash. During the first half of the 17th century, the Huron Wendat suffered catastrophic population declines as a result of epidemic diseases. Following a 20 year war with the Haudenosaunee Iroquois, the Huron Wendat were displaced from southern Ontario, eventually establishing the Wendake Reserve near Québec City (Huron Wendat Nation n.d.).

Huron Wendat (Band No. 50) is a Huron Nation is located on the periphery of Québec City, Québec. The Nation has two reserves, Village des Hurons Wendake #7 and Village des Hurons Wendake #7A, located approximately 8 km west of Québec City, encompassing an area of 378 ha (AANDC 2014n). The Huron Wendat reserves are located approximately 860 km northeast of the proposed Project.

As of May 2014, Huron Wendat Nation (Wendake) had a registered population of 3,896 with 1,490 members living on reserve, 4 members living on another reserve, and 2,402 members living off reserve. Huron Wendat Nation (Wendake) is governed under a custom electoral system, represented by a Grand Chief and eight-member Council elected to a four-year term. The Nation is a signatory of the Anglo-Huron Treaty of 1760 (Konrad 2015).

As of June 2014, Huron Wendat had four claims in total: one settled, two concluded, and one outstanding specific claim related to land and Treaty Land Entitlement, none of which relate to lands in the vicinity of the Project.

100 File No. 160960844



5.5.4 Métis Nation of Ontario

The MNO was founded in 1993 to represent Ontario Métis people and communities. The MNO is composed of 29 Chartered Community Councils that represents approximately 73,000 Métis people in Ontario.

The MNO is governed by the Provisional Council of the Métis Nation of Ontario. The MNO Credit River Métis Council represents the regions of Halton and Peel, including the Town of Milton where the Project is located. The MNO Clearwater Métis Council represents the region of Hamilton, south of the Project location.

Neither the MNO, nor Chartered Community Councils, have a land base analogous to First Nations Reserves. However, their Aboriginal and treaty rights are recognized and affirmed under Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982.

5.6 SUMMARY OF VIEWS EXPRESSED BY ABORIGINAL COMMUNITIES

Consultation with the identified Aboriginal communities is an ongoing process intended to inform planning, design, construction and operation of the Project. This section provides a summary of the issues raised by the various Aboriginal communities through the activities described above. Records of all correspondence are provided in the ROC (Appendix D).

CN is committed to continued engagement with Aboriginal communities in order to understand potential effects on lands and resources used for traditional purposes by Aboriginal persons and how these may be most effectively addressed.

Ongoing engagement with Aboriginal community representatives included phone calls, emails and meetings regarding a range of items such as project updates, meeting logistics, baseline fieldwork, participation in the EA process, scoping and executing TLU studies (including interviews and field work) and relationship building. The ROC includes detailed communication logs for each community. Key issues or concerns raised by communities regarding the EA process, potential effects and Aboriginal and treaty rights are summarized below.

5.6.1 Mississaugas of the New Credit

Through numerous in depth discussions with MNCFN, participation and coordination during site investigations and preliminary interviews to inform a Traditional Land Use (TLU) study, CN has established a relationship with MNCFN founded on open communication, respect and good faith. This relationship was acknowledged by the MNCFN Director of the Department of Consultation and Accommodation, who stated that “it would be (MNCFN) preference if all proponents undertaking development in MNCFN Traditional Territory responded to their obligations pursuant to the “Duty to Consult” as honourably as CN Rail” (MNCFN letter to CEAA

File No. 160960844 101



May 19, 2015). Subsequently, through an email to CEAA dated August 7, 2015, MNCFN stated, “CN is working closely with MNCFN and addressing our issues as we raise them.”

The following is a summary of the comments received from MNCFN pertaining to the effects of changes to the environment and potential adverse impacts on potential or established Aboriginal or treaty rights:

5.6.1.1 Comments on Effects of Changes to the Environment on Aboriginal Peoples

Based on the information collected through consultation with MNCFN, including comments made during site investigations and preliminary TLU interviews with MNCFN Knowledge Holders, the following potential changes to the environment were identified:

• changes to plant species and plant harvesting sites and activities;

• changes to fish species and fishing areas and activities;

• changes to cultural or spiritual practices, sites or areas (including archaeology); and,

• changes to hunting and trapping practices.

Further discussion on the specific concerns and comments received, including the location of where such activities are known to occur, is provided in Section 6.3.8.

The first round of interviews and a mapping session for the MNCFN TLU study were conducted on August 23 to 25, 2015. The MNCFN TLU study is ongoing and comments on the effects of changes to the environment may be identified in the final MNCFN final TLU report. At the time of EIS filing, the MNCFN final TLU report was not available. MNCFN has not yet determined terms of release for the final TLU report (see Section 5.4.5). Any additional Information provided by MNCFN through ongoing consultation or as TLU studies are completed will be used to inform project planning and the regulatory process. MNCFN brought forward no specific information regarding potential adverse environmental effects specific to the Project that may impact their community.

A copy of the Stage 1 and Stage 2 Archaeological Assessment (AA) was forwarded to MNCFN on November 3, 2015 before the filing of the EIS to CEAA.

5.6.1.2 Comments on Potential Adverse Impacts on Potential or Established Aboriginal or Treaty Rights

At the time of filing of the EIS, no information regarding potential adverse impacts of the Project on potential or established Aboriginal or treaty rights was brought forward by MNCFN. Any additional Information provided by MNCFN or MNCFN community members through ongoing consultation or as TLU studies are completed will be used to inform Project planning and the regulatory process.

102 File No. 160960844



5.6.2 Six Nations

CN is committed to working cooperatively with Six Nations regarding the project. The following is a summary of the comments received from Six Nations pertaining to the effects of changes to the environment and potential adverse impacts on potential or established Aboriginal or treaty rights:


A copy of the Stage 1 and Stage 2 AA was forwarded to the Six Nations on November 3, 2015 in advance of the submission of the EIS to CEAA. Any additional information provided by Six Nations through ongoing consultation will be used to inform project planning and the regulatory process.

Six Nations has brought forward no specific information regarding potential adverse environmental effects specific to the Project that may impact their community


At the time of filing of the EIS, Six Nations indicated that the Project is located on lands within their treaty lands and are subject to litigations against Canada and Ontario. The process through which they wish to be consulted was communicated to CEAA by the Six Nations, whereby engagement is to occur between CEAA and the Six Nations directly.

No specific information regarding potential adverse impacts of the Project on potential or established Aboriginal or treaty rights was brought forward.

Any additional Information provided by Six Nations through ongoing consultation will be used to inform project planning and the regulatory process.

5.6.3 Huron Wendat Nation (Wendake)

CN is committed to working co-operatively with the Huron Wendat and have agreed to provide archaeological information for their review, as requested. The following is a summary of the comments received from Huron Wendat pertaining to the effects of changes to the environment and potential adverse impacts on potential or established Aboriginal or treaty rights:


At the time of filing of the EIS, the Huron Wendat expressed interest in archaeological resources, identifying known archaeological sites located 18 km from the Project. They have requested a copy of the Archaeology report once completed.

File No. 160960844 103



A copy of the Stage 1 and Stage 2 AA was forwarded to the Huron Wendat on November 3, 2015 in advance of the submission of the EIS to CEAA. Any additional Information provided by Huron Wendat through ongoing consultation will be used to inform project planning and the regulatory process.

Huron Wendat has brought forward no specific information regarding potential adverse environmental effects specific to the Project that may impact their community.


Huron Wendat has brought forward no information regarding potential adverse impacts of the Project on potential or established Aboriginal or treaty rights. Any additional Information provided by the Huron Wendat through ongoing consultation will be used to inform project planning and the regulatory process.

5.6.4 Métis Nation of Ontario

CN is committed to providing key EA information to the MNO for review and to document any concerns reside during the preparation of the EIS. At the time of filing, no comments have been received by the MNO. The following is a summary of the comments received from MNO pertaining to the effects of changes to the environment and potential adverse impacts on potential or established Aboriginal or treaty rights:


At the time of filing of the EIS, the MNO has brought forward no information regarding potential adverse environmental effects specific to the Project that may impact the MNO. Any additional Information provided by MNO through ongoing consultation will be used to inform project planning and the regulatory process.

A copy of the Stage 1 and Stage 2 AA was forwarded to MNO on November 3, 2015 in advance of the submission of the EIS to CEAA. Any additional information provided by MNO through ongoing consultation will be used to inform project planning and the regulatory process.


At the time of filing of the EIS, MNO has brought forward no information regarding potential adverse impacts of the Project on potential or established Aboriginal or treaty rights. Any additional Information provided by MNO through ongoing consultation will be used to inform project planning and the regulatory process.

104 File No. 160960844



5.7 FUTURE ABORIGINAL ENGAGEMENT

CN remains committed to continuing its engagement activities with the identified Aboriginal communities to enable awareness and understanding of the Project, to provide opportunities for discussion, and to solicit feedback to inform the EA. CN will continue its on-going engagement with Aboriginal communities throughout the EA process, as well as during the construction and operation phases of the Project, as appropriate.

Key objectives of the ongoing engagement are to:

• inform Aboriginal communities about the Project and potential effects and mitigation measures proposed;

• continue to provide opportunities to discuss concerns, resolve potential issues and facilitate discussion related to the Project; and,

• where appropriate, facilitate consultation and engagement activities with CEAA as part of the EA process.

In fulfilling these objectives, CN will continue with many of the initiatives carried out or initiated to date, including the Project website, Public Information Centre, and completion of TLU studies. Participation by Aboriginal monitors during the follow-up and monitoring programs will be extended to all communities.

During the EA process, these on-going activities will serve to inform Aboriginal communities about the EIS, specifically technical data reports and effects assessment, and to assist them in their review of the findings. Opportunities to review and discuss the various technical reports with CN and technical leads will be offered.

File No. 160960844 105



This page left blank intentionally

106 File No. 160960844


Effects Assessment December 7, 2015

6.0 EFFECTS ASSESSMENT

6.1 SCOPE OF THE ASSESSMENT

6.1.1 Scope of the Project

The scope of the Project is focused on matters that are under the jurisdiction of the CEAA as described in section 5 of CEAA, 2012 and within the care and control of CN. Based on the submission of the Project Description report to CEAA, it was determined that an EA was required for the Project. As described in Chapter 3, the Project includes the construction and operation of the following project components:

• yard tracks;




• truck entrance/gate and access road (including a grade separation);


• SWM system;

• vegetation clearing, grading and berms;

• construction materials and stockpile areas;







A detailed description of Project components can be found in Chapter 3 of this EIS.

6.1.2 Factors to be Considered

Pursuant to section 19 of CEAA, 2012, the federal EA of a designated project must take into account the following factors:

File No. 160960844 107



a) environmental effects of the project, including the environmental effects of malfunctions or accidents that may occur in connection with the project and any cumulative environmental effects that are likely to result from the project in combination with other physical activities that have been or will be carried out;

b) the significance of the effects referred to in paragraph a);

c) comments from the public;

d) mitigation measures that are technically and economically feasible and that would mitigate any significant adverse environmental effects of the project;

e) the requirements of the follow-up program in respect of the project;

f) the purpose of the project;

g) alternative means of carrying out the project that are technically and economically feasible and the environmental effects of any such alternatives;

h) any change to the project that may be caused by the environment;

i) the results of any relevant regional study pursuant to CEAA, 2012; and,

j) any other matter relevant to the EA that would be included in the terms of Reference of the Review Panel3.

The EIS gives full consideration to all of the applicable factors outlined in section 19 of CEAA, 2012.

6.1.3 Scope of the Factors to be Considered

The scope of the factors to be considered focuses the assessment on the relevant issues and concerns. The EIS Guidelines issued by CEAA on July 20, 2015 provide direction on the information to be included in the assessment of environmental effects specific to the Project.

As per section 5(1) of CEAA, 2012, the environmental effects that are to be taken into account in relation to an act or thing, a physical activity, a designated project, or a project are:

(a) a change that may be caused to the following components of the environment that are within the legislative authority of Parliament:

3 At the time of filing the EIS, the terms of reference for the panel review has not been issued by CEAA.

108 File No. 160960844



(i) fish as defined in section 2 of the Fisheries Act and fish habitat as defined in subsection 34(1) of that Act;

(ii) aquatic species as defined in subsection 2(1) of the Species at Risk Act (SARA);

(iii) migratory birds as defined in subsection 2(1) of the Migratory Birds Convention Act, 1994 (MBCA); and,

(iv) any other component of the environment that is set out in Schedule 2 of CEAA, 2012.

(b) a change that may be caused to the environment that would occur:

(i) on federal lands;

(ii) in a province other than the one in which the act or thing is done or where the physical activity, the designated project or the project is being carried out; and,

(iii) outside Canada.

(c) with respect to Aboriginal peoples, an effect occurring in Canada of any change that may be caused to the environment on:

(i) health and socio-economic conditions;

(ii) physical and cultural heritage;

(iii) the current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes; and,

(iv) any structure, site or thing that is of historical, archaeological, paleontological or architectural significance.

Certain additional environmental effects must be considered under section 5(2) of CEAA, 2012 where the carrying out of the physical activity, the designated project, or the project requires a federal authority to exercise a power or perform a duty or function conferred on it under any Act of Parliament other than CEAA, 2012. This is the case for the Project, as CN will require authorizations from DFO under the Fisheries Act and from Canadian Transportation Agency under the CTA and from Industry Canada under the Radiocommunication Act in order for the Project to proceed. Other licenses and permits may be required from other federal authorities for specific components of the Project. These will be determined through the course of the detailed design and sought as applicable prior to those features being constructed/operated.

Therefore, in accordance with section 5(2) of CEAA, 2012, the following environmental effects have also been considered:

File No. 160960844 109



(a) a change, other than those referred to in section (1)(a) and (b), as above, that may be caused to the environment and that is directly linked or necessarily incidental to a federal authority’s exercise of a power or performance of a duty or function that would permit the carrying out, in whole or in part, of the physical activity, or the project; and,

(b) an effect, other than those referred to in section (1)(c), as above, of any change referred to in section 2 (a), as above, on:

(i) health and socio-economic conditions;

(ii) physical and cultural heritage; and,

(iii) any structure, site or thing that is of historical, archaeological, paleontological or architectural significance.

These categories of direct and indirect environmental effects have been taken into account in defining the scope of the assessment, including the scope of factors to be considered in the assessment. They were more specifically refined and expanded to address the EIS Guidelines in terms of specific Valued Components (VCs), potential changes to the environment that may result and the effects of such changes on the environment resulting from the Project. These considerations have included the selection of VCs and the identification of spatial and temporal boundaries (Section 6.2.2 and Section 6.2.4, respectively).

6.2 METHODS

6.2.1 Overview of Approach

The methodology used to conduct the EA of the Project is based on a structured approach that is consistent with international best practices for conducting environmental impact assessments, including the International Association for Impact Assessment’s Principles of Environmental Impact Assessment Best Practice (IAIA 1999), and the methodology used by Stantec for environmental assessments of other major projects assessed by the CEAA. The assessment methodology is structured to:

• focus on issues of greatest concern;

• consider key issues raised by Aboriginal peoples, stakeholders, and the public; and,

• integrate engineering design and programs for mitigation and follow-up into a comprehensive environmental planning process.

This methodology is concentrated on the identification and assessment of potential adverse environmental effects of the Project on VCs. VCs are environmental attributes associated with the Project that are of particular value or interest because they have been identified as a

110 File No. 160960844



potential concern to Aboriginal peoples, regulatory agencies, CN, resource managers, scientists, key stakeholders, and/or the general public.

It is noted that “environment” is defined to include not only ecological systems but also human, social, cultural, and economic conditions that are affected by changes in the biophysical environment. As a result, VCs relate to ecological, social and economic systems that comprise the environment (refer to Section 6.2.2).

Project-related environmental effects are assessed using a methodological framework as shown in Diagram 6.1. The potential environmental effects of Project activities and components are assessed in Section 6.5 using a standard framework to facilitate individual assessment of each VC. Evaluation tables and matrices are utilized to document the assessment where effects have been identified for a more in-depth analysis. Residual Project-related environmental effects (i.e., those environmental effects that remain after the planned mitigation measures have been applied) are characterized for each individual VC using specific analysis criteria (i.e., magnitude, geographic extent, duration, frequency, reversibility, and context). The significance of residual Project-related environmental effects is then determined based on pre-defined standards or thresholds (i.e., significance rating criteria).

The environmental effects associated with potential accidental events as well as the effects of the environment on the Project are considered separately in this EIS (Section 6.6).

File No. 160960844 111



Diagram 6.1: Overview of Approach

112 File No. 160960844



Cumulative environmental effects are assessed in Section 6.6.1 to determine whether there is potential for the residual environmental effects of the Project to interact cumulatively with the residual environmental effects of other past, present, and future (i.e., certain or reasonably foreseeable) physical activities in the vicinity of the Project. The significance of any identified cumulative environmental effects is also assessed in Section 6.6.1.

6.2.2 Selection of Valued Components

The selection of VCs was carried out in consideration of:

• regulatory guidance and requirements, including the Project-specific EIS Guidelines provided by the CEAA (CEAA 2015b);

• issues raised by regulatory agencies, key stakeholders, and the public (refer to Chapter 4);

• issues raised by Aboriginal peoples, including traditional knowledge obtained through consultation with Aboriginal communities (refer to Chapter 5);

• technical aspects of the Project (i.e., the nature and extent of Project components and activities) (refer to Chapter 2);

• existing environmental conditions in the Project Area and interconnections between the biophysical and socio-economic environment (see Section 6.3);

• experience and lessons learned from similar projects; and,

• the professional judgment of the EIS Study Team.

Section 5 of CEAA, 2012 was also influential in selecting appropriate VCs for the assessment (refer to Section 6.1.3 of this EIS for a discussion of CEAA, 2012 section 5 requirements).

The following VCs were initially considered to facilitate a focused and effective EA process that complies with the EIS Guidelines, government requirements and supports public review:

Biophysical Environment:

• fish and fish habitat;

• migratory birds; and,

• species at risk (SAR).

Socio-economic Environment:

• Aboriginal peoples (Traditional Land and Resource Use);

• human health;

• socio-economic conditions; and,

File No. 160960844 113



• archaeological and cultural heritage resources.

Table 6.1 presents the VCs assessed in this EIS, the rationale for their selection. The table also provides the rationale for excluding certain environmental components that were identified in the EIS Guidelines as potential VCs. Relevant sections of the EIS are referenced where applicable. Traditional land and resource use (TLRU) by Aboriginal peoples identified in the vicinity of the Project will not be affected by Project-related activities because they occur outside of the PDA and the Local Assessment Area (LAA). As a result, this has not been carried forward as a VC.

114 File No. 160960844



Table 6.1: Selected Valued Components

Environmental Components

Specified in EIS Guidelines

VC Determination Basis for Inclusion or Exclusion as a VC Relevant EIS Section Reference(s)

Biophysical Environment Fish and Fish Habitat

Environmental effects on fish, including applicable Species at Risk (SAR), and fish habitat are assessed within the Fish and Fish Habitat VC. This VC is included in consideration of its ecological importance, the socio-economic importance of fisheries resources (i.e., target fish species), the legislated protection of fish and fish habitat and applicable aquatic SAR, and the nature of potential Project-VC interactions.

Several species of fish (including silver shiner, a SAR) are known to occur in the vicinity of the Regional Assessment Area (RAA). Project activities and accidental events associated with the Project have the potential to effect fish and fish habitat. Potential Project effects on fish and fish habitat have been identified as an issue of concern during Aboriginal engagement (refer to Chapter 5). Fisheries and fish habitat are protected under the Fisheries Act. Section 5(1)(a) of CEAA, 2012 requires consideration of Project-related environmental effects associated with a change to a component of the environment within the legislative authority of Parliament (e.g., fish and fish habitat as defined in the Fisheries Act).

Existing conditions related to fish and fish habitats are described in Section 6.3.5 and Appendix E.4. Predicted changes that may affect fish and fish habitat are described in Section 6.4.2 Project-related effects on change fish and fish habitat are in Section 6.5.1 Fish and Fish Habitat

Migratory Birds Migratory birds are selected as a VC based on their social, cultural and aesthetic value to society, the potential interactions with Project activities, regulatory considerations and requirements in the EIS Guidelines. This migratory birds VC includes waterfowl, raptors, shorebirds,

Several species of migratory birds are known to occur in the vicinity of the PDA and have the potential to be affected by Project activities and components as well as accidental events associated with the Project. Migratory birds are protected under the MBCA. Section 5(1)(a) of CEAA, 2012 requires consideration of project-related environmental

Existing conditions related to migratory birds and their habitat are described in Section 6.3.6 and Appendix E.16 Predicted changes that may affect migratory birds are described in Section 6.4.3 Project-related effects on changes to migratory birds are in Section 6.5.2

File No. 160960844 115







marsh birds and other land birds, protected under the MBCA.

effects associated with a change to a component of the environment within the legislative authority of Parliament (e.g., migratory birds as defined in the MBCA).

Migratory Birds

Species at Risk SAR are proposed as a VC because of the potential for direct interactions with the Project, requirements of the EIS Guidelines, and federal regulations (SARA) and provincial regulations (Endangered Species Act (ESA)) that offer protection to these species.

Several federal and/or provincial SAR are known to occur in the vicinity of the PDA including Western Chorus Frog, Snapping Turtle, Barn Swallow, Bobolink, Eastern Meadowlark and Little Brown Myotis. These SAR have the potential to be affected by Project activities and components as well as accidental events associated with the Project. SAR can be more vulnerable to changes to their habitat or population levels than secure species and therefore require special consideration. However, in general, evaluation of potential environmental effects and mitigation measures taken to protect SAR are also protective of secure species as well. With respect to migratory birds, some SAR known from the PDA are also migratory birds and considering them as a separate VC is redundant. This has been avoided in this EIS by consideration of migratory bird SAR under the section ‘Migratory Birds’.

Existing conditions related to species at risk and their habitat are described in Section 6.3.7 and Appendix E.16 Predicted changes that may affect species at risk are described in Section 6.4.3 Project-related effects on changes to SAR are in Section 6.5.3

116 File No. 160960844







Other Socio-Economic Conditions

Traditional Land and Resource Use (TLRU) by Aboriginal Peoples

In consideration of the environmental context, the concerns as raised through consultation with Aboriginal peoples identified in the EIS Guidelines and the evaluation of other VCs, further evaluation of TLRU for Aboriginal peoples has not been selected as a VC.

While the Traditional Territories for the four consulted Aboriginal peoples overlap with the Project, no identified TLRU activities occur within the PDA or LAA. Project-related interactions with TLRU do not occur. Concerns raised during consultation with Aboriginal peoples have been already assessed as part of discipline specific assessments (i.e., fish and fish habitat, migratory birds, SAR, and archaeological resources).

Existing conditions related to traditional land and resource use for Aboriginal peoples are described in Section 5.6 and 6.3.8

Human Health Human health has been selected as a VC because of the inherent importance to the wellbeing of humans and regulatory requirements.

Farmhouses and residences are located in the vicinity of the PDA and within the LAA and have the potential to be affected by Project activities. A change in human health could result from a change in air quality from direct exposure via inhalation of chemicals of potential concern (COPCs) released during the construction and operation phases of the Project. Project-related air emissions consist of volatile compounds; as a result, aerial deposition does not occur and subsequently the compounds do not bioaccumulate up the food chain. For this reason, the ingestion of country foods exposure pathway was not evaluated in the HHRA.

Existing conditions related to human health are described in Section 6.3.10 and Appendix E.7 Predicted changes that may affect human health are described in Section 6.4.1 Project-related effects on changes to human health are in Section 6.5.4 Human Health

File No. 160960844 117







No other exposure pathways (i.e., drinking water quality and noise exposure) of concern are applicable to the evaluation of human health.

Socio-Economic Conditions

Environmental effects on Socio-Economic conditions are assessed within the Socio-Economic conditions VC. This VC is considered based on the social importance, economic importance, and the potential for Project-VC interactions.

The Project will increase vehicle and truck movement at the truck entry point at Britannia Road and the employee entry point on Tremaine Road. Project-related vehicle movements will follow posted speed limits, signals and other indications, as well as the Ontario Provincial Highway Traffic Act when entering/exiting the site. These rules are in place to ensure road user safety and may be updated by local and provincial authorities to manage changing traffic volumes and protect the safety of a variety of road users. Project effects to road user safety within the entry points of the PDA are therefore not considered in the assessment of the Socio-Economic Conditions VC. They are instead considered under Accidents and Malfunctions. Commercial and recreational activities evaluated within the VC based on the change in the quantity and quality of land and resource use are limited to only the activities that can occur in the PDA or LAA including: use of navigable waters, cycling and agricultural land use. Activities that do not occur based on municipal regulations or the

Existing conditions related to the transportation infrastructure are described in Appendix E.17. Existing conditions regarding fish species present in Indian Creek and Tributary A are described in Appendix E.4. Existing conditions regarding wildlife species present in the area are described in Appendix E.16. Project-related effects on change in community services and infrastructure; change in quantity and quality of land and resource use are assessed in Section 6.5.5 Cumulative environmental effects are assessed for Socio-Economic Conditions VC in Section 6.6.1 Environmental effects of potential accidental events on all VCs are assessed in Section 6.6.2

118 File No. 160960844







lack of evidence to support those activities have not been included further (i.e., hunting, gathering activities, tourism,) Approved land use planning for the employment lands where the Project is located is compatible for development of the Terminal by CN. Surrounding lands were planned for residential growth north of Britannia Road with knowledge of the future planned rail related employment uses south of Britannia Road on the CN lands. Therefore, project effects to existing municipal and regional land use planning, including present and approved land uses are not assessed in the Socio-Economic Conditions VC.

Archaeological and Heritage Resources (including structures, sites or things of historical, archaeological, paleontological or architectural significance)

Environmental effects on Archaeological and Heritage Resources are assessed within the Archaeological and Heritage Resource VC. This VC is considered based on the Aboriginal importance, historical importance, cultural importance, and the potential for Project-VC interactions.

Occurrence of archaeological and heritage sites within the PDA are included as a VC based on the requirements set out by the applicable regulatory agencies responsible for the effective management of these resources and in the interest of local Aboriginal peoples, the municipality, the general public, and the scientific community.

Existing conditions related to archaeological resources are described in Section 6.3.12 and Appendix E.14 Existing conditions related to cultural heritage resources are described in Section 6.3.11 and Appendix E.14 Predicted changes that may affect archaeological and cultural heritage resources are in Section 6.4.3. Project-related effects on changes to archaeological and cultural heritage resources are in Section 6.5.6 Archaeological and Heritage Resources

File No. 160960844 119



6.2.2.1 Regulatory Setting

The Project is federally regulated, and as such subject to relevant federal legislation. However, certain provincial laws have also been taken into consideration where appropriate.

The regulatory context is described for each individual VC, including an overview of any applicable regulations, policies, or administrative mechanisms. The regulatory setting may be utilized to define the scope of the assessment for the individual VC. In addition, this section may also provide relevant definitions under legislation that may be important to consider in scoping the VC or defining measureable parameters or significance thresholds.

6.2.2.2 Issues Identification

Any VC-specific issues that have been raised during consultation and engagement activities are summarized, and the extent to which identification and consideration of these issues has influenced the scope of the assessment for the individual VC is explained.

6.2.3 Identification of Potential Environmental Effects and Measurable Parameters

Potential environmental effects arising from interactions between the Project and each selected VC are identified in their respective subsections in Section 6.5. These effects are changes to the biophysical or human environment caused by the proposed Project activities and/or components. For each individual VC, potential environmental effects are identified and one or more measurable parameters are selected to facilitate quantitative or qualitative assessment of those effects. Measurable parameters for biophysical VCs include measures of ecosystem health and integrity. Federal measurable parameters, objective, standards, or guidelines are used where applicable. In circumstances where federal parameters are unavailable, regional and provincial parameters may be used. The degree of change in the chosen measurable parameters is used to help characterize the environmental effects to identify any residual environmental effects that will then be evaluated for significance. Thresholds or standards are identified for each measurable parameter where possible.

6.2.4 Identification of Spatial and Temporal EA Boundaries

Consideration of environmental effects in this EIS is conceptually bound in both space and time. This consideration is more commonly known as defining the spatial and temporal boundaries of the assessment. The spatial and temporal boundaries may vary among VCs, depending on the nature of the potential environmental effects. The spatial boundaries must reflect the geographic range over which the Project’s potential environmental effects may occur, recognizing that some environmental effects will extend beyond the PDA. Temporal boundaries identify when an environmental effect may occur in relation to specific Project activities and/or components. The temporal boundaries are based on the timing and duration of Project

120 File No. 160960844



activities and the nature of the interactions with each individual VC. Spatial and temporal boundaries are developed for each VC in consideration of:

• timing/scheduling of Project activities for all Project phases;

• understanding natural variations of each VC;

• information gathered on current and traditional land and resource use;

• the time required for recovery from an environmental effect; and,

• potential for cumulative environmental effects.

The temporal boundaries for the Project encompass all Project phases. Construction is anticipated to begin in 2017 and is expected to take approximately 18 to 24 months with operation of the Terminal to commence in 2019.

The spatial boundaries for the Project are defined below with respect to Project activities and components:

• Project Development Area (PDA): The PDA encompasses the immediate area in which Project activities and components may occur and as such represents the area within which direct physical disturbance may occur as a result of the Project, temporary or permanent. The PDA is consistent for all VCs and includes portions of the CN property as depicted on Figure 3, Appendix B.

• Local Assessment Area (LAA): The LAA is the maximum area within which environmental effects from Project activities and components can be predicted or measured with a reasonable degree of accuracy and confidence. It consists of the PDA and adjacent areas where Project-related environmental effects are reasonably expected to occur based on available information and professional judgment. Figures depicting the applicable LAA’s for each VC is provided in each Technical Data Report, Appendix E.

• Regional Assessment Area (RAA): The RAA is the area within which residual environmental effects from Project activities and components may interact cumulatively with the residual environmental effects of other past, present and future (i.e., certain or reasonably foreseeable) physical activities. The RAA is based on the potential for interactions between the Project and other existing or future potential projects. The RAA is specific to each VC and have been overlain for comparison as depicted on Figure 6, Appendix B, with individual RAA’s identified in each Technical Data Report.

6.2.5 Characterization of Residual Project-related Environmental Effects

The following criteria are used to characterize residual environmental effects on each VC.

File No. 160960844 121



• Magnitude: refers to the expected nature or degree of the residual effect. When evaluating the magnitude of residual effects, the proportion of the VC affected within the spatial boundaries and the relative effect (i.e., negligible, low, moderate, high) is considered;

• Geographic Extent: refers to the geographic area or spatial scale over which the residual effect is expected to occur (i.e., within the PDA, LAA, or RAA);

• Duration: refers to the length of time the residual effect will occur (i.e., short-term, medium-term, long-term, permanent);

• Frequency: refers to how often the residual effect occurs (i.e., single event, multiple irregular events, multiple regular events, continuous);

• Reversibility: pertains to whether or not the residual effect on the VC can be returned to its previous condition once the activity or component causing the disturbance ceases (i.e., reversible or irreversible); and,

• Context: refers to the current degree of anthropogenic disturbance in the area in which the residual effect will occur.

The application of these criteria will be further specified in Section 6.5.

6.2.6 Thresholds or Benchmarks for Characterizing and Determining the Significance of Residual Environmental Effects

In consideration of the Reference Guide for the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act: Determining whether a Project is Likely to Cause Significant Environmental Effects (Federal Environmental Assessment Review Office 1994), criteria or established thresholds for determining the significance of residual adverse environmental effects are identified for each VC. These criteria or thresholds are defined:

• in consultation with the appropriate regulatory agency for a particular VC (where applicable);

• using information obtained during stakeholder and Aboriginal engagement;

• using available information on the status and characteristics of each VC;

• using applicable regulatory documents, environmental standards, guidelines, or objectives where available; and,

• using the professional judgment of the EA Study Team.

These criteria or thresholds establish a level beyond which a residual environmental effect would be considered significant (i.e., an unacceptable change). Thresholds may be based on regulations, standards, resource management objectives, scientific literature, or ecological processes (e.g., desired states for fish or wildlife habitats or populations). Where pre-established standards or thresholds do not exist, significance criteria have been defined qualitatively and justifications for the criteria provided.

122 File No. 160960844



6.2.7 Existing Conditions

Existing conditions of the physical environment, biological environment, and socio-economic environment are described in Section 6.3 in order to characterize the setting for the Project, support an understanding of the receiving environment, and provide sufficient context to enable an understanding of how current environmental conditions and processes might be affected by the Project. A brief overview of existing conditions is then provided for each VC in Section 6.5, highlighting key information to support the assessment of potential environmental effects. Inclusion of existing conditions information in this EIS is limited to that which is necessary to assess the environmental effects of the Project and support recommendations for mitigation, monitoring and follow-up as applicable.

Further details on the methods used to determine existing conditions for the Project are presented in the Technical Data Reports (Appendix E).

6.2.8 Potential Project-VC Interactions

For each VC, a table is used to list all Project activities and components, and to identify potential interactions from those Project activities and components with the VC. This then allows for a comparison of the interactions/environmental effects between the Project and the VC. This comparison is based on the potential for a Project activity or component to interact with the VC and to result in an environmental effect. The comparison is assigned as follows:

- No interaction or associated environmental effects are anticipated. Further assessment is considered unnecessary.

√ Interaction may occur or interaction could result in an effect of concern. Further assessment is warranted and is provided in the respective VC analysis section (where applicable).

Justifications for the comparison of each interaction are provided in the corresponding VC section. The justifications consider the nature of the interactions and the implementation of any applicable codified standards or measures. Where interactions have been deemed no interaction, there are no predicted environmental effects and therefore these interactions are not considered further in the EIS. The potential residual environmental effects of all Project activities and components that are determined to be not significant are therefore not subject to further assessment, except in the analysis of cumulative effects. However, where applicable, the extents of these residual effects are still characterized. Interactions subject to further assessment and effects characterizations are also carried forward in the cumulative effects assessment according to the steps outlined below (refer to Section 6.6.1).

File No. 160960844 123



6.2.9 Assessment of Project-Related Environmental Effects

As discussed in Section 6.2.8, the potential environmental effects resulting from the interactions with the Project require further assessment for each individual VC. The assessment includes:

• identification of environmental effects pathways (i.e., identification of the means by which the Project could result in an environmental effect on the VC);

• description of the mitigation measures proposed to reduce or eliminate potential environmental effects, including industry standards, best management practices and environmental protection measures that CN will implement;

• identification and characterization of the nature and extent of residual environmental effects (i.e., those environmental effects that remain after the proposed mitigation measures have been applied) through application of specific analysis criteria (i.e., magnitude, geographic extent, duration, frequency, reversibility, and context); and,

• determination of significance.

The specific analysis criteria used to identify and characterize residual environmental effects and determine their significance have been identified for each VC (refer to Section 6.2.6). Where standards or established thresholds are available, the potential environmental effects of the Project on each VC are evaluated against these standards or thresholds. Established thresholds reflect – but are not necessarily determinative of – the limits of an acceptable state for an environmental component based on resource management goals, scientific literature, or ecological processes.

A determination of the significance of any residual project effects is included for each VC.

The level of confidence is provided for each determination of significance, which is typically based on professional judgment, prior experience, and scope and quality of available information.

Following the determination of significance, follow-up and monitoring measures are recommended as appropriate to verify environmental effects predictions or to assess the effectiveness of proposed mitigation measures as described in Section 6.5, Chapter 7 and Appendix G.

6.2.10 Assessment of Cumulative Effects

Cumulative environmental effects are assessed within each section corresponding to the predicted effects of the Project on individual VC’s (Section 6.5). Potential cumulative environmental effects are identified in consideration of potential interactions with other physical activities that have been or will be carried out in the vicinity of the Project. These other physical activities include certain or reasonably foreseeable future undertakings. The assessment of cumulative environmental effects is carried out with respect to any Project-related residual

124 File No. 160960844



environmental effect that is considered likely to overlap with the residual environmental effect of another past, present or future physical activity.

Where there is potential for cumulative interaction, the residual environmental effects of the Project are assessed in combination with those of other physical activities. The contribution of the Project to the cumulative environmental effects is evaluated and the significance of residual cumulative environmental effects is determined.

Table 6.2 identifies the list of specific past, present and future projects that have been identified for potential cumulative interaction with the Project, which are shown on Figure 7, Appendix B.

Table 6.2: Present, Approved and Proposed Projects and Activities Considered In the Environmental Assessment for the Purpose of Evaluating Cumulative Environmental Effects

Past, Present and Future

Physical Activities

Project or Activity Name Project or Activity Description Current Status

Residential Development

Bristol Planning District The Bristol Survey Secondary Plan Area is located within the Town of Milton Urban Expansion Area and is bounded by Highway 401 to the north, James Snow Parkway to the east, Derry and Britannia Roads to the south and Region Road 25, Derry Road and Thompson Road to the west.

Operational

Sherwood Planning District The Sherwood Survey Secondary Plan Area is located within the Town of Milton Urban Expansion Area and is bounded by Highway 401 to the north, Peru Road, Canadian Pacific Railway Company (CP), CN and Regional Road 25 to the east; Louis St. Laurent Avenue to the south and Tremaine Road to the west.

Operational

Boyne Planning District The Boyne Survey Secondary Plan Area is located within the Town of Milton Urban Expansion Area and is being implemented to accommodate growth to the year 2021. Once fully developed, the Boyne Secondary Plan Area will likely accommodate an additional 50,000 residents. The area is approximately 930 ha in size and is bounded by Louis St. Laurent Avenue to the north, James Snow Parkway to the east, Britannia Road to the south and Tremaine Road to the west.

Pending approval

File No. 160960844 125





Physical Activities


Road Development/Upgrades

Louis St. Laurent Avenue, Tremaine Road to Yates Boulevard

Louis St. Laurent Avenue is an important roadway that connects east and west Milton. This essential corridor will also provide residents in residential growth areas with more direct access to major 400-series highways and intersect all three residential growth areas (Bristol, Sherwood and Boyne). The roadway was designed as a four-lane thoroughfare with a centre median.

Operational

Main Street Grade Separation

The project involved the construction of an underpass on the south side of the existing CP track level crossing at Main Street East, just east of Ontario Street. The purpose of this underpass was to improve traffic flow on Main Street and allow for better access to the business areas of Milton as commercial development grows on Main Street.

Operational

Main Street West, Tremaine Road to Bronte Street

Main Street West is a rural roadway that has been designed as a four-lane thoroughfare with a centre median. This street is being widened to support future growth within the community.

Under construction

Britannia Road Transportation Corridor Improvements

The Halton Region is currently planning to construct a six land road configuration on Britannia Road from Tremaine Road to Regional Road 25, ultimately from Regional Road 25 to Highway 407, to accommodate travel demands within the Town of Milton. As a result, a grade separation is planned by the Region for the CN Britannia road crossing west of Tremaine Road.

Pending Approval

Tremaine Road, Derry Road to Britannia Road

Halton Region is currently constructing a six land road configuration on Tremaine Road from Derry Road to Britannia Road to accommodate travel demands within the Town of Milton.

Operational

Urban and Rural Road upgrades

Various roads within the Town of Milton and Halton Region have been included in the 10 year planning documents.

Planned for 2025

126 File No. 160960844





Physical Activities


Infrastructure Development

Halton Region Waste Management Site

To support the growth of Halton Region, the Regional Municipality of Halton operates the Halton Region Waste Management Site providing the region with solutions for reduce, reuse, recycle, yard waste composting, safe disposal of household hazardous waste and garbage disposal.

Operational

Utilities Hydro One Bruce to Milton Transmission Reinforcement Project

The Bruce to Milton Transmission Reinforcement Project was one of several Hydro One Networks Inc. (Hydro One) projects completed to meet Ontario’s electricity delivery needs in the 21st Century. An approximately 180 km double-circuit 500 kilovolt (kV) transmission line was built on a widened existing transmission corridor connecting the Bruce Power Facility in Kincardine to Hydro One’s switching Station in Milton. The transmission line route crosses through five upper tier municipalities (Bruce, Grey, Dufferin, and Wellington Counties and the Regional Municipality of Halton) and eleven lower tier municipalities (Kincardine, Brockton, Hanover, West Grey, Southgate, Wellington North, East Garafraxa, Erin, Halton Hills and Milton).

Operational

Union Gas Hamilton-Milton (Dawn Parkway System Expansion) Project

In order to expand its natural gas pipeline system, Union Gas is proposing to construct and operate a 48” diameter steel natural gas pipeline approximately 20 km in length from Hamilton to Milton. More specifically, the pipeline is proposed to travel between the existing Union Gas Hamilton Valve Site located near Highway 6 and Carlisle Road and the existing Union Gas Milton Gate Station located south of Derry Road between Ontario Street and Third Line.

Approved project, not under construction

File No. 160960844 127





Physical Activities


Union Gas Burlington-Oakville (Dawn Parkway System Expansion) Project

In order to expand its natural gas pipeline system, Union Gas is proposing to construct and operate a 20” diameter steel natural gas pipeline approximately 12 km in length from Burlington to Oakville. More specifically, the pipeline is proposed to travel between the Parkway West Compressor Station (currently under construction) located near the intersection of Eighth Line and Derry Road in the Town of Milton and the existing Union Gas Bronte Gate Station located East of Ninth Line, south of Dundas Street in the Town of Oakville.

Pending approval

Union Gas Parkway West Project

Union Gas is building a new compressor facility known as Parkway West on the east side of Eighth Line, southeast of Derry Road East and southwest of Highway 407 near the existing Union Gas Parkway site in the Town of Milton. This new facility will house two natural gas compressors, Parkway C and Parkway D. When in operation, the Parkway C Compressor will provide back-up compression in case of an unplanned compressor outage and Parkway D will provide additional compression to support the growing demand for natural gas at the existing station. This project is necessary to enhance the reliability and security of gas supply to the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area and markets beyond.

Under construction

KEY Operational – Project construction completed Pending Approval – Project construction pending agency approval Approved project, not under construction – approval for construction granted by agencies Under Construction – Project construction occurring at time of EIS preparation

128 File No. 160960844



6.2.11 Assessment of Potential Accidents or Malfunctions

Environmental effects associated with potential accidents or malfunctions are assessed in Section 6.6.2. The focus of the assessment is on identified plausible accidental events or malfunctions that could occur as a result of the construction and operation of the Project, including those that could result in significant environmental effects in the unlikely event that they do occur. As part of this assessment, potential events and considered scenarios are described, interactions with VCs are identified and potential environmental effects are assessed. Additionally, a description of the planned mitigation and contingency measures is provided, as is a conclusion regarding the significance of potential residual environmental effects and their likelihood of occurrence. Section 6.6.2 provides further details regarding EA methodology and the scope of assessment for the potential accidents and malfunctions that have been identified.

6.2.12 Assessment of Effects of the Environment on the Project

Effects of the environment on the Project are assessed in Section 6.6.3. The assessment considers potential changes to the Project that may result from interactions with the environment. This includes the sensitivity of the Project to variations in meteorological conditions and to natural hazards. The assessment of effects of the environment on the Project includes discussion of potential Project interactions as well as details regarding planning, design and construction strategies for reducing the likelihood of potential effects on the Project, thereby also reducing the likelihood of any potential environmental effects. A significance determination is then made regarding the potential residual effects of the environment on the Project. Section 6.6.3 provides further details regarding the methodology and scope of assessment for the effects of the environment on the Project.

6.2.13 Identification of Follow-up and Monitoring

Where applicable, follow-up and monitoring programs are presented to verify environmental effects predictions and/or to assess the effectiveness of proposed mitigation measures. A compilation of monitoring and follow-up commitments from the assessment of Project effects, effects from accidents and malfunctions, effects of the environment on the Project, and cumulative effects, as applicable, is provided in Chapter 9 of this EIS.

6.2.14 Summary

The final step in the EA methodology is a summary of the residual effects, mitigation and significance of effects. Chapter 7 of this EIS provides an overall summary of the effects analysis including identification of key mitigation measures. Follow-up and monitoring commitments are provided in Chapter 9.

File No. 160960844 129



6.3 PROJECT SETTING AND BASELINE CONDITIONS

This section provides an overview of the physical, biological, and socio-economic environments in which the Project is located and is intended to provide a regional perspective of the existing environment and to help identify key factors that may interact with the Project and require further assessment as VCs in Section 6.5. These environments are described below at different scales and specificity, depending on the information available and/or relevance to the environmental assessment. Where site-specific information may be lacking in the PDA, general information from the LAA or RAA are included.

6.3.1 Atmospheric Environment

Atmospheric environment is addressed in terms of air quality, climate, noise and light.

6.3.1.1 Air Quality

Assessment of current (baseline) ambient air quality conditions for Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPCs) including criteria air contaminants (CACs) and key volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from existing published sources of air quality data (local ambient monitoring stations managed by Environment Canada).

The main air emission sources for the existing CN operations are locomotives passing on the mainline. The air emission sources for the Terminal will be locomotives passing by, trains and associated locomotives on-site servicing the Terminal, non-road equipment (e.g., stackers, hostlers, and mechanically protected containers), stationary equipment (generators), and on-road mobile equipment (trucks). Air emissions are generated from fossil fuel combustion (diesel) in mobile and stationary equipment engines.

Ambient air quality conditions were obtained through a review of existing air quality monitoring data collected by the National Air Pollution Surveillance Program (NAPS) operated by Environment Canada and supplemental baseline ambient monitoring program conducted on site for the Project.

Four monitoring stations in the Halton area were selected for the study based on their proximity to the PDA (Mississauga, Oakville, Burlington, and Hamilton). Since VOCs and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) were measured only at the Hamilton station, the Brampton and Etobicoke stations were added to the list. VOC data was available from the Brampton monitoring station, and particulate matter less than 10 μm in diameter (PM10) and PAH data were available from the Etobicoke station.

Further, to supplement existing data, a site-specific ambient air quality monitoring station was set-up brought on line during the months of July to August 2015, with further changes as systems

130 File No. 160960844



were brought online October 2015. A summary of the current air contaminants being monitored and methodology as of October 2015 are provided in Table 6.3.

Table 6.3: Summary of Current Contaminants Monitored and Sampling Methodology October 2015

Contaminant Methodology Equipment Sample Frequency and Duration

PM2.5 Continuous BAM 1020 PM2.5 Monitor Hourly

PM10 Continuous BAM 1020 PM10 Monitor Hourly

Nitrogen oxides (NOX) Continuous API Model 200E

Chemiluminescence Analyzer Minutely

Sulphur dioxide (SO2) Continuous API 100E Sulphur Dioxide

Analyzer Minutely

Carbon monoxide (CO)

Continuous API Model 300E Carbon Monoxide Analyzer Minutely

Ozone (O3) Continuous Thermo U.V. Photometric Ozone Analyzer Model 49 Minutely

Ammonia (NH3)

Non-continuous Active – Started August 16, 2015

Tube method Started as daily 24-hour exposures, since expanded to weekly exposure.

Non-continuous Passive – Started Sept. 30, 2015

Ogawa Passive Samplers Exposure period is typically two weeks in duration.

Total suspended particulate matter (TSP)

Non-continuous Tisch Environmental TE-5170 volumetric-flow high volume sampler

24-Hour sample, collected once every 6 days.

PAH Non-continuous PUF high volume sampler 24-Hour sample, collected once every 12 days.

VOCs Non-continuous SUMMA canisters 24-Hour sample, collected once every 12 days.

The review of ambient monitoring data in the Halton area shows that the measured hourly, 24-hour and annual NO2, CO, SO2 and particulate matter less than 2.5 μm in diameter (PM2.5)

ambient levels are all below the relevant federal or provincial air quality standards.

Background levels for benzene and benzo(a)pyrene (B(a)P) show current air quality to be above some of the applicable relevant criteria, which represents current background before any project contributions are considered. Background data is publically available data assessed to be representative of the Halton area for background concentrations (published background data).

File No. 160960844 131



For the Halton area, the annual base benzene background is conservatively expected to be 0.79 ug/m3 , or 176% of the referenced threshold level without considering any potential predicted project emissions. Further, using conservative interpretation of the available data, both the 24-hour and annual B(a)P background is expected to be above the referenced criteria, 0.00064 ug/m3, which is 1,273 % of the 24- hour criteria and 0.00025ug/m3, which is 2,461 % of annual criteria.

The results from the on-site air monitoring station will be tabulated and validated following 1 year of data collection, with a sensitivity analysis completed to inform ambient air quality data.

6.3.1.2 Climate

Long term climatological data in the vicinity of the PDA is available from the Toronto Pearson International Airport meteorological station located approximately 30 km from the Milton Intermodal project site. The following sections describe the general climatology of the area. The climatology is based on 30 year (1981 to 2010) Canadian Climate Normal data obtained from Environment Canada.

Temperature

A summary of the daily average, daily maximum and daily minimum temperatures on a monthly basis over the period 1981 to 2010 is presented in Table 6.4. The daily average temperature for the area varies from -5.5 to 21.5ºC with an annual average temperature of 8.2ºC.

Table 6.4: Summary of Average Temperature Data

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual

Daily Average (ºC)

-5.5 -4.5 0.1 7.1 13.1 18.6 21.5 20.6 16.2 9.5 3.7 -2.2 8.2

Daily Maximum (ºC)

-1.5 -0.4 4.6 12.2 18.8 24.2 27.1 26 21.6 14.3 7.6 1.4 13

Daily Minimum (ºC)

-9.4 -8.7 -4.5 1.9 7.4 13 15.8 15.1 10.8 4.6 -0.2 -5.8 3.3

Environment Canada Canadian Climate Normal – Toronto Pearson Airport meteorological station

Precipitation

A summary of the monthly average rainfall, snowfall, total precipitation (as equivalent rainfall based on a conversion factor for snowfall to equivalent rainfall of 0.1) and average snow depth on a monthly basis over the period 1981 to 2010 is presented in Table 6.5. The annual average total precipitation for the area is about 785.9 millimetres (mm).

132 File No. 160960844



Table 6.5: Summary of Average Precipitation Data


Rainfall (mm) 25.1 24.3 32.6 63 74.3 71.5 75.7 78.1 74.5 60.6 68 34 681.6

Snowfall (centimetre (cm))

29.5 24 17.7 4.5 0 0 0 0 0 0.4 7.5 24.9 108.5

Precipitation (mm) 51.8 47.7 49.8 68.5 74.3 71.5 75.7 78.1 74.5 61.1 75.1 57.9 785.9

Average Snow Depth (cm)

6 7 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2

Environment Canada Canadian Climate Normal - Toronto Pearson Airport meteorological station

Humidity

A summary of the average morning relative humidity on a monthly basis over the 1981 to 2010 is presented in Table 6.6. The annual average relative humidity in the morning is 81.3%.

Table 6.6: Summary of Average Relative Humidity Data


Average Relative Humidity - 0600LST (%)

80.8 79.3 78.1 75.4 77.2 79.8 81.9 85.7 87.4 85.2 83.3 81.8 81.3


Wind Speed and Direction

Climate normal wind data summarizing wind speed and direction is presented in Table 6.7. The annual average wind speed for the area is 15 kph and the most frequent wind direction, on an annual basis, is wind blowing from the west. In the summer, winds blow most frequently from the north and west, while in the fall to winter, the most frequent direction is from the west.

Table 6.7: Summary of Wind Data

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual Speed (km/h) 17.6 17 16.9 16.8 14.4 13.2 12.9 11.9 12.7 14 15.7 16.7 15

Most Frequent Direction

W W N N N N W N W W W W W

Max Hourly Speed (km/h)

77 77 97 81 71 63 61 71 77 92 80 76 97

File No. 160960844 133



Table 6.7: Summary of Wind Data

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual Max Gust Speed (km/h)

115 105 124 115 109 107 135 115 106 104 122 109 135

Direction of Max Gust E W SW W W W NW NE NW NW SW S NW

Days with Winds >= 52 km/h

3.1 2.4 2.8 2.9 1.4 0.7 0.6 0.8 0.7 1.8 2.5 2.8 22.2

Days with Winds >= 63 km/h

0.9 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.4 0.8 0.4 6.1


6.3.1.3 Noise

A baseline (ambient) noise study was completed in the vicinity of the proposed Project. As part of the study, sound level measurements were conducted at ten locations and analyzed to establish the baseline acoustical environment within the LAA (i.e., existing sound levels within the LAA).

The LAA extends approximately 1.0 km from the main PDA and captures the area that follows the existing rail corridor between Bronte Road South / First Line and Tremaine Road / Regional Road 22. Representative Points of Receptions (PORs) were identified within the LAA and baseline acoustical conditions were established for all of the identified PORs identified in the LAA. The baseline or ambient sound level was determined based on the minimum daily value measured during the measurement period. The background sound levels measured in the baseline study range from those comparable to a suburban residential area up to those comparable to and urban residential area. The baseline study suggests that the ambient sound level near the undeveloped land north of Britannia Road is currently measured to be higher than those in other areas due to its proximity to the railway corridor and Britannia Road, with no noise-mitigating features nearby.

6.3.1.4 Light

Baseline light data was gathered in the summer 2014. It represents the least affected condition for the LAA. As the reflectivity associated with snow cover over a winter season typically serves to increase background baseline light, a conservative baseline level has been established, and further seasonal background variation has not been carried out.

From the baseline measurements and related interpretation, the LAA are shown to have suburban background levels as a baseline. The results of the field surveys of the baseline ambient light conditions are presented in Table 6.8.

134 File No. 160960844



Table 6.8: Baseline Ambient Nighttime Light Measurements

Site

Site Location (UTM Zone 17T)

Site Description

June 22/23, 2014 August 27/28, 2014

Easting (m)

Northing (m)

Sky Glow SQM-L

(mag/arcsec2)

Sky Glow SQM-L

(mag/arcsec2)

Light Trespass

(lux)

1 595464 4810448 2nd Sideroad, approximately 50 m southwest of Tremaine Road - 19.34 0.00

2 593900 4811995 Tremaine Road, along property line of proposed Terminal 19.40 19.45 0.00

3 592962 4812846 Tremaine Road, along property line of proposed Terminal - 19.40 0.00

4 595072 4812796 First Line, along property line of proposed Terminal - 19.37 0.00

5 595179 4811749 Lower Base Line, along property line of proposed Terminal - 19.37 0.00

6 589967 4815070 Derry Road West, approximately 400 m west of Tremaine Road 19.32 19.29 0.00

7 588525 4815147 Bell School Line, approximately 1.2 km north of Derry Road West 19.45 19.43 0.00

8 591259 4808849 Walkers Line, Indian Wells Golf Club Parking Lot 19.51 19.40 0.00

The sky glow measurements showed little variation between sites on both nights of recording, 19.32 – 19.51 (mag/arcsec2) on June 23, 2014 and 19.29 – 19.45 (mag/arcsec2) on August 27, 2014. Likewise there was little variation in the sky glow measurements taken at corresponding sites on June 23 and August 27, 2014. Sky glow measurements, taken with the SQM-L at Sites 1 through 5 (around the proposed Terminal) were in the same range as measurements taken at Sites 6 and 7 (northwest) and Site 8 (southwest) of the proposed Terminal. Light trespass measurements, taken with the Extech EA33 metre demonstrated that currently no incident light is shining within the area where spot measurements were taken.

6.3.2 Geology and Geochemistry

A geotechnical investigation was conducted on 64 boreholes to confirm the subsurface conditions and identify geotechnical issues within the PDA. The investigation was not conducted in the LAA or the RAA.

6.3.2.1 Geology

The PDA is within the Peel Plain physiographic region (Chapman and Putnam 1984). The Peel Plain generally consists of till sediments and is characterized as a level to undulating tract of clayey soils that extends across the central portions of the Regional Municipalities of York, Peel, and Halton in a northeast – southwest orientation. Elevation within the region ranges from

File No. 160960844 135



approximately 150 to 230 metres above sea level (masl), and gradually and uniformly slopes in a southeast direction towards Lake Ontario. The physiography within the general area is slightly undulating, ranging in elevation between 180 masl and 185 masl.

The overburden soils in the region of the PDA consist of Halton Till and glaciolacustrine deposits. The Halton Till deposits are primarily comprised of silt and silty clay soils. The glaciolacustrine deposits consist of fine textured basin and quiet water deposits typically comprised of silt and clay and minor sand. The surficial dense clayey silt till ranges from 1 to 10 m in thickness and is underlain by hard sandy silt till.

The bedrock underlying the region is the Queenston Formation. This formation of the Upper Ordovician age consists of various shades of reddish brown shale with green/grey limestone interbedding that is flat to gently undulating with a southeastward slope. The depth to bedrock is generally 2 to 11 m, but extending to depths greater than 18 m at some locations.

6.3.2.2 Geohazards

A geohazard is a threat from a naturally occurring geological, geotechnical or hydrotechnical process or condition that may lead to damage. The process may be triggered by natural or anthropogenic causes and can result in seismic activity, isostatic rise or subsidence, landslides, or slope erosion.

Seismicity/Faulting

Seismic zone mapping of Canada are derived from the analysis of past earthquakes and from the knowledge of Canada’s tectonic and geological structure. The expected seismic hazard and intensity of ground shaking are expressed in terms of ground acceleration as expressed as a fraction of the acceleration of gravity. The territory of Canada is divided into seven seismic zones (i.e., zones 0 to 6). Zone 0 is characterized with a very low seismic hazard, where Zone 6 is characterized with the highest seismic hazard in Canada. Eastern Canada is part of the stable North American Plate. Seismic activity within this region is related to stress fields and is concentrated in areas of crustal weakness (Natural Resources Canada 2013).

The Southern Great Lakes Region has a low to moderate level of seismicity when compared to more active seismic zones to the east, along the Ottawa River and in Quebec. The PDA is characterized within Zone 1.

Two deep seated faults have been identified in the vicinity of the PDA dissecting the underlying Precambrian Shield, one of which dissects the lower Paleozoic Units. These faults are considered minor in nature and have not produced seismic displacements in recent history (i.e., 50 years).

136 File No. 160960844



Isostatic Rise or Subsidence

Based on the regional geology/topography, isostatic rise and/or subsidence is currently measured near 0 mm/year for the Great Lakes region, of which the PDA falls within (Rate of lithospheric uplift due to Postglacial Rebound, as modelled by Paulson et al. 2007).

Landslide/Mass Movement

The regional geology/topography does not support the potential for debris flow and debris slides. The concern with respect to Landslide/Mass Movement is more aptly associated with localized slope instability and potential long term creep.

Localized slope instability was observed in an area of Indian Creek along the outside of meander bend and a floodplain along the inside of the bend with a 10 m to 15 m high valley wall. The slope of the ground bank has an overall slope in the order of 1.1H: 1.0V. There is evidence of toe erosion on the bank. As a component of the detailed design of the Project, the slope instability of the bank will be addressed.

Rock Instability Potential

Elevation within the region ranges from approximately 150 m to 230 masl, and gradually and uniformly slopes in a southeast direction towards Lake Ontario. The physiography within the general area is slightly undulating, ranging in elevation between 180 masl and 185 masl. Based on the geology and the slopes within the region, rock instability is not a further concern for the PDA.

6.3.3 Topography and Soil

A geotechnical investigation was conducted on 64 boreholes to provide surface elevations and create a baseline soil profile within only the PDA (Figure 3, Appendix B).

Topography

The topography in the general area of the PDA is relatively flat with a gradual slope downward to the southwest corner along the length of the PDA. The PDA has low-relief with an overall west facing aspect (i.e., land drains to the west) and is bisected by one watercourse (Tributary A) that drains into Indian Creek, immediately south of Tremaine Road. A short distance upstream of the railway tracks, the channel is defined as an intermittent stream. Several smaller surface water drainage features are located within the PDA.

Soil

In general, the soil stratigraphy encountered in the PDA consists of surface vegetation with associated topsoil, underlain by native sandy silty clay till and silty clay till soil. A localized stratum of silty clay was encountered overlying the silty clay till. Fill is localized in the southern portion of

File No. 160960844 137



the Project site and consists of gravelly sand, silty sand and silty clay. Bedrock was not encountered to the termination depth of the boreholes and test pits.

Topsoil stripped during the site preparation program is not considered suitable for reuse in any application other than general landscaping on the site. The topsoil can be used for landscaping within the SWM ponds, diversion channel and swales and the construction of landscape berms.

Generally, the overburden soils, silty clay, clayey silt till and silty clay till encountered during the investigation can be considered suitable for reuse as general engineered fill to develop design grades and elevations, or for use in backfilling trenches. The glacial sediments under the topsoil are considered to be a suitable matrix within which to construct proposed channels in Tributary A and Indian Creek.

6.3.4 Groundwater and Surface Water

6.3.4.1 Groundwater

Ten groundwater monitoring standpipes were installed in boreholes and 27 test pits were excavated during the geotechnical investigation to assess free groundwater and groundwater levels within the PDA (see the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report - Hydrogeology (Appendix E.6)).

The groundwater condition in the open boreholes was recorded on completion of drilling and prior to installation of the monitoring wells. The static groundwater levels were measured in the monitoring wells and are recorded in Table 9.10 and Table 9.11 of the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report - Geotechnical Investigation (Appendix E.5).

Free groundwater was recorded in some of the boreholes and test pits at the time of drilling and groundwater levels were measured in the geotechnical standpipes installed. The levels varied from near surface (presumed to represent infiltration from standing water at the ground surface) to depths in the range of 5 m to 9 m below existing grade.

There is localized surficial groundwater perched at the ground surface in various areas across the PDA. The volume of surficial perched water represents shallow perched groundwater accumulated primarily as run-off across the ground surface and seepage into the surficial clay and till soils. Surface water run-off is more likely to pool in low lying areas after precipitation events given that the PDA is characterized as having low groundwater recharge potential (i.e., less than 100 mm/year), where pooled surface water is more likely to be lost to evaporation than via infiltrating to the subsurface.

138 File No. 160960844



6.3.4.2 Surface Water

The Project site is located within the Indian Creek sub-watershed of Bronte Creek. The headwaters of much of this subwatershed drain from the Niagara Escarpment and descend the slopes to the Peel Plain south of Derry Road (Conservation Halton 2002).

The spatial boundaries of the Tributary A and Indian Creek channel realignments and aquatic enhancements are contained within the PDA. The LAA includes the length of Indian Creek channel between the Tributary A and Indian Creek realignments and a section downstream of the Indian Creek realignment. The LAA encompasses the CN property boundary and neighbouring properties bounded by the Indian Creek watershed to the east and south and a 500 m wide buffer around the PDA for the north and west boundaries, except for the portion of the PDA along the railway to the northwest.

The RAA establishes the larger study area for understanding existing channel morphology within Tributary A and Indian Creek. The Indian Creek reference reach, which was used in the Indian Creek channel realignment design, is found within the RAA. The area is an expansion of the LAA downstream along Indian Creek and contains the watershed between the LAA and where Indian Creek discharges into Bronte Creek. The PDA, LAA and RAA are shown in Figure 6, Appendix B.

6.3.4.2.1 Tributary A

Tributary A is a tributary channel of Indian Creek. The Tributary A subwatershed is located in the northwest 1/3 portion of the PDA. The tributary drains an area of 5.6 km2 and the current dominant watershed land use is field crop agriculture consisting of tilled row crops. There are little to no established riparian buffer zones along the existing watercourse and the ecological land classification is dominated by Graminoid Mineral Meadow Marsh Ecosite (Appendix E.16). Tributary A within the PDA has an intermittent flow regime with low diversity of substrate material and canopy cover.

A flow control feature consisting of a constructed berm with a culvert outflow exists along the watercourse approximately 150 m upstream of where Tributary A confluences with Indian Creek. The berm structure created an online agricultural pond that was historically used by a neighbouring farm, but was observed to no longer be in use.

Tributary A has a total length of 735 m extending from the current CN rail alignment to the existing on-line agricultural pond. It is a moderately-well defined channel in which vegetation (grasses) exert considerable control on channel form. Although vegetation is the dominant influence in Tributary A, subtle pool and riffle features were evident and captured in the geomorphic survey. Timing of the geomorphic survey allowed for the collection of water surface elevations. A summary of the existing channel morphology, including channel longitudinal profile and typical cross-section, is presented in Appendix E.2.

File No. 160960844 139



Using the Rosgen Stream Classification method, the stream is classified as a C6 channel. The classification ‘C’ indicates a stable channel with good access to the floodplain. The bed material classification of 6 indicates silt-clay substrate, further indicating that the channel may be vegetation controlled, which was confirmed during the field investigation. The channel had an average wetted width of 2.32 m and an average wetted depth of 0.10 m; an average bankfull width of 3.53 m and an average bankfull depth of 0.19 m with a corresponding bankfull area of 0.65 m2.

Archival aerial imagery (1954 – 1999) of the PDA indicates that a 300 m section of the tributary has been anthropogenically straightened. Downstream of this point, Tributary A is sinuous and does not appear to have been straightened (Philips 2004). The berm (and pond) near Tremaine Road were constructed after 1954.

The channel is moderately well defined and bankfull features, although not well represented, are discernable. Cross sections were surveyed where channel definition was good and the bankfull cross sectional area was determined using the survey results. Based on the cross-sectional measurements in Tributary A, the bankfull cross sectional area is 0.65 m2.

6.3.4.2.2 Indian Creek

Indian Creek has been identified as the most anthropogenically affected watercourse in the Bronte Creek Watershed, predominantly caused by agricultural activities and narrow, low-vegetation riparian buffers (Conservation Halton 2002). Based on analysis of benthic sampling data, Conservation Halton characterized water quality in Indian Creek as moderately to substantially impaired (Conservation Halton, 2002).

Underlying materials in Indian Creek consist of fine textured (silty-clay) Halton Till (Chapman and Putman 1984) (Appendix E.5 and E.6). The creek has cut into bedrock (shale/dolostone) in the reaches extending from the vicinity of Bell School Line downstream to the confluence with Bronte Creek (Philips 2004). Drainage density throughout the watershed is low, likely due to many of the lower order watercourses being tilled to improve agricultural field drainage (Philips 2004).

The Indian Creek watershed is dominated by flat to gently undulating terrain of the Peel Plain and is bounded by the Niagara Escarpment to the west. Indian Creek has a total length of approximately 1,600 m extending from the upstream crossing of Tremaine Road (5269 Tremaine Road) to the downstream crossing of Tremaine Road (5051 Tremaine Road). The confluence of Tributary A and Indian Creek is located approximately 1,075 m upstream of the affected portion of Indian Creek.

Using the Rosgen Stream Classification method, this portion of Indian Creek was classified as a C4 channel. A C4 channel is considered stable with good access to the floodplain. A bed material classification of ‘4’ is indicative of a gravel dominated channel substrate. A summary of the existing conditions morphology data is presented.

140 File No. 160960844



Based on the examination of archival imagery (1954 – 1999) land use throughout the Indian Creek watershed has been predominantly agriculture throughout the period of record and remains so to the present day. Using both archival imagery and topographic mapping, it was observed that there have been two substantial shifts in the path of Indian Creek within the PDA (refer to Figure 3 in Appendix A of Appendix E.2). A large meander loop (380 m) was cut off immediately upstream of the proposed realignment reach between 1954 and 1978. It is possible that this loop cut off resulted from artificial straightening. Approximately 600 m downstream of the loop cut off, 400 m of the channel has shifted to the south east of its 1954 alignment sometime in between 1954 and 1978.

Land use in the watershed has remained predominantly agriculture throughout the period of record with much of the land cleared for pasture or tillage. The headwaters have become increasingly urbanized in recent years as the Town of Milton expanded westward. At present, 83% of the watershed is used for agriculture, 4.5% is urbanized and vegetation (e.g., forest, swamp) accounts for the remainder (MNRF 2015a).

Based on the cross-sectional measurements in Indian Creek, the bankfull cross-sectional area at riffles is approximately 4.0 to 6.2 m2.

Within the PDA, Indian Creek is partially confined within its valley, with the channel contacting the valley wall at several locations along the left downstream-facing bank. The channel on the right bank is unconfined and the meander pattern is free to develop unimpeded. The meanders in this area are relatively small, as indicated by the low sinuosity of 1.09 (Philips 2004).

Stantec quantified the meander belt in Reach I-5 through the application of standard belt width delineation methods (Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 2004). The final meander belt width of Indian Creek within the PDA was determined to be 68 m, which includes the maximum lateral extent of the existing channel and meander pattern, plus an erosion allowance.

Hydrologic findings indicate that existing and proposed condition flows are expected to be similar owing to the proposed stormwater management controls (AECOM 2015). Therefore, no changes to the existing Indian Creek Hydrologic Engineering Center-River Analysis System (HEC-RAS) hydraulic model flows were warranted.

6.3.5 Fish and Fish Habitat

Background records were reviewed to provide an overview of the aquatic habitat within the RAA, LAA, and PDA, and to determine potential locations of fish habitat that might be affected by the Project.

The Project RAA is located in the Bronte Creek watershed. The Bronte Creek watershed flows into western Lake Ontario and drains an area of over 300 km2 (Conservation Halton 2009). The LAA for fish and fish habitat includes the PDA as well as portions of Indian Creek and its tributaries that

File No. 160960844 141



are 100 m upstream and 300 m downstream of the PDA. The PDA, LAA and RAA are shown in Figure 1 of Appendix E.4.

Indian Creek is a major tributary to Bronte Creek, originating near the base of the Niagara Escarpment and converging with Bronte Creek, approximately 5 km downstream of the LAA. Indian Creek is a warm water system that supports a diverse fish community (Conservation Halton 2002, and 2009; AMEC 2013a, 2013b), but water quality is considered moderately to substantially impaired (Conservation Halton 2002), primarily as a result of riparian land-use, straightening of tributaries, low density of riparian vegetation, and the presence of on-line agricultural ponds.

A total of 12 water features were carried forward from the records review to the field assessment program. The field assessment program determined that two watercourses (Indian Creek and Tributary A to Indian Creek) support fish that are part of, or support, a Commercial, Recreational, or Aboriginal fishery (CRA fishery). An additional watercourse (Tributary C to Indian Creek) might support fish that are part of, or support a CRA fishery on a seasonal basis. The remaining nine of the twelve watercourses were not part of, or did not support a CRA fishery (Appendix E.4). Following a review of background information and data collected during field investigations, watercourses were assigned to the highest habitat quality ranking, where it met a least one of the following criteria within a ranking category:

• High Quality

− species present are highly sensitive to perturbations and are not resilient to change

− presence of spawning or other habitat critical to the survival of a species

− supports habitat for SAR

− habitat essential to sustaining a CRA fishery

− permanently flowing, cold and cool water systems that cannot easily buffer temperature changes or are not resilient to disturbance especially where unique or limited within an ecozone

• Moderate Quality

− species present are resilient to change and perturbation

− diverse fish community

− habitat used by one or more species for feeding, growth and migration

− typical of the fish habitat in the region. Large amount of similar habitat readily available

• Low Quality

− habitat with low productive capacity

− no suitable spawning habitat for sport fish and low or nil rearing potential for sport fish

142 File No. 160960844



− habitat has substantial limitations to contribute to a CRA fishery (e.g., sparse in-water and overhead cover, low flows, poor fish passage, no overwintering capacity)

− typically supports only forage fish species which are not limiting to a CRA fishery

− contributes only indirectly to a CRA fishery

− ephemeral watercourses that might not provide habitat for fish to complete one or more of their life processes, but might provide occasional habitat in high flows as well as flow and nutrients to downstream areas. These watercourses might also affect downstream areas through the transport of sediment and other deleterious substances

• Not Fish Habitat

− no direct or indirect contribution to downstream habitat

This ranking is based on guidance from DFO, MNRF, various Ontario Conservation Authorities and generally accepted practices and standards for assessing fish habitat in Ontario. The assigned rankings are generally consistent with rankings from Conservation Halton (2002 and 2009).

One fish SAR (Silver Shiner) has been historically recorded in the RAA (MNRF 2015b). However, there are no fish SAR or suitable habitat for fish SAR known to occur in the LAA. Silver Shiner is designated as threatened by the Committee on the Status of endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) and the Committee on the Status of Species at Risk in Ontario (COSSARO). It is not currently regulated under Schedule 1 of SARA.

The methods and results of the records review and field investigations are detailed further in Sections 4.0 and 5.0 of Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Fish and Fish Habitat Appendix E.4 respectively.

Tributary A

Tributary A within the PDA is an intermittently flowing watercourse with a warm water thermal regime (Conservation Halton 2002 and low diversity of substrate material and canopy cover, meaning it provides low to moderate quality fish habitat for spawning, overwintering, rearing, and migration (Appendix E.4).

Tributary B

Tributary B within the PDA is an unchannelized surficial drainage feature that does not support fish that are part of, or support a CRA fishery.

Tributary C

Tributary C to Indian Creek was identified using aerial photo interpretation. The feature originates outside the LAA and PDA, approximately 100 m southeast of Lower Base Line and 1 km northeast

File No. 160960844 143



of the CN tracks. It flows through the PDA and LAA, converging with Indian Creek outside of the PDA, approximately 200 m southwest of the intersection of Tremaine Road and Lower Base Line.

Based on the 2015 field investigations, Tributary C in the LAA is an intermittent, straightened, channelized watercourse that was assessed as providing low quality fish habitat for the performance of life functions such as spawning, overwintering, rearing and migration.

Indian Creek

Indian Creek is a major tributary to Bronte Creek and drains in a generally southeastern direction, from the base of the Niagara Escarpment and converges with Bronte Creek, approximately 5 km downstream of the LAA. Based on background data and field investigations, Indian Creek in the LAA is a permanently flowing, warm water system that supports a diverse fish community (Conservation Halton 2002, and 2009; AMEC 2013a, b) and moderate quality fish habitat. Fish community sampling by AECOM and Stantec (2013 and 2015 respectively) revealed the presence of 17 species of fish in the PDA.

6.3.6 Migratory birds and their Habitat

Breeding Birds

Breeding bird surveys were completed in 2013, 2014 and 2015, covering the LAA to confirm the locations of natural heritage features, migratory bird habitat, SAR or SAR habitat.

In total, 64 species of birds were observed; 57 of which are likely to be breeding in the LAA. No rare birds in Ontario or specialized habitat such as breeding colonies were identified. Table 5.6 of Appendix E.16 lists all species observed during breeding bird surveys in the LAA.

The majority of the species that were identified at the site are designated as migratory birds under the MBCA. Habitat for migratory birds within the LAA generally falls into three categories, which are common of agricultural settings:

• Woodlands – Oak-Maple dominated forest;

• Grassland – Consisting of hay, pasture and cultural meadows as well as some early successional/shrubland areas; and,

• Wetlands – Consisting of meadow marsh habitat.

These habitat types are shown on Figure 5, Appendix A of Appendix E.16. The most common species and their densities, as measured by the point count surveys, are summarized in Table 5.7 of Appendix E.16.

The most commonly observed species in the woodland habitat are relatively common and widespread in Ontario. No species that are considered area sensitive were observed. Species of special concern, specifically Eastern Wood-Pewee was observed in the habitat. Presence of

144 File No. 160960844



species such as Red-winged Blackbird and Song Sparrow are indicative to the woodland with clearings, some of which contained ponds. The woodland habitat occurred within the LAA and RAA, but outside of the PDA.

The most commonly observed species in the grassland habitat, including Red-winged Blackbird, Bobolink and Savannah Sparrow, are common species of agricultural lands. The grassland habitat also has representation of hedgerow or early successional species, such as Song Sparrow, Yellow Warbler, Gray Catbird and Brown Thrasher. Although not recorded by the point counts, Northern Harrier, an area sensitive grassland species, was also recorded during breeding bird surveys. Grassland habitat occurs in the PDA, LAA and RAA.

Few species were recorded in the wetland habitat point counts; likely the result of the small size of this type of habitat. The meadow marsh/farm pond composition of these features is indicative of some of the bird species observed, such as Red-winged Blackbird (meadow) and Spotted Sandpiper (pond). Other species observed, such as the Killdeer and Horned Lark are characteristic of the agricultural fields that surround these wetlands. Wetland habitat occurred in the PDA, LAA and RAA.

Seven bird species with SAR status were identified through the background review as potentially occurring with the LAA. Of these, five were identified during the field investigations.

• Barn Swallow – identified as threatened federally by COSEWIC and provincially (not yet listed on a SARA schedule);

− This species was observed in the barn in the western edge of the PDA. Eleven active nests were observed in this barn along the east side of Indian Creek on June 5, 2015. An additional pair of Barn Swallows was observed nesting under the bridge along Tremaine Road at the more southern crossing of Indian Creek (Figure 5, Appendix A of Appendix E.16). A total of 18 Barn Swallows were observed foraging in the LAA across the 2015 point counts.

• Bobolink – identified as threatened federally by the COSEWIC and provincially (not yet on a SARA schedule);

− This species was found in the hay and meadow fields in the LAA and PDA. Figure 5, Appendix A of Appendix E.16 shows the fields where Bobolink were observed. Within grassland habitat, Bobolink was recorded at a density of 10.4 pairs per 10 ha.

• Eastern Meadowlark– ranked threatened federally by the COSEWIC and provincially (not yet listed on a SARA schedule);

− This species was found in the hay and meadow fields in the LAA and PDA. Figure 5, Appendix A of Appendix E.16 shows the fields where Eastern Meadowlark were observed. Within grassland habitat, Eastern Meadowlark was recorded at a density of 3.4 pairs per 10 ha.

File No. 160960844 145



• Eastern Wood-Pewee – identified as a species of special concern federally by the COSEWIC and provincially (not yet listed on a SARA schedule);

− This species was observed in the southern woodland (FODM2) in the LAA, but outside of the PDA (Figure 5, Appendix A of Appendix E.16).

• Grasshopper Sparrow – identified as a species of special concern federally by the COSEWIC and provincially (not yet listed on a SARA schedule);

− This species was observed by AECOM in 2013; however, no observations of this species were made in 2014 or 2015. It is assumed that this species is not breeding in the LAA or PDA.

No bird species identified throughout the field surveys are currently listed on a schedule under SARA. As such, no critical habitat for breeding birds has been identified within the LAA or the PDA.

Natural Heritage Features

A desktop review resulted in the identification of six significant natural areas in the RAA (shown on Figure 1, Appendix A of Appendix E.16):

• Trafalgar Moraine Provincially Significant Earth Science ANSI;

• Britannia Wetlands Candidate Provincially Significant Life Science ANSI;

• Oakville-Milton Wetlands and Uplands Candidate Provincially Significant Life Science ANSI;

• North Oakville-Milton West Provincially-Significant Wetland Complex;

• Indian Creek Provincially-Significant Wetland Complex; and,

• Greenbelt Protected Countryside Area.

With the exception of a small portion of the Greenbelt Protected Countryside (limited to an overlap with the existing CN ROW), none of these features occur in the PDA. The ANSIs and the Greenbelt Protected Countryside Area occur within the LAA.

The Halton Region Official Plan (Regional Official Plan Amendment No. 38 [ROPA 38]) identifies the Indian Creek corridor and other drainage features in the LAA as key features, which are defined as:

• significant habitat of endangered and threatened species;

• significant wetlands;

• significant coastal wetlands;

• significant woodlands;

• significant valleylands;

• significant wildlife habitat;

146 File No. 160960844



• significant areas of natural and scientific interests; and,

• fish habitat.

The Bronte Creek Watershed Study identifies the Indian Creek corridor as an area for linkage enhancement opportunities. Furthermore, the watershed study includes recommendation for studies to be undertaken and enhancement opportunities should CN decide to develop the land. Specifically, the Bronte Creek Watershed Study recommends studies to achieve the following as part of the proposed development:

• increase riparian habitat;

• enhance and protect forest habitat;

• increase corridor and linkages; and,

• re-establish linkages between forest blocks.

Land Use and Vegetation Communities

The majority of the land at the site is comprised of agricultural land supporting row crops (i.e., soybeans, corn, wheat, etc.) with some of the fields also used to grow hay. Ecological Land Classification (ELC) boundary delineations are identified on Figure 4 (Appendix A of Appendix E.16), with a description of each vegetation community provided in Table 5.2 of Appendix E.16.

6.3.7 Species at Risk

Based on a review of background sources, SAR that potentially occur in the RAA include two plants, seven migratory birds, two reptiles, two amphibians and four mammals, as presented in Table 5.1 of Appendix E.16. The following sections describe species potentially found in the RAA and confirmation of those identified within the LAA and PDA for the Project.

Botanical Species

A total of 167 species of vascular plants were recorded within the LAA, of which 66% were native and 34% were non-native. Altogether, 94% of these native plants have a rank of S5, indicating they are common and secure within Ontario, and seven species (6%) have a rank of S4 (apparently secure).

None of the species observed had a conservatism value of 9 or 10. No federally or provincially endangered, threatened, or special concern species were found. A full botanical list is provided in Appendix E.16.

Two plants were identified as SAR in the background review: Butternut and Eastern Flowering Dogwood, which could occur in woodlands or hedgerows. These species are identified as endangered both provincially and federally. Neither species was observed in the LAA during the field investigations.

File No. 160960844 147



No threatened or endangered plant species were identified during the field surveys and no critical habitat for plant species at risk was identified within the LAA.

Amphibians

A total of five species of amphibians were heard during amphibian surveys.

One frog species with a SAR status was identified in the background review: Western Chorus Frog. This species is designated as threatened federally. The Western Chorus Frog was not observed within the LAA during the field investigations.

A single area of critical habitat for Western Chorus Frog was identified in the southern end of the LAA. No critical habitat was identified within the PDA.

Salamanders

One salamander SAR was identified through the background review; Jefferson Salamander, which is designated as endangered both provincially and federally. During surveys for Jefferson Salamander egg masses within the LAA, none were observed, and no critical habitat for the species has been identified.

Turtles

One turtle SAR was identified in the background review: Snapping Turtle which is ranked special concern both provincially and federally. Two turtle species were observed in the LAA: Midland Painted Turtle and Snapping Turtle. Eight Snapping Turtle observations were made in four different waterbodies; two within the LAA (2 outside the LAA). One Midland Painted Turtle was observed in the LAA and 21 were observed in wetlands outside of the LAA. No threatened or endangered turtle species were identified through the background review or field surveys and no critical habitat for turtle species at risk was identified within the LAA or PDA.

Bats

Three bat SAR were identified in the background review: Little Brown Myotis (formerly Little Brown Bat), Northern Myotis (formerly Northern Long-eared Bat) and Tri-coloured Bat (formerly Eastern Pipistrelle), all of which are designated as Endangered by the COSEWIC and have recently been added to Schedule 1 of the SARA. In Ontario, the Little Brown Myotis and Northern Myotis are listed as endangered. The Small-footed Bat is also listed as endangered in. The status of the Tri-coloured Bat is currently being evaluated in Ontario.

A bat habitat assessment and acoustic surveys were completed within the LAA. Results of the field surveys identified the presence of one federally endangered bat species, the Little Brown Myotis. A recovery strategy or critical habitat definition for the species has not yet been developed. Regardless, no significant habitat components (i.e., maternity colony or hibernacula) have been identified through the background review or field surveys. As such, no critical habitat for the species has been identified within the LAA or PDA.

148 File No. 160960844



Snakes

The Eastern Milksnake is listed as special concern by COSEWIC and is listed on Schedule 1 of the SARA. In Ontario, this species is considered a provincial species of special concern under the ESA.

No snakes were observed during area searches throughout the LAA or PDA. No specialized snake habitat components were observed during field surveys.

While no snakes were observed during the various surveys, it is likely that snakes are present within this agricultural environment. However, they are not considered to occur in high concentrations based on the habitat features present.

No threatened or endangered snake species were identified through the background review or field surveys and no critical habitat for snake species at risk was identified within the LAA or PDA.

A list of the wildlife species recorded during the various surveys is provided in Appendix C of Appendix E.16.

6.3.8 Traditional Land and Resource Use for Aboriginal Peoples

As described in Chapter 5, CN has engaged the following Aboriginal communities:

• MNCFN;

• Six Nations;

• Huron Wendat; and,

• MNO.

Profiles for each of these Aboriginal communities can be found in Section 5.5. Available information provided by MNCFN through consultation efforts and preliminary TLRU interviews and mapping sessions has been considered in this assessment. Should the Six Nations, Huron Wendat or MNO provide relevant TLRU information and approve it for release to the Project, it will inform Project planning.

The information collected has been categorized according to TRLU parameters, including:

• hunted and trapped species and hunting and trapping areas and activities;

• plant species and plant harvesting sites and activities;

• fish species and fishing areas and activities; and,

• cultural or spiritual practices, sites or areas.

File No. 160960844 149



The information was collected for the Bronte Creek Watershed. This area was selected because Bronte Creek is an area in which MNCFN practices traditional land use and harvesting activities. Bronte Creek is at least 2.5 km away from the PDA.

Hunted and Trapped Species and Hunting and Trapping Areas and Activities

Information obtained through the preliminary interviews and mapping sessions with the MNCFN indicates that hunting and trapping occur within their traditional territory, although no hunting and trapping areas or activities were identified within the Bronte Creek Watershed.

Plant Species and Plant Harvesting Sites and Activities

The MNCFN indicates that harvesting plants for food, medicinal and cultural purposes occur within their traditional territory. Specific to the Bronte Creek Watershed, they gather cedar near Bronte Creek.

Fish Species and Fishing Areas and Activities

Members of the MNCFN use Bronte Creek for fishing. This includes harvesting lake salmon and trout in the spring and fall and gathering salmon roe from spawning salmon for use as fishing bait.

Cultural or Spiritual Use Areas

The MNCFN use Bronte Creek as a spiritual use area to commemorate the passing of a deceased relative.

6.3.9 Socio-Economic Conditions

A Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report - Socio-Economic Baseline (Appendix E.12) was completed to detail local and regional socio-economic baseline conditions in the vicinity of the Project. Topics covered include demography, economy and employment, community services and infrastructure, land and resource use, and land use plans. These baseline conditions are summarized below.

Demography

The PDA is located in the Town of Milton in Halton Region, which is located in the western portion of the GTHA and Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH). Based on the latest estimates, the Town of Milton had a population of 98,000 in 2014 (Halton Region 2015a), while the population of Halton Region was estimated to be 530,924 (Halton Region 2015b). The Town of Milton and Halton Region have experienced high population growth since the Project was first announced; in 2001, the Town of Milton had a population of 31,471, while the population of Halton Region was 375,229 (Statistics Canada 2007a; 2007b). Population growth projections suggest the Town of Milton and Halton Region will continue to grow, reaching population of 228,084 and 815,000 residents, respectively, by 2031 (Dillon Consulting Ltd. et al. 2011a; Hemson Consulting Ltd. 2013).

150 File No. 160960844



Economy and Employment

The economies of the Town of Milton, Halton Region and the GGH are characterized by a mix of businesses in the goods-producing and services sectors (Halton Region 2015a; Hemson Consulting Ltd. 2012). In 2014, the Town of Milton had 1,927 businesses (13.8% of all businesses in Halton), which employed 30,212 people (Halton Region 2015a). Eighty-two per cent of all jobs in the Town of Milton were related to the services sector and 18% were in the goods-producing sector, reflecting a similar split to Halton Region (Halton Region 2015a).

From 2001 to 2011, the economy of the GGH grew steadily as manufacturing job losses were offset by job increases construction and services sectors, including the transportation and warehousing sectors (Hemson Consulting Ltd. 2012). In the broader region, jobs related to transportation and warehousing, and goods distribution more generally, tend to be located in suburban areas, including Halton Region (Strategic Projections Inc. 2013). Within Halton Region, growth in goods distribution sectors has tended to concentrate in the Town of Milton and Town of Halton Hills, likely due to better transportation access (Metropolitan Knowledge International 2008). At the same time that goods distribution jobs have increased in the Town of Milton, so, too, has the inventory of industrial space, with the Town of Milton leading the GTHA in new industrial space (Cushman & Wakefield 2015).

Employment in the Town of Milton, Halton Region and GGH is forecast to increase over the next 15 to 25 years (Dillon Consulting Ltd. et al. 2011a; Hemson Consulting Ltd. 2013), with Halton Region anticipated to host 466,000 jobs by 2041 (Hemson Consulting Ltd. 2013).

Community Services and Infrastructure

The Town of Milton and Halton Region are located within the most highly urbanized area of Canada, the GGH. The Town, Region and Province provide numerous services to residents, including all typical municipal services and infrastructure such as emergency services, solid waste and recycling, potable water treatment, distribution and liquid was management, health care services and recreation. Non-public services are also available, such as housing, recreational activities and tourism accommodations. Transportation services are discussed in the following sub-section.

Rapid population growth in the Town of Milton and Halton Region has placed pressure on community services and infrastructure, including shelter costs and availability, capacity constraints related to water and waste water treatment and regional solid waste management. To accommodate growth, service upgrades and expansions have been carried out or planned. Specific examples of upgrades are discussed in the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report - Socio-Economic Baseline (Appendix E.12).

File No. 160960844 151



Transportation

This section provides a summary of road transportation infrastructure and capacity issues in Halton Region and the GGH. Other types of transportation infrastructure, including rail and transit services, are presented in Appendix E.12.

The PDA is bordered by two local municipal roads (First Line and Lower Base Line) and two regional roads (Britannia and Tremaine) and is intersected by the CN mainline. The Town of Milton is responsible for construction, maintenance and upgrading of local municipal roads, bridges and culverts within its territory. Halton Region is responsible for the construction, maintenance and upgrading of the regional road network and its associated infrastructure. Regional roads that intersect the Town of Milton are Derry Road, Britannia Road, Steeles Avenue, Regional Road 25, Dundas Road, Trafalgar Road, Guelph Line, Tremaine Road and James Snow Parkway. Provincial highways that enter or intersect Halton Region are Highway 401, QEW, Highway 407, Highway 403, Highway 7, and Highway 6.

Halton Region’s road network is considered to operate well (Halton Region 2014b). In 2013, it had the least congested travel corridors in the GGH compared to all other regional municipalities and the majority of existing regional road infrastructure has been assessed as being in “good condition” as per the latest published Transportation Services Report for Halton Region (Halton Region 2014b).

Regional roads and provincial highways, along with rail infrastructure, are particularly important to the movement of goods. All regional roads in Halton Region are classified and designed to accommodate transportation by truck (Dillon Consulting Ltd. et. al 2011b). In comparison, many local roads are not, which has resulted in the need for several municipalities in Halton Region, including the Town of Milton, to enact by-laws prohibiting the heavy commercial traffic on municipal neighbourhood streets, unless no major arterial roads provide access to the destination or pick-up location (Corporation of the Town of Milton 2008; Dillon Consulting Ltd. et. al 2011b).

As identified in the Halton TMP, future growth in Halton Region will require upgrades to the regional road network. Of the $2.4 billion in capital investments by 2031 proposed for Halton Region, $430 million would be spent between 2013 and 2016 to increase the capacity of five thoroughfares in the Town of Milton, including Tremaine Road, Britannia Road and Regional Road 25 (Dillon Consulting Ltd. et. al 2011c).

The Halton TMP lays out capital road projects in the LAA, including the widening of Britannia Road, Tremaine Road and Regional Road 25. As part of the Regional Road Improvement Program, the following road improvements are scheduled to be completed by 2016:

• widening of Britannia Road between Tremaine Road and Highway 407, with the creation of a grade separation at the CN rail crossing;

152 File No. 160960844



• widening of Tremaine Road between Britannia Road and Campbellville Road, with a grade separation at the CP rail crossing; and,

• widening of Regional Road 25 between Derry Road and Highway 407 (Halton Region n.d. b).

Land Use

Provincial Policy Statement

In Section 1.6.8 of Ontario’s 2014 Provincial Policy Statement (PPS), the importance of infrastructure such as rail and major goods movement facilities is recognized, and planning authorities are required to protect such infrastructure to meet current and projected needs. Furthermore, Section 1.2.6 of the PPS mentions that sensitive land uses should be buffered to ensure the long-term viability of major facilities.

Land Use Plans

Within Halton Region, there are a number of plans that function at the municipal and regional level. These plans form a hierarchy, with a requirement that lower level plans (e.g., municipal) conform with higher level plans (e.g., regional) and that local municipalities amend zoning to conform to these plans. Regional plans must also conform to provincial plans and be consistent with provincial policy direction.

Objectives and goals of the plans that overlap the assessment areas are briefly discussed below. A more detailed description of land use plans is provided in Section 5.4.1 of Appendix E.11 and Appendix E.12. Also identified are development constraints and conditions that are related to the Project.

Halton Region Official Plan

The Halton Region Official Plan was adopted by Halton Region in 2009 to provide direction for the future physical development of Halton Region. The Halton Region Official Plan identifies three principal categories of land use:

• settlement areas with identifiable communities;

• a rural countryside where agriculture is the preferred and predominant activity; and,

• a natural heritage system that is integrated within settlement areas and the rural countryside, to preserve and enhance the biological diversity and ecological functions of Halton (Halton Region 2014a).

The PDA intersects designated land use areas defined as Urban Area, Agricultural Area, Regional Natural Heritage System, Employment Area and Future Strategic Employment Area (Figure 5, Appendix A of Appendix E.12). The objectives of these designated land use areas are as follows:

File No. 160960844 153



• Urban Areas are intended to aid in planning and investment for a balance of jobs and housing in communities across Halton Region to reduce the need for long distance commuting and to increase the modal share for transit and active transportation.

• Objectives of the Agricultural Area designation are the preservation of prime agricultural areas, including Agricultural Area and Regional Natural Heritage System, and the maintenance of agricultural lands for future use (Section 99 of the Halton Region Official Plan). Additionally, this designation protects farms from incompatible activities and land uses which would limit agricultural productivity or efficiency. Agriculture is the primary land use within the Agricultural System; however, it should be noted that Section 100 of the Halton Region Official Plan states that the Halton Region Waste Management Site is authorized in the Agricultural Area (Halton Region 2014a).

• The Regional Natural Heritage System designation is intended to help preserve and enhance the biological diversity and ecological functions within Halton Region for future generations. Specific objectives of this land use designation include maintaining landscape quality, to support agricultural activity, to preserve native species and to preserve and enhance air quality.

• Employment Areas are intended to accommodate forecast economic growth, to provide opportunities for a diversified economic base, and to locate employment areas in the vicinity of major transportation infrastructure within the Urban Area (Section 77.1 of the Halton Region Official Plan 2009). Halton Region Official Plan does not stipulate permitted uses within the Employment Area designation; however, as per Policy 77.4(1), residential and non-employment uses are prohibited within Employment Area designations (Bousfields Inc. 2015).

• Future Strategic Employment Areas are intended to protect strategically located lands from incompatible uses with respect to major transportation facilities so that the lands are suited for employment purposes to meet employment land needs beyond the planning horizon of 2031. Regional policy regarding these lands prohibits their re-designation to uses that are incompatible with employment uses in the long term, especially non-farm uses such as institutional and recreational uses (Halton Region 2014b).

Halton Region Transportation Master Plan

The 2011 Halton TMP is another planning policy document prepared by Halton Region. It recommends improving roadways, engaging in the study and discussion of goods movement at a regional level, enhancing active transportation, implementing transportation demand management programs and promoting transit ridership through land use planning. In it, Halton Region acknowledges that CN owns lands in Milton for which it has a long-range plan for an intermodal facility. This plan recognizes the benefits of intermodal transportation, as outlined in the Planning Justification Report (Appendix E.11) and the Review of Terminal-Generated Truck Traffic (Appendix E.17).

154 File No. 160960844



Town of Milton Official Plan

The Town of Milton Official Plan (Figure 6, Appendix A of Appendix E.12) serves as the primary tool for making land use decisions and for change management within the Town of Milton. The 2008 consolidation of the Town of Milton Official Plan is the most current in-force version of the official plan as the 2010 amendment is currently pending approval by Halton Region (Town of Milton 2008).

Boyne Survey Secondary Plan

The Boyne Survey Secondary Plan, a residential development area, was adopted by the Town of Milton in 2010 through an amendment to the Town of Milton Official Plan (Amendment 30) and approved by the Halton Region in 2013. (Figure 7, Appendix A of Appendix E.12). The area is approximately 930 ha (2,300 acres) in size and is bounded by Louis St. Laurent Avenue to the north, James Snow Parkway to the east, Britannia Road to the south and Tremaine Road to the west (Town of Milton n.d.). The Boyne Survey Secondary Plan Area is located in the Milton Urban Expansion Area directly north of the Terminal in the LAA. Portions of the new rail tracks will be built within CN’s existing ROW that cuts across the Boyne Survey Secondary Plan Area.

The Niagara Escarpment Plan

The Niagara Escarpment Plan (2005) overlaps Halton Region and a small area of the LAA for Land Use (defined in Section 6.5.5) (Figure 8, Appendix A of Appendix E.12). The small area overlapping the LAA is defined as an Escarpment Rural Area and is approximately 1.1 km away from the PDA.

Parkway Belt West Plan

The Parkway Belt West Plan (1978) overlaps Halton Region and a small section of the LAA (MMAH 1978). The Parkway Belt West Plan (1978) describes two types of areas (Public Use Areas and Complementary Use Areas) linked by six utility corridors. Four of the utility corridors (i.e., the Escarpment Link, Burlington-Oakville Mini-Belt, the Southern Link, Northern Link Milton-Woodbridge) overlap Halton Region (MMAH 1978). None of the areas identified in the original 1978 plan or the most recent amendment (2008) overlap the PDA, but there is overlap with the LAA (Figure 9, Appendix A of Appendix E.12).

Agricultural Land Use

Lands within the PDA consist primarily of active agricultural lands, the majority of which are used in the cultivation of row crops (i.e., soybeans, corn, wheat, etc.) with some of the fields also used to grow hay. Agricultural lands within the PDA are owned by CN and are leased to individual farmers.

Utilities, Oil and Gas Facilities and Mineral Tenure

CN possesses existing agreements with the utility entities. The majority of the existing utility crossings will not interact with the Project components as they are located at an appropriate

File No. 160960844 155



depth or possess adequate wall or casing thickness. Two existing petroleum pipelines owned by Sun-Canadian will require relocation as a result of the Project. Additional detail regarding these pipelines and other utilities are provided in Chapter 3.

There is no mineral activity within the PDA. An analysis of GIS data notes that a single abandoned petroleum well that predates 1921 records is located outside of the PDA, but within the LAA (see Figures 1, 2, 3 and 4 in Appendix E.12). It is presumed that this well is abandoned as it occurs within an area already developed for residential use. The original operator of the well is unknown.

Hunting, Fishing and Other Harvesting

The PDA and LAA are located within Wildlife Management Unit (WMU) 79D, which covers the southern portion of Halton Region bounded by Highway 401, Highway 403 and Sir Winston Churchill Boulevard, the shore of Lake Ontario and Highway 6 and Millburough Line. The PDA offers limited high-quality wildlife habitat given its level of agricultural activity and the relative proximity of urban areas. As a result, opportunities for hunting are limited. Within the limits of the Town of Milton, which includes the entirety of the LAA, By-Law No. 80-95 prohibits the discharge of a firearm, including crossbows and longbows. Exceptions to this are related to the protection of livestock. Based on this prohibition, there should be no recreational hunting within the LAA.

The PDA is within Fish Management Zone 16 (Government of Ontario 2015) and Bait Harvest Area AU0003. There is no known bait harvesting within the PDA or LAA. There is also no evidence of recreational fishing activity within Indian Creek, although it has been identified as habitat supporting a CRA fishery. There is also no evidence of an active recreational fishery elsewhere in the PDA or LAA for Land Use (defined in Section 6.5.5). Additional details on fish and fish habitat are available in the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report - Fish and Fish Habitat (Appendix E.4).

Navigation

Within the PDA, there are no ‘Scheduled Waters’ as listed under the Navigation Protection Act (2014); however, Indian Creek may be considered navigable as per the Navigation Protection Act and Common Law Right to Navigation. However, the existing potential for navigation in Indian Creek in the PDA is limited by varying water levels and the presence of a wire agricultural fence where the watercourse first enters the PDA. A similar fence is located across the Tributary A channel at the downstream end, upstream of where the channel flows through a set of culverts and discharging into Indian Creek. The agricultural fences are an existing barrier to navigation within Tributary A and Indian Creek.

No boating has been identified within the LAA for Land Use (defined in Section 6.5.5); however, there are a number of watercourses that have the potential for navigation. These watercourses have no interaction with the Project.

156 File No. 160960844



Recreational Land Use, Land Use Facilities, and Tourism

Cycling

Cycling is a popular activity and may draw cyclists from outside Halton Region. Within the LAA for Land Use (defined in Section 6.5.5). There are five established cycling routes (Figure 10, Appendix A of Appendix E.12). Of these routes, only the Lower Base Line route intersects with the PDA. No dedicated bike lanes or paths occur within the PDA.

The Mattamy National Cycling Centre was constructed in 2015 and is located outside the PDA, but within the LAA (defined in Section 6.5.5).

Other Recreational Facilities and Tourism Areas

The Town of Milton is part of Escarpment CountryTM, which attracts more than 1.5 million visitors to the area each year (Escarpment Country™ and the Milton Chamber of Commerce 2015). Attractions within the LAA consist of the cycling routes and Mattamy National Cycling Centre discussed above, as well as a number of hard surface trails for recreational use and the Rattlesnake Point Golf Club. A trail running along Louis St-Laurent Avenue between Tremaine Road and First Line/Bronte Street has been proposed. There are no trails, parks, conservation areas or reserves, campgrounds, boat launches, or golf courses in the PDA.

6.3.10 Health Conditions

Baseline conditions for human health have been established using predictive quantitative risk assessment to assess potential health risks associated with exposures to existing chemical concentrations measured in the environment. Inhalation of outdoor air was determined to be the only applicable exposure pathway by which human receptors may be exposed to the COPCs during construction and operation phases of the Project; therefore, the evaluation of baseline conditions focused on ambient background air quality in the LAA.

The ambient background air quality in the LAA was evaluated using 2009-2013 data from the nearest NAPS monitoring stations. The review of ambient air monitoring data shows that the measured hourly, 24-hour and annual ambient levels for all COPCs are below the relevant air quality standards with the exception of benzene and B(a)P(i.e., used as a surrogate of total PAHs) annual average average background levels which are currently above their applicable air quality standards. In rural and urban areas, anthropogenic sources such as vehicular traffic and incomplete combustion of organic material and fossil fuels produce the majority of the PAHs (including B(a)P) found in the air; consequently, because of such widespread sources, PAHs are ubiquitous contaminants in both the general environment and in certain working environments (MOE 2011b). For benzene, the anthropogenic sources include automobile exhaust and fugitive emissions from gas stations, as well as a wide variety of other industrial activities such as steel manufacturing facilities (MOE 2011a).

File No. 160960844 157



Monitoring of ambient air quality at the Project was initiated in early August 2015. The ongoing data collection of air quality parameters will continue for the next several months, once sufficient data are collected, the data will be analyzed and compared to the published air quality data used as the basis of this assessment.

6.3.11 Cultural Heritage Resources

The Peel Plain was known throughout the 19th century for its wheat growing as the fertile clay soils were ideal for agriculture. In 1881, 73% of the land was cleared with all but 11% assigned to agriculture (Ontario Agricultural Commission 1881). These conditions, alongside a close vicinity to larger markets, established the Peel Plain as a key supplier for the City of Toronto and for exporting grains to the United States (Chapman and Putnam 1984). Agricultural activity has decreased recently to accommodate for rapid population growth and development, although lands between urban centres are often occupied by active cash crop agriculture and pasture.

The Town of Milton identified 17 protected properties within the project LAA, including one designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. The majority of potential cultural heritage resources (CHRs) identified were constructed between 1875 and 1900; there were five potential early 20th century residences identified. Most properties contained farmsteads, which include both a 19th century residence and a 19th century barn. A small number of residential properties were identified, one of which contained a school house that had been converted for residential use. Finally, one property contained a small concrete building.

The cultural heritage resources identified are characteristic of the history of the area and represent three distinct phases of residential construction. The first phase of construction is represented by a small number of structures constructed in and around the mid-19th century. Following the initial settlement phase, and the transition from sustenance farming into cash crop agriculture and dairy, much of which was facilitated by the development of the railway, a second phase of construction is represented by the late 19th century structures. During the last quarter of the 19th century, materials became more readily available as did the economic means to build a brick structure. A series of economic boom and bust cycles resulted in construction of a large number of residential structures, many of which remain today throughout the area and the province. Finally, the early 20th century was generally a less prosperous economic period which is represented in the small number of residential structures constructed. The resources identified in the LAA are characteristic of this distribution.

6.3.12 Archaeology

Known archaeological sites within the LAA were identified based on a review of the Ontario Archaeological Sites Database (ASDB) maintained by the Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport (MTCS) and previously conducted archaeological assessments in and adjacent to the LAA. An examination of the ASDB has shown that 30 archaeological sites had been registered within a one km radius of the LAA. Of the 30 archaeological sites, 29 are pre-contact Aboriginal and one is Euro-Canadian. None of these sites are located within the PDA.

158 File No. 160960844



No previously identified archaeological sites were determined to be located within the PDA and no previous archaeological assessment had occurred within the limits of the PDA. Based on the Stage 1 archaeological assessment, the majority of the PDA was identified to have the potential to contain archaeological resources.

The Stage 2 archaeological assessment of the PDA resulted in the identification of a total of 60 archaeological resources. Of these, 14 met criteria for further assessment, including 10 pre-contact aboriginal sites, 3 Euro-Canadian historic period sites and one multi-component (pre-contact and Euro-Canadian) site. Further details on the artefacts encountered within the PDA are provided in Appendix E.14.

6.3.13 Paleontology

The PDA is underlain by bedrock that was deposited in an ancient coastal environment more than 440 million years ago. The rocks contain the fossilized remains of ancient sea creatures, including clams, snails, corals and trilobites. This bedrock is covered by thick layers of glacial sediments that are not fossiliferous. The glacial sediments are so thick that the underlying fossiliferous bedrock will not be disturbed.

6.4 PREDICTED CHANGES TO THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT

Project-related changes to the atmospheric environment, groundwater and surface water, and the terrestrial landscape are presented below.

6.4.1 Changes to the Atmospheric Environment

The construction and operation of the Project will result in changes to air quality, noise and light.

6.4.1.1 Air Quality

The Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPCs) assessed included criteria air contaminants (CACs): nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), sulphur dioxide (SO2), particulate matter (PM, including PM10 and PM2.5), and speciated volatile organic compounds (VOCs) including benzene, 1,3-butadiene, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acrolein and B(a)P(B(a)P) (PAH – Poly Aromatic Hydrocarbon, accepted indicator is B(a)P). Other emissions such as Diesel Particulate matter (DPM), Ozone (O3), Ammonia (NH3) are also addressed qualitatively in our analysis and discussion.

The main air emission sources for the existing CN operations are locomotives passing on the mainline. The air emission sources for the Terminal will be locomotives passing by and on-site, non-road equipment (e.g., stackers, hostlers, heated or cooled containers), stationary equipment (generators), and on-road mobile equipment (trucks). Air emissions are generated from fossil fuel combustion (such as low sulphur diesel, etc.) in mobile and stationary equipment engines.

File No. 160960844 159



Emissions from the temporary construction activities on-site will primarily be from construction equipment fuel combustion and dust emissions from the construction activities. This includes the various phases of site preparation, land clearing and Project construction.

Emissions from the Terminal operating alone (i.e., excluding the existing background contribution) predict concentrations of all COPCs to be below their respective air quality criteria at all off-site receptors, except for B(a)P. The maximum off-property 24-hour and annual average B(a)P concentrations are predicted to be above the referenced project criteria. There are no specific federal criteria. Predicted off property concentrations are approximately ten times and seventeen times the referenced applicable criteria, and occur frequently (82% of the time emissions will exceed the 24 hour criteria, 100 % of the time emissions will exceed the annual criteria). Further very basic analysis of dispersion modelling results show that B(a)P emissions dispersed from the Terminal operating alone are predicted to occur just below the allowable criteria approximately 900 m from the property line.

Emissions from the Terminal Project alone are predicted to be below the applicable applied air quality criteria for all COPCs at all special receptors in all directions around the Project area except for B(a)P. The maximum Ground Level Concentrations (GLCs) of B(a)P predicted at the special receptors are 0.00018 μg/m3 and 0.00004 μg/m3, respectively. As discussed above, levels of B(a)P, higher than the applicable criteria, are commonly measured in Ontario, in both industrialized and remote areas.

When considering cumulative emissions from the Terminal in the context of background air quality, emissions modelling predicts the maximum cumulative concentrations of all COPCs at all off property receptors to be below their respective criteria, except for PM10, PM2.5, benzene and B(a)P, as follows:

• Cumulative concentrations above the Ontario AAQC for PM10 are predicted to occur within 20 to 45 m of the facility property line towards First Line and towards Tremaine Road. These areas are open spaces with no special receptors. Cumulative PM10 concentrations above the criteria are expected to be infrequent, occurring no more than 1.4% of the time.

• Cumulative concentrations above the Federal CAAQS for PM2.5 are predicted to occur within 45-m of the facility property line towards First Line and towards Tremaine Road. These areas are open spaces with no special receptors. Cumulative PM2.5 concentrations above the criteria are expected to be infrequent, occurring no more than 2.7% of the time).

• The maximum off-property annual average cumulative benzene concentration is predicted to be above the referenced criteria; however this is due to the current background concentration already being above its threshold without any contribution from the Project. The Project contribution to the maximum off-property cumulative benzene concentration is predicted to be no more than 10.5% of the maximum cumulative concentration.

160 File No. 160960844



• The maximum off-property 24-hour and annual average cumulative B(a)P concentration are predicted to be above the referenced MOECC criteria. The Project contribution is predicted to be 45% and 41%, respectively, of the maximum 24–hour and annual average cumulative concentration. The background concentrations alone are above the 24-hour and the annual criteria by approximately thirteen times and twenty-five times, respectively, without any contribution from the Project operation.

In regards to special receptors, the maximum predicted cumulative concentrations of all COPCs are predicted to be below their respective criteria at all nearby special receptors, with the exception of benzene for an annual averaging period (due to the existing benzene background levels) and B(a)P for 24-hour and annual averaging periods. The contribution from the Project operations to cumulative benzene concentrations is relatively minor (no more than a maximum of 2% of criteria for a limited duration). For B(a)P, the Project contribution to the cumulative 24-hour and the annual average B(a)P concentrations are 22% and 15%, respectively, of the maximum cumulative concentrations. Approximately 80% of the 24-hour and annual exceedances concentrations above the threshold are attributed to background levels.

During construction, the maximum predicted concentrations of all the COPCs from the Project alone are below their respective criteria at all the special receptors around the Project property. When considering background levels, the maximum predicted cumulative concentrations for the Project of all COPCs are below their respective criteria at the special receptors, except tor for benzene and B(a)P. These exceedances are attributed to the high background levels of these COPCs. The maximum predicted contributions from the Project construction activities at the most impacted receptor for benzene and B(a)P are minor, as follows:

• contribution of benzene from construction is 2.5% of the annual background concentration; and,

• contributions of B(a)P from the Project construction activities are predicted to be 3.9% and 1.6% respectively of its referenced 24-hour and annual background concentrations.

In summary, the determination of predicted changes followed a conservative approach in terms of establishing baseline conditions and predicting emission source estimates. Conservative methods used to establish the background or baseline criteria, such as using data from published emissions monitoring data, clearly identify a potential concern with the background benzene and B(a)P levels. A sensitivity analysis of the on-site data currently being collected will be of interest to determine whether the site monitoring data can be used to reduce the conservative background or baseline data values that form the basis of this assessment.

Cumulative contributions from the Project and baseline conditions do show some potential emissions above the respective criteria for the emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), sulphur dioxide (SO2), particulate matter (PM, including PM10 and PM2.5), and many speciated volatile organic compounds (VOCs). However, where values above the criteria are predicted to occur, occurrences would be within approximately 45 m of the PDA, take

File No. 160960844 161



place in empty open field like situations located away from any special receptors, and would occur infrequently.

The benzene and B(a)P emissions have no applicable federal criteria. Ontario based criteria is used for reference. From the expected potential background or baseline predictions, both COPCs already exceed the applicable criteria, before considering any proposed project emissions. There appears to be a common province wide concern in Ontario. This conclusion regarding the common concern is based on review of background information regarding the published air quality monitoring information for benzene and B(a)P in many specific locations. Ontario recently adopted new and reduced criteria for these two COPCs, which were used in this assessment.

Potential Benzene and B(a)P emissions from the Project operations alone case are predicted to be above the criteria immediately off property, and are expected to be below the criteria after 900 m from the PDA. With the background baseline expected to be above both benzene and B(a)P criteria, adding the Project alone emissions (also above the expected criteria), the cumulative case for benzene and B(a)P is also above applicable criteria.

For further detail information refer to the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report - Air Quality (Appendix E.1).

6.4.1.2 Noise and Vibration

Construction noise sources include the operation of several types of construction machinery, such as excavators, loaders, graders, and other equipment. Operational noise will be from unmitigated generator sets, and sources operating within the Terminal pad (such as reach stacker movement, loading/unloading, hostler movement, and mechanically protected containers). Mainline railway traffic, which currently contributes to the acoustical environment at most PORs in the area, is not expected to change considerably as a result of the Project (Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Noise Effects Assessment (Appendix E.10)).

Consistent with the CTA methodology, noise assessment methods included both the U.S. Federal Transit Administration (FTA) methods for transportation-related sources (rail) and ISO 9613 for stationary sources. Based on preliminary Project design drawings and site-specific information, noise effects at sensitive points of reception (PORs) were determined. With noise mitigation measures in place the change in the acoustical environment due to the Project (i.e., construction and operation) is considered acceptable and the noise effects from the Project will be in line with both the FTA and Health Canada criteria.

Ground borne vibration from Project operation is not predicted to create a vibration level higher than what already exists. The vibration levels from Project construction are also predicted to be within an acceptable range. Therefore, the assessment concludes that no vibration mitigation

162 File No. 160960844



measures are required (Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Vibration Effects Assessment (Appendix E.18)).

6.4.1.3 Light

Lighting during construction will be temporary and directed to local work areas. While some focused periods of night time construction work will be required (for example, paving operations require continuous activity to minimize surface seams), careful location of the temporary and mobile lighting systems that are expected will allow operation in close proximity to the work area for relatively short periods of time with minimal offsite light effects.

One operation, the Terminal will add background light to the area. Predicted light changes at nearby receptors carried out on the preliminary lighting design shows lighting impact on nearby residences to the proposed Terminal to be well below 10% of the E3 environmental zone allowable 2 lux light spill guideline.

Once operational, the Terminal will add additional background light to the area, but the additional light is estimated to be below 10% of the allowable guidelines available from international sources.

6.4.2 Changes to Groundwater and Surface Water

6.4.2.1 Channel Realignment Water Quality Conditions

Changes to water quality will result from the channel realignment. Channel realignment plantings and live stakes within the banks and riparian areas and instream features (i.e., woody toe debris protection) will increase shade over the Tributary A and Indian Creek channel realigned and enhanced sections. The shaded areas have the potential to reduce instream water temperatures and increase dissolved oxygen concentrations.

6.4.2.2 Hydrological and Hydrometric Conditions

Changes to hydrologic and hydrometric conditions (surface water quantity) during the construction phase include modifications to localized drainage and to the water balance within the PDA and may extend into the LAA. Mean annual flows and flood flows within Indian Creek and Tributary A are not expected to change. Tributary B mean annual and flood flows will be lower with surface run-off diverted to SWM Pond 2 discharging upstream of the Tributary B outlet. A portion of regional flows to Tributary A will be diverted along the regional diversion ditch directly to Indian Creek upstream of Tremaine Road (prior to Indian Creek exiting the PDA). The regional storm event diversion for Tributary A will result in reductions in channel flow into Tributary A and Indian Creek from the Tributary A discharge location and be transferred to where the regional diversion ditch enters Indian Creek. The expected flow rate downstream of the PDA along Indian Creek is not expected to be affected by the diversion ditch. There is no predicted increase in Regional storm event floodline elevations within the PDA and downstream of the PDA

File No. 160960844 163



within Tributary A and Indian Creek. There is no anticipated change in local hydrology outside of the PDA mainline ROW for the section within the Fourteen Mile Creek watershed.

6.4.2.3 Site Drainage Water Quality Conditions

Changes to water quality during construction will be a result of altered drainage, leaching, erosion and use of construction materials.

Localized surface water and sediment quality are expected to improve during operations with respect to instream sediments, nutrients, and metals within Tributary A and Indian Creek as a result of the SWM system and improvements to Indian Creek.

6.4.2.4 Groundwater Recharge/Discharge Areas

The disruption in local pre-construction groundwater flow patterns is not expected to be changed given that groundwater flowing towards Indian Creek does not discharge into this watercourse (i.e., Indian Creek loses water to the subsurface, recharging the underlying groundwater system). Consequently, the potential diversion of groundwater flow away from Indian Creek would not affect the hydraulic function of this surface water feature.

6.4.2.5 Infiltration Areas

The PDA is covered by a surficial aquitard consisting of low permeability sandy to silty clay deposits, which would impede the infiltration of an inadvertent release to the subsurface. During construction, surfaces will be paved and will further decrease infiltration potential.

6.4.2.6 Surface Imperviousness

A post-construction water balance assessment for the PDA was performed based on the United States Geological Survey monthly water balance model (McCabe and Markstrom 2007). Compared to the pre-construction water balance, the post-construction model indicates that the projected increase in imperviousness in the PDA will result in annual infiltration being reduced from 92 mm to 68 mm, representing an annual infiltration loss of 24 mm.

Local private wells draw their water supply from either deeper, higher permeability overburden deposits or the bedrock aquifer, which are hydraulically separated from the upper overburden of the PDA. Consequently, excavation and construction throughout the PDA is very unlikely to affect groundwater quantities in these neighbouring wells.

Similarly, precipitation that infiltrates the soils within the PDA does not recharge the groundwater table due to the low permeability of the soils. This water table does not discharge to Indian Creek or other onsite surface water features and, ultimately, a reduction in infiltration due to the Project will not impact the hydraulic function of these features. Finally, the annual infiltration estimated to occur within the PDA (i.e., 92 mm) is notably lower than the average infiltration that

164 File No. 160960844



occurs throughout the Source Water Protection Area in which the PDA resides (i.e., 135 mm), suggesting that there are areas beyond the PDA that are more important in sustaining the recharge function of the regional groundwater system.

6.4.3 Changes to Terrestrial Landscape

The terrestrial landscape in the area is comprised of agricultural fields with isolated woodlands and wetlands as well as sparse hedgerows. The PDA consists of 177.5 ha, which will be directly changed by construction of the Project. The majority of this area consists of active agricultural in annual row crops (i.e., soya, corn, wheat). A portion of this area, 50.9 ha, consists of perennial hay fields or fallow fields. Approximately 3.7 ha of wetlands occur within the PDA, which will be directly altered through construction and wetland enhancement measures. No woodlands occur within the PDA and therefore no direct changes to this habitat types are anticipated. During operation of the Project, habitats in the adjacent terrestrial landscape may be changed through sensory disturbance that may occur, however most wildlife species in this area are already well adapted to human activity and disturbance.

Changes to migratory bird or SAR habitats are discussed in Section 6.5.2 and 6.5.3, respectively.

6.5 PREDICTED EFFECTS ON VALUED COMPONENTS


6.5.1.1 Rationale for VC Selection

Environmental effects on fish and fish habitat (including aquatic SAR and SAR habitat) are assessed within the fish and fish habitat VC. This VC is included in consideration of its ecological importance, the socio-economic importance of fisheries resources (i.e., target fish species), the legislated protection of fish and fish habitat (including SAR), and the nature of potential Project-VC interactions. Additionally, it is identified in the CEAA EIS Guidelines for the Project.


Fisheries Act

Federal management of fisheries resources is the mandate of DFO; the regulatory agency that is responsible for implementing the requirements of the Fisheries Act. Modifications to fish and fish habitat are regulated by the requirements of the Fisheries Act which “aims to provide for the sustainability and ongoing productivity of commercial, recreational and Aboriginal fisheries” or fish that support such a fishery. The definitions of fish and fish habitat follow those as per the Fisheries Act:

File No. 160960844 165



• “fish” includes (a) parts of fish, (b) shellfish, crustaceans, marine animals and any parts of shellfish, crustaceans or marine animals, and (c) the eggs, sperm, spawn, larvae, spat and juvenile stages of fish, shellfish, crustaceans and marine animals; and,

• “fish habitat” means spawning grounds and any other areas, including nursery, rearing, food supply and migration areas, on which fish depend directly or indirectly to carry out their life processes.

Commercial, recreational and Aboriginal fisheries are defined by the Fisheries Act as follows:

• Commercial fisheries are recognized as fish species harvested under licence for the purpose of sale.

• Recreational fisheries are recognized as fish species harvested for personal use or sport, as well as coarse and forage fish which support this fishery.

• Aboriginal fisheries are recognized as fish species harvested by Aboriginal groups for subsistence, social or ceremonial purposes.

Quality of fish habitat incorporates a variety of biophysical parameters, including substrate, cover, hydrology, channel morphology, and flow. Water quality parameters that influence habitat suitability for fish include temperature, dissolved oxygen (DO), total suspended sediment, turbidity, toxic substances [(chronic and acute) that act outside DO or sediment pathways: e.g., some metals, salt, greases, endocrine disrupters etc.)], and pH.

Key sections of the Fisheries Act that apply to project activities in fish habitat include:

• Sections 20 to 21, which address obstructions, fish passage, and screening of water intakes.

• Section 35, which addresses serious harm to fish.

• Section 36, which addresses deposition of deleterious substances in waters frequented by fish.

DFO’s Fisheries Protection Policy Statement states that “…proponents will be required to demonstrate that measures and standards have been fully applied to first avoid, then mitigate, and then finally, offset any residual serious harm to fish that are part of or support commercial, recreational or Aboriginal fisheries …” (DFO 2013a).

Avoidance measures are described as measures to relocate, redesign, or time a project, or a component of a project, to prevent serious harm to fish. Mitigation measures are implemented during construction and operation of a project to reduce the spatial scale, duration, or intensity of serious harm to fish. Offsetting measures are implemented to counterbalance residual serious harm to fish after the application of avoidance and mitigation measures (DFO 2013a).

Measures to offset residual harm to the productive capacity of the fishery are requirements that might form part of an Authorization issued by DFO as part of the approvals process.

166 File No. 160960844



Species at Risk Act

The status of fish species is assessed by the COSEWIC, which then recommends a designation for legal protection by officially listing the designated species under the SARA. One of the key considerations under SARA for protection of listed species at risk is protection of the species’ habitat. Under SARA, the protection of aquatic species at risk falls under the jurisdiction of DFO.

For the Project, federal aquatic species at risk are considered to be species that are listed federally as endangered, threatened or extirpated on Schedule 1 of SARA. There are three main prohibitions in SARA relevant to extirpated, endangered or threatened aquatic SAR and their critical habitat:

• Section 32, which prohibits killing harming, harassing, capturing or taking an individual of a SAR.

• Section 33, which prohibits damage or destruction of residences of SAR.

• Subsection 58(1), which prohibits destruction of critical habitat of SAR.

Ontario Regulatory Context

The Project is federally regulated, and as such subject to relevant federal legislation. However, certain provincial laws have also been taken into consideration where appropriate, as follows.

Endangered Species Act

The Endangered Species Act (ESA) legally protects wildlife species that are listed as threatened or endangered by the COSSARO or listed as SAR under the ESA. The ESA applies to fish and mussels as well as aquatic plants and insects. The ESA protects individuals of the listed species from harm or harassment and their habitats from damage or destruction.

Conservation Authorities Act

The province of Ontario has established 36 Conservation Authorities, which “are watershed management agencies that deliver services and programs that protect and manage water and other natural resources in partnership with government, landowners and other organizations” (Conservation Ontario 2013). Under the Conservation Authorities Act, the Regulation of Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses is concerned with work (including watercourse realignments) in or near wetlands or water features such as lakes, ponds, rivers and watercourses. Each Conservation Authority has a separate regulation to allow for region-specific concerns. The Project is located within the area managed by Conservation Halton.

Ontario Water Resources Act

The purpose of Ontario’s Water Resources Act, “is to provide for the conservation, protection and management of Ontario’s waters and for their efficient and sustainable use”. For activities

File No. 160960844 167



associated with fish and fish habitat, the Act typically pertains to pollution and pollution prevention, and water-taking activities associated with watercourse crossings or excavation in a watercourse.

Restricted Activity Periods

For fish-bearing watercourses and water bodies, restricted activity periods (RAPs) were determined based on the MNRF’s construction timing windows for in-water works (MNR 2013). DFO uses RAPs determined by MNRF Districts. Each MNRF District assigns RAPs to watercourses and water bodies in their jurisdiction based on thermal regime classification and sensitivity of fish species known or suspected to be present. Fisheries Act approvals typically cite RAPs consistent with MNRF guidance.

6.5.1.3 Consideration of Issues Raised During Consultation and Engagement

Concerns were expressed for potential impacts on fish and fish habitat resulting from changes in water quality and alterations to Indian Creek and Tributary A. Baseline studies were completed to characterize fish and fish habitat within the PDA, LAA and RAA, as provided in Appendix E.4. Representatives from the MNCFN participated in field programs in support of fish and fish habitat studies.

These conditions were considered in the design of the Project and appropriate mitigation measures were determined through the assessment of environmental effects to minimize impacts on fish habitat, fish movement/migration/passage, mortality of fish species and water quality.

Design of the Indian Creek and Tributary realignments follow natural channel design principles and incorporate restoration and enhancement measures to improve fish habitat. Measures to avoid and minimize potential impacts on fish and fish habitat during construction of these realignments are proposed, and will be confirmed in consultation with DFO. Monitoring to confirm predicted effects and ensure compliance with mitigation measures, design plans and approval conditions will occur.

6.5.1.4 Identification of Environmental Effects Pathways and Measurable Parameters

The following potential project effects on fish and fish habitat were assessed in Table 6.9:

• change in fish habitat;

• change in fish movement, migration and fish passage;

• change in fish mortality; and,

• change in water quality.

168 File No. 160960844



Table 6.9: Potential Environmental Effects, Effect Pathways and Measureable Parameters for Fish and Fish Habitat

Potential Environmental Effect Effect Pathway Measurable Parameter(s) and Units of

Measurement

Change in fish habitat

Change in riparian and in-water habitat availability (including critical habitat of SAR)

• Areal extent of altered or destroyed habitat (m2)

• Habitat productivity (CPUE, density, biomass) (may require follow-up/monitoring)

• Species and life stage diversity

Change in fish movement, migration and fish passage

Change in flow rates or obstructions • Minimum and maximum seasonal flows (m3/s)

• Creation of flow or passage obstruction in-water

Change in fish mortality

Change in direct mortality risk • Fish mortality occurrences • Water quality measurements will be

compared to the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME) guidelines for the protection of aquatic life (CCME 2002)

Change in water quality

Change in water quality parameters

Change in sediment load and quality

• DO, temperature turbidity and Provincial Water Quality Objectives (PWQOs)/ or CCME targets

6.5.1.5 Environmental Assessment Boundaries

Spatial Boundaries

The PDA has been defined as the area of physical disturbance directly associated with the Project footprint (i.e., land that will be physically disturbed for the purpose of the Project). The PDA is constituted by a 10 m buffer around all project components as shown in Figure 1, Appendix B.

The LAA for fish and fish habitat includes all watercourses in the PDA, and 100 m upstream and 300 m downstream of potential alterations to a watercourse (Figure 2, Appendix A of Appendix E.4). The LAA also includes the riparian area (within 30 m of each watercourse bank). Several regulatory guidance documents in Canada indicate that a typical LAA is the area within 30 m of a facility (NEB 2014; BCWLAP 2004; NBDELG 2012). There is potential for Project-specific effects to extend outside the PDA, and outside the 30 m referenced in these documents. Therefore, the boundaries of the LAA were developed based on protocols used for linear infrastructure projects in Ontario and Alberta (MTO 2009; AENV 2001a; AENV 2001b) that provide more conservative guidance on the potential area of measurable effect for activities that have similar potential effects to those associated with the Project.

File No. 160960844 169



The RAA for potential effects on fish and fish habitat includes watercourses in the Indian Creek subwatershed to the confluence with Bronte Creek and the main channel of Bronte Creek down to the confluence with Mount Nemo Creek (Figure 1, Appendix A of Appendix E.4). This RAA provides the context for assessing the type, degree and magnitude of effects on fish and fish habitat that may occur in the PDA and LAA. A regional context is important to understand the broader ecosystem so that local changes with potential for ecosystem wide effects (such as barriers to fish migration) can be properly identified assessed and mitigated.

Temporal Boundaries

The temporal boundaries for the assessment of potential Project-related environmental effects on fish and fish habitat encompass both construction and operation. The construction phase of the Project, which is anticipated to occur over a period of 18 months, will include site preparation (vegetation removal), watercourse realignment, restoration, and naturalization, installation of linear facilities, buildings and infrastructure. Following construction, the ongoing (in perpetuity) operation of the Terminal will include truck, train and lift operations, water management, as well as maintenance to infrastructure and Terminal equipment.

6.5.1.6 Criteria for Characterizing Residual Environmental Effects and Thresholds for Determining Significance

Table 6.10 outlines the effects classification criteria that are applied to make a determination with respect to Project residual effects on fish and fish habitat.

Table 6.10: Effects Classification Criteria – Fish and Fish Habitat

Criteria Criteria Definitions

Direction The long-term trend of the residual effect

Positive Effect is an increase in the productive capacity of fish habitat compared with baseline conditions and trends.

Adverse Effect is a decrease in the productive capacity of fish habitat compared with baseline conditions and trends.

Neutral Effect is no change from baseline conditions and trends.

Magnitude The amount of change in measurable parameters or the VC relative to existing conditions

Low No change or negligible change in fish habitat.

Moderate Measurable change to fish and fish habitat that is within applicable guidelines, legislated requirements, and/or federal and provincial management objectives, or that does not affect the sustainability of fish populations.

170 File No. 160960844



Table 6.10: Effects Classification Criteria – Fish and Fish Habitat

Criteria Criteria Definitions

High Measurable change to fish and fish habitat that is not within applicable guidelines, legislated requirements, and/or federal and provincial management objectives, or that results in a change in the sustainability of fish populations.

Geographic Extent

The geographic area in which a potential environmental effect may occur

PDA Effect restricted to the PDA (i.e., construction area and footprints associated with constructing the facility, permanent and temporary access roads).

LAA Effect extends to the LAA.

RAA Effect extends to the RAA.

Duration The period of time required until the measurable parameter or the VC returns to its existing condition, or the effect can no longer be measured or otherwise perceived

Short-term Effect is restricted to construction.

Long-term Effect occurs throughout construction and operation.

Frequency Identifies when the residual effect occurs and how often during the Project or in a specific phase

Single event Effect (or event) occurs once.

Multiple irregular event

Effect occurs sporadically (and intermittently) throughout assessment period.

Multiple regular event

Effect occurs repeatedly and regularly throughout assessment period.

Continuous Effect occurs continually over assessment period.

Reversibility Pertains to whether a measurable parameter or the VC can return to its existing condition after the project activity ceases

Reversible Recovery from an environmental effect is likely, through active management and mitigation.

Irreversible Recovery is unlikely.

Ecological Context

Existing condition and trends in the area where environmental effects occur

Undisturbed Area is relatively undisturbed or not adversely affected by human activity.

Disturbed Area has been substantially previously disturbed by human development or human development is still present.

File No. 160960844 171



The following thresholds have been established to define a significant adverse residual environmental effect on fish and fish habitat.

A significant adverse residual environmental effect on fish and fish habitat is defined as a Project-related environmental effect that results in serious harm to fish that are part of, or support, a CRA fishery, where the effect cannot be avoided, mitigated or offset. Significant adverse residual effects might include effects:

• which will displace fish otherwise occurring in that habitat;

• which prevent fish from carrying out one or more of its life processes, thereby affecting the sustainability or productivity of a fish population or stock;

• that cause the habitat to become unusable or marginalized; and,

• on fish or fish habitat of importance (e.g., SAR, spawning, or other critical habitat required for sustaining fish populations).

All applicable legislation and regulations (i.e., Fisheries Act, SARA and ESA) were also considered to be an essential part of the framework for the assessment of residual effects on fish and fish habitat.

6.5.1.7 Existing Conditions

6.5.1.7.1 Fish and Fish Habitat

Fish communities were sampled by AECOM and Stantec in July 2013 and September 2015, respectively. Field methods followed the Ontario Stream Assessment Protocol (OSAP), version 3 (Stanfield et al. 2013) in reaches on Tributary A and Indian Creek (Figure 2, Appendix A of Appendix E.4).

Existing conditions of fish and fish habitat are summarized as follows:

• Two surface water features, Indian Creek and Tributary A to Indian Creek support fish that are part of, or support a CRA fishery.

• The reaches of Indian Creek in the LAA for the Project provide moderate quality habitat for fish that are part of or contribute to a CRA fishery.

• Tributary A, downstream of the CN tracks in the LAA provides low quality habitat for fish that are part of or contribute to a CRA fishery.

• Tributary A (at Britannia Road), Tributary B and the assessed headwater features are not part of, and do not contribute to, a CRA fishery.

• The on-line agricultural pond that is part of Tributary A provides low quality habitat for fish that are part of, or contribute to, a CRA fishery.

172 File No. 160960844



• Intermittent flow in downstream reaches of Tributary A to Indian Creek might present a seasonal impediment or barrier to fish passage.

• The reaches of Tributary C within the PDA provide low quality fish habitat only during spring freshet and substantial precipitation events.

• No impediments or barriers to fish passage were identified in Indian Creek within the PDA, LAA, or RAA.

Habitat quality categories are detailed in Section 6.5.1.9 of this report.

6.5.1.7.2 Species at Risk

MNRF’s Natural Heritage Information Centre (NHIC) database (MNRF 2015b) and DFO’s 2015 aquatic SAR mapping (DFO 2015) contain records for one fish SAR in the RAA, identified more than 5 km downstream of the LAA: Silver Shiner (Notropis photogenis). NHIC indicates that the record is from 1983. No records of fish SAR occurring in the LAA were found in the review of background data.

No fish SAR were encountered during fish community sampling conducted in the LAA in 2013 or 2015.

Silver Shiner is listed as threatened by COSEWIC (2011) but is listed as special concern under Schedule 3 of SARA and is not subject to the SARA prohibitions associated with species listed under SARA Schedule 1. Silver Shiner is designated as threatened by COSSARO (2012) and is protected under the provincial ESA.

Preferred habitat of the Silver Shiner includes cool to warm, clear waters of medium to large watercourses, over bottoms of cobble and boulders (COSEWIC 2011). Key issues affecting this species include deteriorating water quality (turbidity, pollution and impoundments) and reductions in watercourse gradients (typically resulting from impoundments) (COSEWIC 2011). The high turbidity and poor water quality within the LAA and PDA are unsuitable for Silver Shiner. Therefore, it is unlikely that the species would occur in the LAA or PDA.

6.5.1.8 Potential Project-VC interactions

Table 6.11 identifies, for each potential effect, the project’s physical activities that might interact with the VC and have an environmental effect. These interactions are indicated by check marks, and are discussed in detail in Section 6.5.1.9 in the context of effects pathways, standard and project-specific mitigation/enhancement measures, and residual effects. Project components where no interaction is anticipated are denoted by dashes in Table 6.11

File No. 160960844 173



Table 6.11: Potential Project-Environment Interactions and Effects on Fish and Fish Habitat

Project Components and Physical Activities

Potential Environmental Effects

Change in Fish Habitat

Change in Fish Movement,

Migration and Fish Passage

Change in Fish Mortality

Change in Water Quality

Construction

Site Preparation and Grading Activities – – –

Track Construction and Signals Installation – – – –

Terminal Infrastructure

Grade Separations – – – –

Utilities – – – –

Watercourse Realignments, Restoration and Naturalization

Construction Equipment and Operation – –

Air Contaminant Emissions – – – –

Acoustic Emissions – – –

Solid Waste Management and Recycling – – – –

Operations

Truck Entrance/Exit (Gate) – – – –

Train Operations – –

Lift Operations – – – –

Equipment Maintenance – – –

Water Management – – –

Site Buildings, Linear Facilities and Associated Infrastructure – – –

Operation Labour Requirements – – – –

Air Contaminant Emissions – – – –

Acoustic Emissions – – –

Solid Waste Management and Recycling – – – –

NOTES: = Potential interactions that might cause an effect. – = Interactions between the project and the VC are not expected.

174 File No. 160960844



6.5.1.9 Assessment of Residual Environmental Effects on Fish and Fish Habitat

6.5.1.9.1 Analytical Methods

An assessment of residual effects to fish and fish habitat was conducted, based on the presence and quality of fish habitat (fish habitat as defined by the Fisheries Act), fish community composition and habitat associations for important life processes at different times of the year. The potential for interactions between Project phases and activities with fish and fish habitat was assessed.

6.5.1.9.2 Assessment of Change in Fish Habitat

Project Pathways

Activities associated with the construction of water management facilities, site buildings and associated infrastructure, and watercourse realignments or temporary crossings might potentially alter the riparian vegetation, stability of the watercourse or water body bed and banks, and in-water habitat. Habitat might be lost or altered as a direct result of the removal or alteration of fish habitat during watercourse realignment, channelization or infilling.

Work in- or near-water involving excavation and soil disturbance could increase the rate of sediment input (particularly of fines) to the watercourse or water body, temporarily increasing the sediment load. Excavation near or in a watercourse or water body that disrupts the existing bed and banks might result in temporary or longer-term degradation of habitat quality in the affected area. The extent of this effect is determined by physical factors (e.g., channel width, flow characteristics, substrate types) and construction timing. Another factor is the sensitivity of aquatic habitats relative to their importance in sustaining the resident aquatic biota. Sensitive habitat generally includes areas that are important for completing essential life processes, such as spawning, rearing, migrating and overwintering.

Riparian vegetation and bank stability are important watercourse and water body characteristics because they influence the rate of riparian soil erosion, provide filtration of overland flow from the surrounding land, and provide cover, cooling shade and food (e.g., terrestrial invertebrates) for fish. Loss of riparian habitat as a result of construction activities might reduce cover, increase water temperature, and negatively affect invertebrate populations.

Recreational and commercial fish species in the RAA have diverse habitat requirements. While many species in the RAA are relatively tolerant to turbid waters, several species require clear water in which to complete critical life process. Construction activities might increase sediment input and mobilize sediment downstream in the watercourse, which might cover spawning substrate or otherwise alter fish habitat.

File No. 160960844 175



During operation, riparian vegetation management (including potential use of herbicides to control noxious or invasive riparian vegetation) has the potential to result in changes in fish habitat.

Mitigation Measures

In order to fulfill the design objectives, a combination of realignment and reconstruction of Tributary A and Indian Creek is required. These design objectives include the following geomorphological and biological considerations:

• Apply natural channel design principles to appropriately design and dimension the realigned channels, including incorporating natural bed morphology (pools, riffles) and planform geometry;

• Design the channel realignments such that they do not excessively aggrade or degrade;

• Convey existing flows such that flood elevations are not increased and bankfull frequency is maintained, and downstream channel morphology is not altered;

• Design the channels to limit barriers to fish migration; and,

• Provide aquatic and riparian habitat that is functional over a range of flows.

These design objectives and considerations are intended to satisfy potential requirements under the Fisheries Act to mitigate, or partially offset potential serious harm caused by Project-related activities. Specifically, habitat altered or destroyed as a result of Project-related activities during construction will be offset by:

• Direct measures in PDA:

− Natural channel design incorporating 2,400 m2 of new channel

− An increase in diversity of habitat types – e.g., grass spawning areas with suitable hydrology to permit egg deposition, maturation and movement of young-of-year (YOY) back to the main branch

• Indirect measures in PDA, LAA, and RAA:

− Improved water quality through the removal of an on-line agricultural pond and construction of a SWM system (increase in water quality, decrease in average water temperature)

− Riparian cover along the watercourse (decreased average water temperature, increased bank stability, increased cover, increased and more diversified allochthonous inputs)

− Reforestation in subwatershed – improved water quality and flow regime (less erosion, more baseflow, lower peak flows)

− Improved habitat conditions to facilitate the future re-establishment of Silver Shiner (SAR)

176 File No. 160960844



Potential operational effects will be mitigated through successful implementation of the SWM plan.

The SWM infrastructure within the PDA will mitigate terminal sediment loads to the watercourses. Oil grit separators will receive all drainage area inflows into each SWM pond and will be designed to reduce sediment loads from the PDA to Tributary A and Indian Creek. The SWM ponds will be designed to meet MOE Stormwater Management Planning and Design Manual (2003) guidelines which provide target removal rates for total suspended solids (TSS) and total phosphorus of 80% and 70%, respectively. TSS concentrations are commonly used to represent sediment concentrations in the water column. The removal of sediment by the SWM ponds will also mitigate potential metal compound loadings. The empirical Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE) for application in Canada and an empirical phosphorus loading model were used to estimate sediment and phosphorus surface run-off loads, respectively, for the pre- and post-development land use conditions within the PDA. The changes in contaminant loads to local receiving watercourses will result in positive, localized residual effects with estimated PDA reductions in TSS and total phosphorus loads of 44% and 24%, respectively.

In addition to the recommended measures presented above, activities near water should be carried out following standard guidance (e.g., DFO Measures to Avoid Causing Harm to Fish and Fish Habitat [DFO, 2013b]) that reduce effects on fish and fish habitat.

Residual Project Effects: Change in Fish Habitat

Tributary A to Indian Creek

Table 6.12 outlines the change in available fish habitat based on Project components and activities. These are first approximations, with final detailed plans to be completed following discussion with DFO, as part of the Fisheries Act approval process.

Table 6.12: Quantification of Changes to Fish Habitat: Tributary A to Indian Creek

Changes to Fish Habitat

Area (m2) Comments

Features to be Removed, Overprinted, or Enclosed (losses)

A Channel (to be removed/overprinted/ enclosed at various points) 1,035

Intermittent flow (seasonal fish habitat). Area based on low flow channel dimensions.

B Wetland (on-line agricultural pond) (to be overprinted) 2,500

On-line agricultural pond (might dry up or function as seasonal fish habitat).

C Enclosed in culvert beneath berm (to be removed) 13

Based on length of 16 m and an approximate culvert diameter of 800 mm.

File No. 160960844 177



Table 6.12: Quantification of Changes to Fish Habitat: Tributary A to Indian Creek

Changes to Fish Habitat

Area (m2) Comments

Features to be Constructed (gains)

D Channel (from culvert outlet of piped, realigned watercourse) 745

Intermittent flow (fish habitat). Value based on low flow channel width of 1.45 m and length of 513 m.

E Channel through berm 13 Improves upstream access.

Effects

F Net change in area of available fish habitat -2,790 F=(D+E)-(A+B+C)

Following completion of the proposed works, there will be a net loss of approximately 2,800 m2 of low quality fish habitat that consists of an intermittent channel and on-line agricultural pond. Based on fish capture records, the tributary and pond are used by YOY Largemouth Bass and White Sucker, as well as three species of small-bodied fish (Brook Stickleback, Bluegill, and Pumpkinseed).

The proposed changes will reduce the amount of rearing and foraging habitat available to the species listed above and will reduce spawning habitat for these species except White Sucker. White Sucker spawn in relatively fast flowing water, over gravel substrates (Twomy et al. 1984; Scott and Crossman 1998). These habitat conditions are absent from Tributary A and the on-line agricultural pond.

The loss of approximately 2,800 m2 of low quality fish habitat will result in a residual effect by reducing the productive capacity of the CRA fishery located within the PDA. Further offsetting will occur following discussion with DFO. Implementation of the final offsetting plan will result in there being no significant residual effects to a CRA fishery in Tributary A, from Project-related activities.

Tributary C to Indian Creek

During field investigations, it was observed that Tributary C to Indian Creek consisted of a dry, narrow, poorly defined channel within the PDA and LAA, transitioning to a dry, well defined channel with occasional reaches of cobble and gravel. The installation of approximately a 30 m long culvert on this feature will result in the alteration of poorly defined channel that contributes indirectly to fish habitat, or supports fish habitat only during spring freshet.

Indian Creek

The proposed footprint of the Project will require 1,075 linear m of Indian Creek to be removed. To mitigate (offset) the removal, 570 linear m of realigned and enhanced channel will be

178 File No. 160960844



constructed, which reconnects with the existing Indian Creek channel approximately 150 m above the downstream Tremaine Road bridge crossing (Figure 4, Appendix B). Upstream of the realignment, 300 linear m of Indian Creek will be subject to in-water and riparian habitat enhancements. The areal extents of these activities are presented in Table 6.13 below. The table presents the areal extents as losses or gains and provides a summary of the changes as they relate to direct fish habitat (i.e., high flow (line F) and low flow (line E) channels with conditions typical of spring and summer flows, respectively) and to riparian areas that indirectly affect fish habitat (line G) through provision of thermal moderation, allochthonous inputs (i.e., nutrients, leaf litter, etc.).

Table 6.13: Quantification of Changes to Fish Habitat: Indian Creek

Feature Area (m2) Comments

Features to be Removed or Overprinted (losses)

A Existing Channel 4,739 m2 Permanently flowing, existing channel (fish habitat supporting several different species; value calculated based on low flow channel dimensions).

Features to be Constructed (gains)

B New channel (realignment) 2,398 m2 Permanently flowing, newly created natural channel (realigned from existing; enhanced fish habitat supporting several different species) (value calculated using proposed low flow channel dimensions).

C Channel enhancements on existing channel

1,425 m2 Permanent flow (enhanced habitat intended to augment existing structures and improve habitat quality; support several different fish species). Area based on measurements from wetted width.

D Riparian wetland (seasonally connected to Indian Creek) (channel enhancement)

2,873 m2 Provides seasonal foraging and resting areas for all species of fish.

Effects

E Change in channel area during low flow conditions

-2,341 m2 E=B-A (loss of habitat)

F Change in channel area including riparian wetlands accessible during high flow conditions

532 m2 F=E+D (net change in habitat)

G Net change in channel enhancements

4,298 m2 G=C+D (total enhancements)

Residual environmental effects on changes in fish habitat are presented in Table 6.14.

File No. 160960844 179



Table 6.14: Characterization of Residual Environmental Effects: Change in Fish Habitat

Criteria Characterization Rationale

Direction Neutral No net change in measureable parameters for the Fish and Fish Habitat VC relative to baseline. This is a requirement of the Fisheries Act and will be achieved through the Fisheries Act approval process. While some decrease in total habitat area is predicted this quantitative effect will be offset by improvements in the quality of the habitat resulting in similar fish habitat productivity and an increase in ecosystem resilience.

Magnitude

Negligible

Since the direction of effect will be maintained as neutral under Fisheries Act requirements the magnitude of effect is negligible. It is anticipated that there will be no measurable change in the productivity of fish habitat following implementation of offsetting measures.

Geographic Extent

RAA Direct habitat disturbance will be limited to the bed and banks of the PDA. In case of a sediment release, habitat disturbance from sedimentation will occur in the LAA (i.e., the zone of influence [ZOI] where 90% of the sediment potentially generated during construction would be expected to be deposited). Positive changes to fish habitat through offsetting and naturalization are intended to have positive effects to fish populations and habitat in the RAA.

Duration Long-term Neutral, negligible residual change is long term

Frequency

Continuous Neutral, negligible occurs continuously following offsetting.

Reversibility Irreversible The effect is unlikely to be reversed.

Ecological Context

Disturbed RAA has been substantially previously disturbed by agriculture, residential, and existing transportation activities.

There are expected to be localized, positive changes to surface water and sediment quality with respect to in-water concentrations of sediment, nutrients, metals and hydrocarbons within Tributary A and Indian Creek. Metal and nutrient (i.e., phosphorus) compounds are typically transported to watercourses via overland surface run-off by adsorbing to sediment particles from agricultural amendments.

6.5.1.9.3 Assessment of Change in Fish Movement, Migration, and Fish Passage

Project Pathways

Fish movement and migration are important to local fish populations and assemblages to access habitat for lifecycle requirements. Isolated construction methods associated with infrastructure construction, channel realignment and in-channel enhancement work, as well as temporary vehicle crossings might result in a temporary blockage or diversion of flow resulting in

180 File No. 160960844



the blockage of fish passage for a short duration. The degree of alteration or restriction will depend on the timing of construction and the mitigation measures applied. Acoustic emissions associated with construction and operations may alter fish behaviour, affecting movement patterns by causing fish to temporarily avoid or move out of the PDA and LAA.

Fish movement and migration are important to local fish populations and assemblages to access habitat for lifecycle requirements. Several recreational and commercial fish species in the RAA, as well as several fish species that might be prey for these fish, spawn in spring or early summer in smaller watercourses or water bodies and require open migratory pathways to reach their spawning grounds (Scott and Crossman 1998; Holm et al. 2009).

On-line agricultural pond outlet structures can present barriers to fish passage (Baxter 1977; TRCA 2010; Conservation Halton and Hamilton Conservation Authority n.d.), cause increases in downstream water temperature during the summer months, corresponding to reductions in coldwater fish species (Lessard and Hayes 2003), as well as cause decreases in downstream in-water dissolved oxygen concentrations (Maxted et al. 2005).

Several studies (Smith et al. 2004; Hastings and Popper 2005; Popper and Hastings 2009; Voellmy et al. 2014) indicate that an increase in certain anthropogenically created noise (and associated vibrations) can cause effects on fish such as:

• Avoidance of areas with elevated sound levels;

• Changes in anti-predator behaviours of prey species;

• Behavioural changes that can result in decreased fitness;

• Temporary or permanent damage to sound receptors; and,

• Communication and detection of other environmental noise.

As discussed in the studies cited above, potential effects of noise on fish typically vary by intensity and duration, rather than by the specific source of the sound. Irregular and regular, repetitive increases in sound levels and increases in baseline, or ambient sound levels can affect each species differently. However, the literature cited above generally agrees that these types of noise have the potential to affect fish. Since the construction and operation of the Project will result in an increase in irregular, repetitive noise and an increase in ambient noise levels, Project-related noise and vibration has the potential to affect fish. As presented in Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report - Vibration Effects Assessment (Appendix E.18), operation of the Project is not anticipated to result in an increase in anthropogenically created noise (and associated vibrations) as a result of the proposed mitigation measures, and an increase in distance between the tracks and facility from the Indian Creek (due to channel realignment).

File No. 160960844 181



Mitigation Measures

• The new channel will be constructed in the dry, while leaving earthen plugs at the connection points. This will reduce the period when installation of coffer dams is potentially required, thus reducing potential to disrupt fish movement, migration and passage.

• Ensure maintenance of downstream flow at all times when conducting in-water construction activities.

• Ensure water and pump intakes reduce or avoid disturbance of the watercourse bed and are screened with a maximum mesh size of 2.54 mm and approach velocity of 0.038 m/s, consistent with DFO’s Freshwater Intake End-of-Pipe Fish Screen Guideline (DFO 1995). To accomplish this, where pumps larger than 15 cm diameter are used, place the intakes in a mesh cage (2.54 mm) to reduce the approach velocity that fish are exposed to and prevent them from being impinged on the intakes. Maintain the screens free of debris.

• Do not withdraw more than 10% of the instantaneous water flow at any given time.

In addition to the recommended measures listed above, activities near water should be carried out following standard guidance (e.g., DFO Measures to Avoid Causing Harm to Fish and Fish Habitat [DFO 2013b]) that reduce effects on fish and fish habitat.

Residual Project Effects: Change in Fish Movement, Migration, and Fish Passage

Table 6.15 characterizes the residual environmental effects on changes in fish movement, migration and fish passage. With the implementation of appropriate mitigation measures, it is expected that there will be no change in fish movement, migration, or fish passage as a result of Project-related activities.

Table 6.15: Characterization of Residual Environmental Effects: Change in Fish Movement, Migration and Fish Passage


Direction Neutral Isolated work (channel realignment, restoration, and naturalization) within flowing watercourses have the potential to temporarily obstruct fish movement, migration and fish passage; however due to duration this is expected to not effect fish movement, migration and fish passage.

Magnitude

Low Mitigation measures, such as reducing duration of in-water work and construction outside the RAP (i.e., within the MNR construction timing window for in-water work), are expected to limit obstruction of fish passage and reduce disturbance to fish migration.

Geographic Extent

PDA Work area isolation is limited to the construction area in the PDA only.

182 File No. 160960844



Table 6.15: Characterization of Residual Environmental Effects: Change in Fish Movement, Migration and Fish Passage


Duration Short-term Obstructions to fish movement are expected to be fully removed immediately following construction. No permanent obstruction of fish movement is expected.

Frequency Irregular Obstruction to fish movement will occur during the realignment of Tributary A and Indian Creek. It might also occur during culvert installation in Tributary C. Obstructions to fish movement might occur several times at a watercourse throughout the construction process as a result of construction sequencing.

Reversibility Reversible Once obstructions are removed from the watercourse or water body following construction, fish movement, migration and fish passage are expected to be restored to preconstruction conditions.

Ecological Context

Disturbed Construction occurs in a developed area with high agricultural land use as well as industrial, rural and residential land uses. In addition, parts of the PDA follow an existing rail ROW that has been previously disturbed.

6.5.1.9.4 Assessment of Change in Fish Mortality

Project Pathways

Fish are subject to two sources of increased mortality during construction of Project components and channel realignment, restoration, and naturalization: through the direct risk of mortality during in-water construction activities (e.g., contact with machinery, impingement on pump intakes, accidental removal from a watercourse or water body via construction equipment or asphyxiation as a result of dewatering activities), or through the introduction of a deleterious substance during construction (described in the Section 6.6.2).

Mitigation Measures

• Project personnel are not permitted to fish on the work site.

• The Contractor shall notify CN 72 hours before construction of any watercourse or water body crossing or diversions to ensure fish salvage operations are conducted, where required.

• Conduct fish salvages by a qualified aquatic biologist, where required, in accordance with permit conditions.

• Release captured fish to areas within the same watercourse, outside of the work, where suitable habitat exists. In addition to the recommended measures listed above, activities near water should be carried out following standard guidance (e.g., DFO Measures to Avoid

File No. 160960844 183



Causing Harm to Fish and Fish Habitat [DFO 2013b]) that reduce effects on fish and fish habitat.

Residual Project Effects: Change in Fish Mortality

It is expected that there will be an increase in fish mortality risk as a result of Project-related activities, for the reasons described in the subsection above entitled Change in Fish Mortality - Project Pathways and summarized in Table 6.16. However, implementation of appropriate mitigation measures is expected to reduce the risk.

Table 6.16: Characterization of Residual Environmental Effects: Change in Fish Mortality


Direction Adverse Isolated work (channel realignment, restoration, and naturalization) within flowing watercourses have the potential to result in fish mortality.

Magnitude Low Mitigation measures are expected to limit fish mortality. Construction outside the RAP (i.e., within the MNRF construction timing window for in-water work) would reduce mortality to sensitive fish species during spawning and rearing.

Geographic Extent

LAA Risk of direct fish mortality is expected to be limited to the construction area in the PDA only. Risk of indirect fish mortality as a result of sedimentation may occur within the LAA.

Frequency Irregular Risk of direct and indirect mortality is expected to occur during realignment of Tributary A and Indian Creek. It might also occur during culvert installation in Tributary C. Risk of mortality might occur several times at a watercourse throughout the construction process as a result of construction sequencing.

Duration Short-term Risk of direct and indirect mortality to fish is not expected to continue following construction.

Reversibility Reversible Risk of direct fish mortality will only occur during in-water construction activities.

Ecological Context


184 File No. 160960844



6.5.1.9.5 Assessment of Change in Water Quality

Project Pathways

Fish are subject to effects from a change in water quality through two pathways:

• Change in water quality parameters; and,

• Change in sediment load and quality.

The presence of suspended sediment in a watercourse or water body can induce a wide range of biological effects. At lower suspended sediment concentrations, the effects include subtle behavioural changes in fish, such as avoidance reactions that might lead to higher energy expenditures by individual fish and changes in territorial responses in some species (Newcombe and Jensen 1996; DFO 2013c). At higher concentrations, fine suspended sediment, such as silts and clays, might induce sub-lethal effects, such as reduced feeding efficiency, decreased predator avoidance and lower growth rates (Newcombe and Jensen 1996). Fish mortality might also occur as a result of heavy gill abrasion at high sediment concentrations (Newcombe and Jensen 1996; DFO 2013c). Continuous, elevated sediment levels might reduce overall fish production in a watercourse or water body because of turbidity-related reductions in algae and in benthic and aquatic invertebrate production.

When water velocities slow, suspended sediment can settle out and smother benthic invertebrate communities or fish eggs and larvae if they are present in a watercourse, and degrade water quality (Alberta Transportation 2009; DFO 2013c). If high volumes of fines (silt, clay and sand) are deposited, pool and run habitat can be in-filled or the voids in gravel and cobble bed materials might become embedded. This alteration of downstream substrate conditions affects the abundance and diversity of benthic invertebrate communities and availability of spawning areas (Reid and Anderson 2002; DFO 2013c).

Several recreational species present in the PDA, LAA, and RAA require clear water with gravel, pebble or rock substrate in which to spawn (Scott and Crossman 1998; Holm et al. 2009). Therefore, suspended sediment concentrations and mobilization or deposition of sediment might affect spawning activities of the species.

Mitigation Measures

• Establish and clearly identify a riparian buffer before the start of clearing activities. Restrict disturbance in this area to activities associated with realignment, restoration and naturalization. Install erosion and sediment control at appropriate locations adjacent to all watercourses and/or water bodies, or as directed by the Environmental Monitor(s).

• Appropriate temporary erosion and sediment control structures shall be installed and maintained through all phases of construction.

• Ensure water from flumes, dam and pumps, diversion or other methods do not cause erosion or introduce sediment into the channel.

File No. 160960844 185



• Restrict grubbing, stripping and grading on approach slopes to watercourses and water bodies to the amount required to allow safe passage of equipment and completion of the relevant work.

• Delay grading of the primary banks of watercourses and water bodies until immediately before construction of temporary crossings and watercourse realignment, where practicable.

• Complete dewatering in a manner that does not cause erosion or allow sediment to re-enter a watercourse or water body through the use of appropriate sediment control devices.

• Collect and treat all stormwater run-off from the Terminal prior to release to Indian Creek or Tributary A.

In addition to the recommended measures listed above, activities near water should be carried out following standard guidance (e.g., DFO Measures to Avoid Causing Harm to Fish and Fish Habitat [DFO 2013b]) that reduce effects on fish and fish habitat.

Residual Project Effects: Change in Water Quality

Construction of SWM facilities associated with the Project is anticipated to reduce concentrations of TSS and other deleterious substances, resulting in a positive effect to water quality of low magnitude (As described in Section 6.4.2.3, this is due to the watercourse reaches in the PDA and LAA receiving inputs from outside those areas).

With the implementation of appropriate mitigation measures, operation and maintenance of the train and facilities is not anticipated to result in changes to water quality.

Table 6.17 presents the characterization of residual environmental effects on a change in water quality. With the implementation of appropriate mitigation measures, it is expected that there will be a positive change in water quality within the LAA as a result of Project-related activities.

Table 6.17: Characterization of Residual Environmental Effects: Change in Water Quality


Direction Positive The Project is expected to result in an improvement in water quality as a result of channel alterations, riparian enhancements, and construction of stormwater management facilities.

186 File No. 160960844



Table 6.17: Characterization of Residual Environmental Effects: Change in Water Quality


Magnitude

Low

The Project is intended to result in a low magnitude increase in water quality as a result of channel alterations, riparian enhancements, and construction of SWM facilities. Additionally, mitigation measures, such as proper isolation, sediment control, overland water management, and construction outside the RAP (i.e., within the MNRF construction timing window for in-water work) are expected to limit introduction of deleterious substances. Following DFO’s Measures to Avoid Causing Harm to Fish and Fish Habitat during operation of machinery (DFO 2013b) is expected to limit the introduction of hydrocarbons or other deleterious substances related to equipment use.

Geographic Extent

LAA Potential for change in water quality will be confined to the LAA.

Frequency Continuous The change in water quality is expected to be continuous, following completion of Project construction.

Duration Long-term Change in water quality will occur for the life of the Terminal.

Reversibility Irreversible The potential increase in water quality is expected to be irreversible following completion of Project construction.

Ecological Context


6.5.1.9.6 Summary of Project Residual Environmental Effects on Fish and Fish Habitat

The Project includes three watercourses that support fish or fish habitat. Work associated with two of these watercourses (Indian Creek and Tributary A to Indian Creek) include channel realignment or infilling. Works associated with Tributary C include installation of an acoustic barrier and a culvert to facilitate watercourse flow beneath the barrier. Where realignment is proposed, works will be conducted under dry conditions using isolation methods outside the RAP (i.e., within the MNRF’s construction timing window for in-water works). The work will result in a temporary disturbance to fish and fish habitat. To minimize effects on fish and fish habitat, work in- or near-water will be carried out following the conditions and mitigation measures outlined in Section 6.5. A summary of project residual environmental effects on fish and fish habitat is presented in Table 6.18.

File No. 160960844 187



Table 6.18: Summary of Project Residual Environmental Effects on Fish and Fish Habitat

Residual Effect

Residual Environmental Effects Characterization

Project Phase

Direction

Magnitude

Geographic

Extent

Duration

Frequency

Reversibility

Ecological and Socio-econom

ic C

ontext

Change in Fish Habitat C N N RAA LT C I D

Change in Fish Movement, Migration, and Fish Passage C,O N L PDA ST IR R D

Change in Fish Mortality C A L LAA ST IR R D

Change in Water Quality C,O P L LAA LT C I D

KEY See Table 6.10 for detailed definitions Project Phase C: Construction O: Operation Direction: P: Positive A: Adverse N: Neutral Magnitude: N: Negligible L: Low M: Moderate H: High

Geographic Extent: PDA: Project Development Area LAA: Local assessment area RAA: Regional assessment area Duration: ST: Short-term; MT: Medium-term LT: Long-term P: Permanent NA: Not applicable

Frequency: S: Single event IR: Irregular event R: Regular event C: Continuous Reversibility: R: Reversible I: Irreversible Ecological Context: D: Disturbed U: Undisturbed

6.5.1.9.7 Determination of Significance of Environmental Effects on Fish and Fish Habitat

Significance of Residual Environmental Effects from the Project

As outlined in Section 6.5.1.6, significant adverse residual environmental effect on fish and fish habitat is defined as one that results in serious harm to fish that are part of, or support, a CRA fishery, where the effect cannot be avoided, mitigated or offset. The adverse residual environmental effects from the Project are limited to a change in fish mortality once mitigation and offsets have been implemented. The change in fish mortality risk is low as it is restricted to occur during construction, which will occur outside of the RAP.

The offsets listed in Section 6.5.1.9 will be sufficient to result in no significant residual effects on Fish and Fish Habitat due to construction. The final offsetting plan will be developed and implemented through an authorization under the Fisheries Act to the satisfaction of DFO. The

188 File No. 160960844



DFO test will be no serious harm to fish or fish habitat. By definition satisfying the conditions of DFO authorization will require the project to be built so there is no significant residual effect.

Implementation of the final offsetting plan will result in residual effects to a CRA fishery in Indian Creek, from Project-related activities to be not significant.

6.5.2 Migratory Birds


Migratory birds are selected as a VC because they have a social, cultural and aesthetic value to society, their potential interactions with Project activities, regulatory considerations and requirements in the EIS Guidelines. This migratory birds VC includes waterfowl, raptors, shorebirds, marsh birds and other land birds, protected under the MBCA.


Federal Legislation

Migratory birds are protected federally under the MBCA, as administered by Environment Canada. This piece of legislation includes provisions that protect the nests of birds during breeding season (i.e., the end of March to the end of August). This requirement can affect the timing of a development by restricting periods when vegetation clearing can be safely conducted without further mitigation. Migratory birds protected by the MBCA generally include all seabirds, except cormorants and pelicans, all waterfowl, all shorebirds, and most land birds (birds with principally terrestrial life cycles). The MBCA and associated regulations state that no person may disturb, destroy, or take/have in their possession a migratory bird (alive or dead), or its nest or eggs, except under authority of a permit. Section 5.1 of the MBCA describes prohibitions against depositing substances harmful to migratory birds into waters or areas used by migratory birds, or into places from where the substance may enter waters or areas used by migratory birds.

A discussion of the SARA, which addresses endangered, threatened and species of special concern is provided in Section 6.5.3. Species of migratory birds that are considered ‘at risk’ are further assessed in that section.

Provincial legislation

The Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act (1997) is the law used by the MNRF for planning, wildlife management and wildlife enforcement in Ontario. The Act provides protection for wildlife and wildlife residences, such as dens and nests.

The PPS (MMAH 2014) informs land use planning decisions under the Planning Act (1990) in Ontario but is not applicable to federal railway approvals. Policy guidance and practice

File No. 160960844 189



developed to support the PPS provides a framework for assessing the functions and sensitivities of wildlife habitat. This framework was considered in evaluating effects and recommending mitigation measures for this assessment.


Concerns were expressed for potential disturbance to birds resulting from Project activities. Baseline studies were completed to identify breeding bird activities and habitat within the PDA, LAA and RAA, as provided in Appendix E.16. Representatives from the MNCFN participated in field programs in support of terrestrial wildlife and habitat studies.

These conditions were considered in the design of the Project and identification of appropriate mitigation measures determined through the assessment of environmental effects to minimize disturbance to birds, such as mortality, a change in habitat and sensory disturbance.

Measures to avoid and minimize potential impacts on birds during construction are proposed. Further, CN has committed to offset the loss of on-site grassland breeding bird habitat through the creation and management of grassland habitat. Monitoring to confirm establishment of grassland habitat and use, and ensure compliance with mitigation measures, design plans and approval conditions will occur.

6.5.2.4 Identification of Environmental Effects, Pathways and Measurable Parameters

Project activities have the potential to interact with migratory birds and their associated habitat due to lighting of the Project site, the change in landscape, infrastructure and vehicle traffic associated with the Project. The assessment of Project-related environmental effects on migratory birds is focused on the following potential environmental effects:

• Direct migratory bird mortality that could occur with construction and operation of the Project: clearing of sites (including both birds and nests), vehicular strikes or collision with Project infrastructure which may result in changes to the local populations of migratory birds.

• Habitat loss or alteration as a result of site clearing and preparation during construction of the Project facility and disturbance effects during operation of the Project facilities: this may result in a displacement of breeding and foraging birds, changes in species composition and, a loss of breeding and foraging habitat.

• Sensory disturbance associated with attraction to Project lighting.

Table 6.19 presents the potential effects, effect pathway and measurable parameters for the assessment of effects on migratory birds.

190 File No. 160960844



Table 6.19: Potential Environmental Effects, Effect Pathways and Measureable Parameters for Migratory Birds

Potential Environmental Effect Effect Pathway

Measurable Parameter(s) and Units of Measurement

Change in migratory bird mortality

• Vehicular strikes, collision with project infrastructures, clearing of sites, contact with contaminated water.

• Observations of bird mortality on Project roads.

• Observations of bird mortality around Project infrastructure.

• Observations of bird mortality or nest destruction during site clearing.

• Measured increase of chemical constituents in wetland water samples with associated observations of bird mortality.

Change in migratory birds use of area

• Increased disturbance, habitat changes.

• Breeding bird density and species diversity (number of individuals per unit area).

• Continued presence of sensitive species (number of individuals per unit area).

• Areal extent of altered habitat (m2) compared to availability of wetland, woodland and grassland habitats.

Sensory Disturbance • Indirect effects caused by project site lighting.

• Observations of bird mortality around Project lighting and buildings.


Spatial Boundaries

The spatial boundaries for the environmental effects assessment with respect to migratory birds are defined below and depicted on Figure 6, Appendix B.

The PDA encompasses the immediate area in which Project activities and components may occur and as such represents the area within which direct physical disturbance may occur as a result of the Project, temporary or permanent. The PDA is consistent for all VCs.

The LAA is the maximum area within which environmental effects from Project activities and components can be predicted or measured within a reasonable degree of accuracy and confidence. It consists of the PDA and adjacent areas where Project-related environmental effects on migratory birds and their habitats are reasonably expected to occur. A 120 m area around the PDA boundaries has been established to represent the LAA. The LAA is intended to encompass the area in which potential effects of the proposed land use change from the Project might occur, taking into consideration sensitivity of species to disturbance, the habitat requirements of species and the extent of influence of development and site alteration (MNR 2005). The terrestrial LAA covers approximately 392 ha.

File No. 160960844 191



The RAA is the area within which residual environmental effects from Project activities and components may interact cumulatively with the residual environmental effects of other past, present and future (i.e., certain or reasonably foreseeable) physical activities. The RAA is restricted to one kilometre outwards from the PDA boundary for the migratory birds and their habitats for this Project. The terrestrial RAA covers approximately 2,046 ha.

Temporal Boundaries

The temporal boundaries for the assessment of potential Project-related environmental effects on migratory birds encompass both construction and operation of the Project. The construction phase of the Project, which is anticipated to occur over a period of 18 to 24 months, will include site preparation (vegetation removal), watercourse and wetland alterations and enhancements, installation of linear facilities, buildings and infrastructure. Following the construction, the ongoing operation of the Facility will include truck, train and lift operations, water management, as well as maintenance to infrastructure.


The residual environmental effects on migratory are described using the characterizations presented in Table 6.20.

Table 6.20: Characterization of Residual Environmental Effects on Migratory Birds

Characterization Description Quantitative Measure or Definition of Qualitative Categories


Positive—an effect that moves measurable parameters in a direction beneficial to migratory birds relative to baseline. Adverse— an effect that moves measurable parameters in a direction detrimental to migratory birds relative to baseline. Neutral—no net change in measureable parameters for migratory birds relative to baseline.

Magnitude

The amount of change in measurable parameters or the VC relative to existing conditions

Negligible – No observed mortality to migratory birds or bird nests. No loss or alteration of migratory bird habitat (wetland, woodland and grassland) or measurable change in breeding bird density or species diversity (number of individuals per unit area). Low – Observed mortality to migratory birds or bird nests, but at levels not anticipated to have a measurable effect on breeding density or diversity of local species populations. Disturbance results in measurable change in breeding bird density, but no change in breeding bird diversity (i.e., no loss of sensitive species). Moderate – Observed mortality to migratory birds or bird nests at levels that reduce breeding density or nesting

192 File No. 160960844



Table 6.20: Characterization of Residual Environmental Effects on Migratory Birds


success, but not anticipated to affect sustainability of local species populations. Disturbance results in measurable change in breeding bird density with change in breeding bird diversity (i.e., displacement of sensitive species). High – Observed mortality to migratory birds or bird nests at levels that reduce breeding density or success and may affect sustainability of some local species populations. Disturbance results in measurable change in breeding bird density and results in displacement of multiple species.

Geographic Extent

The geographic area in which a potential environmental effect may occur

PDA—residual effects are restricted to the PDA. LAA—residual effects extend into the LAA. RAA – residual effects interact with those of other projects in the RAA.

Frequency

Identifies when the residual effect occurs and how often during the Project or in a specific phase

Single event – occurs once. Multiple irregular event – occurs at no set schedule. Multiple regular event — occurs at regular intervals. Continuous— occurs continuously.


Short term – effects are measurable for less than one breeding season (i.e., less than one year). Medium term – effects are measurable for one generation or several breeding seasons (i.e., 2 to 20 years). Long term – effects are measurable for multiple generations or multiple breeding seasons (i.e., greater than 20 years). Permanent – effects are permanent.

Reversibility

Pertains to whether a measurable parameter or the VC can return to its existing condition after the project activity ceases

Reversible—the effect is likely to be reversed after activity completion and reclamation. Irreversible—the effect is unlikely to be reversed.

Ecological Context


Undisturbed—area is relatively undisturbed or not adversely affected by human activity with natural migratory bird habitat remaining. Disturbed—area has been substantially previously disturbed by human development or human development is still present and has limited or anthropogenic migratory bird habitat remaining.

File No. 160960844 193



The following threshold has been established to define a significant adverse residual environmental effect on migratory birds.

A significant adverse residual environmental effect on migratory birds is defined as a Project-related environmental effect that:

• threatens the long-term persistence or viability of a migratory bird species in the RAA through mortality rates that are beyond which natural recruitment (reproduction and immigration) would not return the population to baseline levels;

• results in loss of breeding migratory bird species within the RAA, either through displacement or reduced recruitment caused by disturbance or habitat changes; and,

• affects the migratory behavior of birds passing through the RAA due to attraction to project lighting resulting an ecological risk at the species’ provincial population level.


In total, 64 species of birds were observed; 57 of which are likely to be breeding in the LAA with seven species that have the potential to forage within the LAA. The surveys did not identify any rare birds or specialized habitat such as breeding colonies. The majority of the species (54) are classified as migratory birds under the MBCA. Habitat for migratory birds within the LAA generally falls into three categories, which are common of agricultural settings:

• Woodlands – The Oak-Maple dominated forest at the south end of the LAA

• Grassland – Consisting of hay, pasture and cultural meadows as well as some early successional/shrubland areas

• Wetlands – Consisting of meadow marsh habitat

Woodland habitat occurs as scattered woodlots in agricultural fields throughout the RAA. Only a small portion of the woodland cover in the RAA occurs within the LAA all of which is located at the southern tip. No woodland habitat occurs within the PDA. The most commonly observed species in the woodland migratory bird habitat are relatively common and widespread in Ontario. No species that are considered area-sensitive were observed. Presence of species such as Red-winged Blackbird and Song Sparrow are indicative to the woodland with clearings, some of which contained ponds. Species of special concern, specifically Eastern Wood-Pewee, were observed in the habitat.

Grassland habitat occurs as hay and meadow fields within the PDA, LAA, and RAA. The most commonly observed species in the grassland migratory bird habitat, including Red-winged Blackbird, Bobolink and Savannah Sparrow, are common species of agricultural lands. The grassland habitat also has representation of hedgerow or early successional species, such as Song Sparrow, Yellow Warbler, Gray Catbird and Brown Thrasher. Northern Harrier, an area sensitive grassland species, was also recorded in the LAA.

194 File No. 160960844



Some large provincially significant wetlands (PSWs) occur within the RAA. Within the LAA, wetland habitat is limited, but includes two small marsh communities. Few species were recorded in the wetland migratory bird habitats point counts; likely the result of the small size of these features. The meadow marsh/farm pond composition of these features is indicative of some of the bird species observed, such as Red-winged Blackbird (meadow) and Spotted Sandpiper (pond). Other species observed, such as the Killdeer and Horned Lark are characteristic of the agricultural fields that surround these wetlands.

6.5.2.8 Project Interactions with Migratory Birds

Table 6.21 identifies, for each potential effect, the Project physical activities that might interact with migratory birds and result in negative environmental effects. These interactions are indicated by check marks, and are discussed in detail in Section 6.5.2.9 in the context of effects pathways, standard and project-specific mitigation/enhancement, and residual effects. A justification is also provided for non-interactions (no check marks).

Table 6.21: Potential Project - Environmental Interactions and Effects on Migratory Birds



Change in M

igratory Bird M

ortality

Change in M

igratory Bird Habitat

Sensory Disturbance of M

igratory Birds

Construction

Site Preparation and Grading Activities -

Track Construction and Signals Installation - -

Terminal Infrastructure - -

Grade Separations - -

Utilities - -

Watercourse Realignment, Restoration and Naturalization -

Construction Equipment and Operation -

Air Contaminant Emissions - - -

Acoustic Emissions - -

Solid Waste Management and Recycling - - -

File No. 160960844 195



Table 6.21: Potential Project - Environmental Interactions and Effects on Migratory Birds



Change in M

igratory Bird M

ortality

Change in M



igratory Birds

Operations

Truck Entrance/Exit (Gate) -

Train Operations -

Lift Operations - -

Equipment Maintenance - -

Water Management - -

Site Buildings, Linear Facilities and Associated Infrastructure -

Operation Labour Requirements - -

Air Contaminant Emissions - - -

Acoustic Emissions - -

Solid Waste Management and Recycling - - -

Notes:

√ = Potential interactions that might cause an effect.

- = Interactions between the project and the VC are not expected.

6.5.2.9 Assessment of Residual Environmental Effects on Migratory Birds

Analytical Methods

The environmental effects of the Project on migratory birds were assessed by determining the relative abundance, distribution and species composition of birds in the LAA and their habitat associations at different times throughout the year. The potential for interactions between Project phases and activities and birds was then assessed.

196 File No. 160960844



Change in Migratory Bird Mortality

The environmental effects of the Project on migratory bird mortality were assessed by comparing species likely to be affected by each Project pathway compared to the relative abundance, distribution and species composition in the LAA. Breeding bird relative abundance, distribution and species compensation were measured through site specific field investigations (i.e., point counts and area searches). A relative abundance and composition of migrating birds pass over or stop/stage in the LAA, as well as wintering birds, were estimated through habitat assessments and consideration of the Projects situation in the local landscape (i.e., proximity to lakeshores). Bird mortality cannot be predicted quantitatively (i.e., number of fatalities per species) with accuracy. As such, a qualitative approach was taken by considering particular risk factors in the habitat or presences of species that would be sensitive to mortality events.

Change in Migratory Bird Habitat

Habitats within the LAA were identified and delineated based on the Ecological Land Classification system (Lee et al. 1998). Migratory bird habitats were categorized based on the community of birds present; i.e., woodland, grassland and wetlands communities. Using the habitat maps, field data collected on species abundance and distributions, Geographic Information Systems (GIS) software was used to calculate the area of migratory bird habitats affected by Project activities. This analysis produced a rough estimate of the number of birds potentially affected by construction and operations.

Abundance estimates (pairs/10 ha) for breeding migratory birds were determined by dividing the number of birds per point count by the area of each habitat. Generalizations made with respect to species composition correlated to use of habitats during migration and winter.

Baseline and predicted acoustic emission levels were analyzed to assess potential disturbance effects to migratory bird habitats in the LAA. Habitat loss or alteration was analyzed and quantified with the assistance of the GIS software.

Sensory Disturbance

To assess the environmental effects of sensory disturbance by attraction to Project lighting, a qualitative approach was taken. Features (i.e., landforms or waterbodies) in the RAA that may concentrate migration activity and increase interaction with Project lighting were considered. The components of the Project infrastructure were also considered when identify potential risk factors that may contribute to attraction of birds by lighting.

6.5.2.9.1 Assessment of Change in Migratory Bird Mortality

Project Pathways

Construction of the Project is expected to have a potential effect on the mortality of migratory birds. In particular, there is potential for bird mortality to occur during the site preparation and

File No. 160960844 197



watercourse realignment, including removing vegetation, clearing trees and grubbing (e.g., bird fatalities through nest destruction). Because their nests, eggs, and young are immobile, there is the potential for mortality if these activities occur during the nesting season (end of March to end of August). Site preparation is most likely to affect grassland breeding birds, as habitat occurs within the PDA. Based on the field investigations, grassland breeding birds recorded within the LAA were species common and widespread in Ontario. However, some declining grassland species, including some SAR species (i.e., Bobolink, Eastern Meadowlark – discussed further in Section 6.5.3) were present.

Considering the relatively limited amount of habitat to be cleared (50.9 ha), mortality associated with site preparation is unlikely to have an effect on any species at the population level.

Another potential cause of bird mortality during construction is vehicular collisions due to increased construction equipment and operation activities in and around the Project. Mortality from vehicular collision may occur during any season (i.e., breeding, wintering or migration) and is most likely to affect passerines. Moderately high levels of vehicle traffic already occur in the LAA due to pre-existing roads.

The potential effect of vehicular collision is expected to extend into operation of the Project from truck traffic (entrance/exit) and train operations. The Terminal will consist of developed infrastructure and graveled or paved surfaces which will offer limited opportunities for foraging or attraction of migratory birds. As such, the risk of collision to resident breeding or wintering birds is expected to be low.

SWM facilities may affect mortality of migratory birds during operations, in the event they that surface water is affected by spills or leaks. Mitigation measures planned including oil grit separators will remove the risk of hydrocarbons from entering the SMW ponds, reducing the pathway to effects. The effects of contaminated water are expected to be limited to “wetland” birds, in particular groups such as waterfowl that would come in contact with and forage in the water. Breeding birds are more likely to be affected than migrating individuals, who would only stage in the ponds for a short period of time. Hatchlings are the most susceptible to be affected by contaminated waters, resulting in reduced nesting success. Based on the field investigations, waterfowl are expected to be uncommon breeders in the LAA. While observations of waterfowl were made over the three years of field investigations, they were not of sufficient density to be recorded on point counts. The point count data suggested the most abundant species in wetland habitat include passerines, which would less frequently come in direct contact with water and less likely to be affected by water contamination.

Site buildings and associated infrastructure pose the potential risk of migratory bird collisions; in particular to nocturnal migrating birds. Many migratory birds, including passerines and shorebirds, migrate during the night, and artificial lighting is known to lead to disorientation of migratory birds and increase collision potential (Evans Ogden 1996). Birds that have lost their celestial navigation aids may enter these illuminated areas and become confused possibly

198 File No. 160960844



resulting in collisions with Project infrastructure. Bird mortality at buildings almost always results from collisions with windows (Machtans et al. 2013). The Project has two main buildings, an administrative building and a garage, which may be a source of window strikes. Other Project infrastructure, such as light standards are expected to have a low risk of bird collision. Within the RAA, there are no habitat types or natural heritage features that are likely to attract a concentration of migrating or staging birds.

The RAA is situated approximately 10 km from the Lake Ontario shoreline. Furthermore, there are no known features within the RAA, such as Important Bird Areas (IBA), that are likely to result in concentrations of migratory birds. As such the Project is not considered to be sited in a “high risk” area for migratory bird collisions. Regardless, although not expected to be high, if unmitigated migratory bird collision with project buildings is anticipated.

Mitigation Measures

The following mitigation measures will be implemented to minimize the potential effects of direct mortality:

• Avoid construction activities with the potential to remove migratory bird habitat during the breeding season (end of March to end of August). Should vegetation clearing activities be unavoidable during this window, a program will be implemented to reduce and avoid effects on migratory birds and their nests.

• Provide employees with sensitivity education for on-site wildlife encounters.

• Implement and enforce speed limits for vehicles on internal roads.

• Pre-treat water run-off before discharge to SWM ponds using oil grit separators.

• Implement a Spill Response Plan to contain contamination, including shut-off valves on SWM ponds in the event of an accidental spill to protect the downstream environment. In the event a SWM pond becomes contaminated with a spill, bird deterrents will be implemented to prevent use of the pond until cleanup measures have been completed.

• During construction, the use of site flood lighting during the migration periods (i.e., April to May and late August through October) will be limited.

• To the extent possible, best management practices to minimize risk of avian collision with windows will be implemented. Such measures include locating vegetation or greenery away from glass and proper building lighting.

Residual Project Effects on Change in Migratory Bird Mortality

The construction and operation of the Project facility could result in a change in migratory bird mortality. However, the implementation of applicable mitigation measures is expected to reduce or eliminate most pathways for this effect.

File No. 160960844 199



During construction, the implementation of timing windows for site preparation and reduced vehicle speeds is anticipated to result in a low change in migratory bird mortality in the LAA. During operation of the Terminal, equipment operations occur in a large paved area that offers very little bird habitat. Furthermore, most vehicular traffic within the terminal will be at low speeds. As such, it is expected that birds will avoid vehicular traffic in the area, and changes in bird mortality in the LAA are expected to be negligible. Other pathways of potential changes in migratory bird mortality during operations including stormwater pond contamination and strikes with buildings and infrastructure, are predicted to be greatly reduced through the application of mitigation measures and not result in any reduction in species diversity within the LAA.

Overall, the change in migratory bird mortality is considered to be adverse, low in magnitude, restricted to the PDA, multiple irregular event, permanent in duration, and irreversible.

6.5.2.9.2 Assessment of Change in Migratory Bird Habitat

Project Pathways

The site preparation is anticipated to have the largest change in migratory bird habitats. The site preparation will result in the loss or alteration of approximately 54.6 ha of terrestrial habitat, including 50.9 ha of grassland habitat and 3.7 ha of wetland habitat. No woodland breeding bird habitat will be removed as a result of construction of the Project. The loss of habitat may displace some migratory bird residences into using habitat outside the PDA. Species likely to be displaced from this agricultural setting are common and widespread in Ontario. Using the point count data, the 50.9 ha of grassland habitat to be cleared supported approximately 407 pairs of breeding birds which will be displaced. By species, this includes approximately 88 pairs of Red-wing Blackbirds, 53 Bobolink, 36 Savannah Sparrow, 24 American Robin, 23 Song Sparrow, 22 Common Grackle and lower numbers of pairs of other species. During the winter season, the grassland habitats, as well as other open agricultural fields, are anticipated to support common wintering species in Ontario, such as Horned Lark or Snow Buntings.

The 3.7 ha of wetland habitat to be altered is estimate to support 14 pairs of breeding birds. By species, this includes approximately five pairs of Red-wing Blackbirds and two pairs each of Killdeer and Mourning Dove, plus lower numbers of other species. The wetlands are not anticipated to be of important value to migrating or stopover waterfowl, given their small size.

Construction of Project infrastructure has the potential to alter remaining habitat by fragmentation, reducing habitat patch size, creating edges along the Project PDA perimeter and linear facilities (e.g., roads, railway lines). However, parcels of migratory bird habitat retained within the LAA will be kept in full and not split by Project components. Furthermore, the remaining grassland, wetland or woodland habitat parcels are separated from the PDA by existing edges (i.e., roads or railway lines). As such, no changes in use of migratory bird habitat are anticipated due to fragmentation.

200 File No. 160960844



Noise associated with the construction of Project site buildings, associated infrastructure and facilities, as well as construction equipment and operation cause a change in migratory birds use within the LAA. Disturbance of this nature may cause temporary displacement of a small number of locally occurring birds to adjacent areas where there are fewer disturbances. Increased intraspecific competition (i.e., competition among individuals of the same species) by individuals temporarily displaced to habitat already occupied by conspecifics (i.e., members of the same species) may occur. Construction and maintenance activities during the nesting season may cause birds nesting near the areas of disturbance to abandon their nests.

During operation, acoustic emissions from truck movement, train and lift operations and equipment maintenance, may result in changes to habitat use, although some birds may habituate to human-made noise and human presence associated with predictable or consistent sounds of day-to-day operations (Steidl and Anthony 2000). Noise generators that exceed 85 decibels (dB) are used to scare off nuisance bird flocks, though birds tend to return once habituation occurs (Dafour 1980; Baxter 2000; Slabbekoorn and Peet 2003). Songbirds may be adversely affected if they are unable to attract mates or defend territories if their songs are drowned out by excessive long term noise, although research suggests that some birds compensate for increases in ambient noise by increasing the pitch and intensity of their songs (Dafour 1980; Baxter 2000; Slabbekoorn and Peet 2003). Raptors are known to tolerate noises of 50 to 80 dB (White and Thurow 1985; Tempel and Gutierrez 2003). Reijnen et al. (1996) suggest that noise levels that are below 47 dB(A) will not have significant effects on breeding birds. Barber et. al. (2010) suggest that physiological responses to noise exposure in animals may begin to appear at exposure levels of 55 to 60 dB(A). Individuals unable to habituate may be displaced into disturbance-free habitat (Steidl and Anthony 2000). Baseline acoustic monitoring found the background noise in the range of 68 to 74 dB in the grassland and woodland habitats in the LAA. As such, these habitats are anticipated to already be affected by high noise levels from existing roads and development.

Operational labour requirements may result in changes to adjacent migratory bird habitat use due to human disturbance. However, most bird species, particular those in agricultural settings, can become accustomed to human presence (Steidl and Anthony 2000).

Mitigation Measures

The following mitigation measures will be implemented in order to minimize the potential effects of habitat loss or alteration:

• The project footprint will be minimized. Unnecessary vegetation clearing around the facility, access roads and rail will be avoided wherever practicable.

• Where possible, wetlands will be enhanced or new ones created to improve breeding opportunities for wetland birds.

• Offsite grassland habitat will be created or protected as an offsets for loss of grassland habitat.

File No. 160960844 201



• Demarcate construction work areas to avoid incidental encroachment into adjacent areas.

• Retain natural habitat features such as wildlife trees; vegetation will be retained wherever possible to provide nesting opportunities for cavity-dependent birds.

• Maintain construction and operations equipment in good working order (e.g., mufflers on vehicles).

• Project layout will be designed to avoid effects on natural features, including:

− Trafalgar Moraine Earth Science ANSI;

− North Oakville-Milton West Wetland Complex; and,

− Protected Countryside land use designation under the Greenbelt Plan.

Residual Project Effects on Change in Migratory Bird Habitat

The construction and operation of the Project facility could result in a change in use of migratory bird habitat. However, the implementation of applicable mitigation measures is expected to reduce or eliminate most pathways for this effect.

To compensate for clearing of habitat during site preparation, grassland and wetland enhancement/compensation measures will be implemented resulting in no net loss of habitat. Disturbance effects during construction, including construction labour requirements and noise emissions may result in reduced bird density, however, this is likely to be short term in nature and; restricted to the two year construction period.

During operation, with mitigation in place, acoustic emissions at grassland and forest habitats within the LAA are predicted to be 69 to 76 dB, a negligible change from baseline conditions (68 to 74 dB).

Overall, the change in use of migratory bird habitat is considered to be adverse, low in magnitude, restricted to the LAA, continuous event, permanent in duration and irreversible.

6.5.2.9.3 Assessment of Sensory Disturbance

Project Pathways

Artificial lighting may create sensory disturbance to migratory landbirds by influencing bird behaviour. In particular, nocturnal migrating birds such as passerines and shorebirds are attracted to artificial lighting. It is hypothesized that migrating birds rely on visual cues (i.e., light) in addition to a magnetic compass mechanism for orientation (Poot et al. 2008). While the attraction to artificial lights at buildings can lead to collisions and bird mortality, this attraction is also believed to indirectly negatively affect migratory birds through depletion of their energy reserves (Gauthreaux and Belser 2006).

202 File No. 160960844



Within the RAA, there are no habitat types or natural heritage features that are likely to result in a concentration migration or staging birds. The RAA is situated away from shorelines of lakes, being approximately 10 km from the Lake Ontario shoreline. The Niagara Escarpment, a linear feature known to host a concentration migration of some species such as diurnal raptors, occurs outside of the RAA, approximately four km to the west of the PDA. Regardless, the Niagara Escarpment is unlikely to affect concentration nocturnal migration; the group most affected by artificial lighting.

Within the PDA, any project components that are lit at night have the potential to attract birds, including buildings, light standards or other external lights. Sky glow and glare for the Project will be controlled by the use of shielded lighting, thereby reducing the effect of attraction of migrating birds.

Mitigation Measures

The following mitigation measures will be implemented in order to minimize the potential effects of sensory disturbance:

• Project lighting used to illuminate the Terminal will be as efficiently as possible, while providing enough light to make the site safe and secure at night. Light fixtures will project light downward to minimize light spillage beyond the PDA (City of Toronto 2007).

• During construction, the use of site flood lighting during the migration periods (i.e., April to May and late August through October) will be limited.

Residual Project Effects on Sensory Disturbance

The construction and operation of the Project facility could result in sensory disturbance to migrating birds through attraction to Project lighting. Although there are many other sources of light pollution within the RAA and the local landscape, including the town of Milton, the Project has the potential to contribute to this effect. However, with implementation of lighting mitigation, this affect is anticipated to be minimized.

Overall, the sensory disturbance to migratory birds through attraction to Project lighting is considered to be adverse, low in magnitude, restricted to the RAA, regular event, permanent in duration and reversible.

6.5.2.9.4 Summary of Project Residual Environmental Effects on Migratory Birds

The summary of Project residual environmental effects on migratory bird is presented in Table 6.22.

File No. 160960844 203



Table 6.22 Summary of Project Residual Environmental Effects on Migratory Birds

Residual Effect


Project Phase

Direction

Magnitude

Geographic

Extent

Duration

Frequency

Reversibility


ic C

ontext

Direct migratory bird mortality

C, O A L PDA P R R D


C, O A L LAA P C I D

Sensory Disturbance C, O A L RAA P R R D

KEY See Table 6.20 for detailed definitions Project Phase C: Construction O: Operation D: Decommissioning and Abandonment Direction: P: Positive A: Adverse N: Neutral Magnitude: N: Negligible L: Low M: Moderate H: High


Frequency: S: Single event IR: Irregular event R: Regular event C: Continuous Reversibility: R: Reversible I: Irreversible Ecological/Socio-Economic Context: D: Disturbed U: Undisturbed R: Resilient NR: Not resilient

6.5.2.9.5 Determination of Significance of Environmental Effects on Migratory Birds


Residual adverse effects on migratory birds related to the Project include change in direct mortality, change in use of habitat, and sensory disturbance due to attraction to Project lighting.

The Project will have adverse effects on migratory birds but all are considered to be low in magnitude, restricted to the RAA and would not substantially affect the local or provincial bird populations. The risk of migratory bird mortality during construction, including site preparation, is anticipated to be negligible with the implementation of mitigation such as timing windows.

204 File No. 160960844



Furthermore, mortality from stormwater pond contamination is unlikely with mitigation in place. There is risk of collision with Project buildings and infrastructure, but with proper mitigation, including lighting and building design, the level of bird mortality is expected to be well below what would have an effect at a population level.

Loss of habitat during site preparation will be offset by grassland habitat creation offsite and wetland habitat enhancements onsite. Noise emissions during operations are estimated to be similar to baseline conditions and as such expected to have a negligible effect. Change in bird habitat use are likely to occur from disturbance from construction and operation labour requirements, but are not anticipated to reduce species diversity in the LAA.

In consideration of the low magnitude of the potential project-specific effects and the mitigation measures that will be implemented, Project residual effects are not expected to cause measurable effects to local and provincial bird populations. The level of certainty for this significance evaluation is considered high.

The conclusion of this environmental assessment is that residual effects of the Project on migratory birds are predicted to be not significant.



SAR are proposed as a VC because of the potential for direct interactions with the Project, requirements of the EIS Guidelines, and federal regulations (SARA) and provincial regulations (ESA) that offer protection to these species.


6.5.3.2.1 Federal Species at Risk Act

The federal SARA, 2002 was created to protect wildlife SAR in Canada. SARA, which became law in June 2003, protects federally listed SAR and their critical habitats. SARA also contains provisions to help manage species of special concern in order to prevent them from becoming endangered, extinct or extirpated. SARA is administered throughout Canada by Environment Canada in conjunction with provincial regulators.

SARA includes prohibitions against killing, harming, harassing, capturing or taking SAR, which makes it illegal to destroy their critical habitats, and can impose restrictions on development and construction projects.

The federal process through which species status are designated begins with an assessment by the COSEWIC, involving a review of status reports and other available information. COSEWIC makes one of the following status designations: extinct, extirpated, endangered, threatened,

File No. 160960844 205



special concern, or not at risk. COSSARO may also determine they do not have sufficient information to classify the species. The status designation is provided to the Minister of Environment and Canadian Endangered Species Conservation Council for review and consideration. The species status may then be added to a schedule of the SARA, which requires an amendment to the Act. Once the species has been added to a schedule, it is afforded legal protection under the SARA. There may be a timeline of several years between the COSEWIC status designation and addition to a SARA schedule.

6.5.3.2.2 Provincial Endangered Species Act

For the purpose of the EIS, reference has been made to the Ontario ESA. The ESA, 2007 protects threatened and endangered species and their habitats by prohibiting anyone from killing, harming, harassing or possessing protected species, as well as prohibiting any damage or destruction to the habitat of species identified on the Species at Risk in Ontario (SARO) List. The ESA is administered in the province by the MNRF.

Provincial species at risk are identified and assessed by the COSSARO, which is a committee of wildlife experts and scientists, and individuals who provide Aboriginal traditional knowledge. COSSARO classifies species according to their degree of risk based on the best available scientific information, community knowledge and Aboriginal traditional knowledge. When COSSARO classifies a SAR, the classification applies throughout Ontario, unless COSSARO indicates that the classification applies only to a specified geographic area in Ontario. Once the COSSARO classification is approved by the Minister, the species is added to the SARO List.

Threatened and endangered species on the SARO List receive immediate general habitat protection; general habitat is defined as areas on which the species depends, directly or indirectly, to carry out its life processes (MNRF 2015c). For some species, general habitat is defined according to three categories (red, orange, yellow) which reflect how tolerant the species is to change in that habitat before its usefulness for the species is compromised. Some species have regulated habitat; which is species-specific and is more precisely defined than general habitat to include specific habitat features and geographic boundaries.


Concerns were expressed for potential effects of the Project on wildlife species, including grassland species and Jefferson Salamander. Baseline studies identified potential SAR known to occur within the RAA, and surveys targeting these species and potential habitat were undertaken, as provided in Appendix E.16. Representatives from the MNCFN participated in field programs in support of terrestrial wildlife and habitat studies. The results of these surveys were considered in the design of the Project and appropriate mitigation measures determined through the assessment of environmental effects.

206 File No. 160960844



Measures to avoid and minimize potential impacts on SAR birds during construction are proposed, and commitments are made to offset the loss of on-site grassland breeding bird habitat as discussed in Section 6.5.2.3.

6.5.3.4 Identification of Environmental Effects and Measurable Parameters

Project activities have the potential to interact with SAR and their associated critical habitat due to change in landscape, construction and operation of the Project and vehicle traffic associated with the Project (Table 6.23).

The activities associated with the Project may affect SAR in the following ways:

• Direct mortality associated with the loss of individuals during the construction and operation of the Project: this may result in changes to the local populations of SAR

• Loss or alteration of critical habitat or residences as a result of site clearing and preparation for the Project as well as disturbance from construction and operation of Project components

Table 6.23: Potential Environmental Effects, Effects Pathways and Measurable Parameters for Species at Risk

Potential Environmental Effect Effect Pathway Measurable Parameter(s) and Units of

Measurement

Changes in direct mortality to federal SAR

Vehicular strikes, clearing of sites. • Observations of SAR mortality on Project roads.

• Observations of SAR mortality or nest destruction during site clearing.

Change to critical habitat of federal SAR.

Removal or changes in habitat Increased disturbance effects.

• Areal extent of altered habitat (m2) compared to availability of habitat.

• Presence of SAR (number of individuals per unit area).


Spatial Boundaries

The spatial boundaries for the environmental effects assessment with respect to SAR are defined below and depicted on Figure 6, Appendix B.

The PDA encompasses the immediate area in which Project activities and components may occur and as such represents the area within which direct physical disturbance may occur as a result of the Project, temporary or permanent. The PDA is consistent for all VCs.

The LAA is the maximum area within which environmental effects from Project activities and components can be predicted or measured within a reasonable degree of accuracy and

File No. 160960844 207



confidence. It consists of the PDA and adjacent areas where Project-related environmental effects on SAR and their critical habitats are reasonably expected to occur. A 120 m area around the PDA boundary has been established to represent the LAA. The LAA is intended to encompass the area in which potential effects of the proposed land use change from the Project might occur, taking into consideration sensitivity of species to disturbance, the habitat requirements of species and the extent of influence of development and site alteration (MNR 2005). The terrestrial LAA covers approximately 392 ha.

The RAA is the area within which residual environmental effects from Project activities and components may interact cumulatively with the residual environmental effects of other past, present and future (i.e., certain or reasonably foreseeable) physical activities. The RAA is restricted to one km outwards from the PDA for SAR and their critical habitats in which residual environmental effects from Project activities and components may interact cumulatively with the residual environmental effects of other past, present and future physical activities. The terrestrial RAA covers approximately 2,046 ha.

Temporal Boundaries

The temporal boundaries for the assessment of potential Project-related environmental effects on SAR encompass both construction and operation of the Project. The construction phase of the Project, which is anticipated to occur over a period of 2 years, will include site preparation (vegetation removal), watercourse and wetland alterations and enhancements construction of linear facilities, buildings and infrastructure. Following construction, the ongoing operation of the Project will include truck, train and lift operations, water management, as well as maintenance to infrastructure.


The residual environmental effects on species at risk (i.e., the environmental effects that remain after mitigation has been applied) are described using the characterizations presented in Table 6.24.

Table 6.24: Characterization of Residual Environmental Effects on Species at Risk



Positive—an effect that moves measurable parameters in a direction beneficial to SAR relative to baseline. Adverse— an effect that moves measurable parameters in a direction detrimental to SAR relative to baseline. Neutral—no net change in measureable parameters for the SAR relative to baseline.

208 File No. 160960844



Table 6.24: Characterization of Residual Environmental Effects on Species at Risk


Magnitude


Negligible – No observed mortality to SAR, including damage to nests. No loss or alteration of critical habitat or residences. Low – Observed mortality to SAR or measureable loss / alteration of critical habitat or residences, but at levels within the range of natural variability (change in population levels consistent with baseline levels); will not affect local species populations. Moderate – Observed mortality to SAR or measureable loss / alteration of critical habitat or residences, outside the range of natural variability, but not posing a risk to viability of local species populations. High – Observed mortality to SAR or measureable loss / alteration of critical habitat or residences that exceeds the limits of natural variability and may affect long-term viability of local species populations.

Geographic Extent

The geographic area in which environmental, effects may occurs


Frequency


Single event – occurs once. Multiple irregular event – occurs at no set schedule. Multiple regular event—occurs at regular intervals . Continuous— occurs continuously.

Duration

The period of time required until the measurable parameter or the VC returns to its existing condition, or the effect can no longer be measured or otherwise perceived

Short-term—residual effect restricted to construction. Medium-term—residual effect extends through construction and operation. Long-term—residual effect extends beyond the life of the Project.

Reversibility



Ecological Context


Undisturbed—area is relatively undisturbed or not adversely affected by human activity with natural SAR habitat remaining. Disturbed—area has been substantially previously disturbed by human development or human development is still present and has limited or anthropogenic SAR habitat remaining.

File No. 160960844 209



In consideration of the criteria for residual environmental effects on species at risk listed above, the following threshold has been established to define a significant adverse residual environmental effect on SAR.

A significant adverse residual environmental effect on SAR is defined as a Project-related environmental affect that:

• Threatens the long-term persistence or viability of a SAR in the RAA that is beyond which natural recruitment (reproduction and immigration) would not return the population to baseline levels.

• Jeopardizes the achievement of self-sustaining population objectives or recovery goals of SAR.


The following SAR and/or their habitats were observed in the LAA:

• Western Chorus Frog – designated as threatened under SARA and not at risk under the ESA – species not present but critical habitat in the LAA;

• Snapping Turtle – designated as special concern under SARA and ESA – observed in the PDA and LAA;

• Eastern Wood-Pewee – designated special concern under ESA and by COSEWIC (not yet on a SARA schedule) – observed in the LAA;

• Barn Swallow – designated as threatened under ESA and by COSEWIC (not yet on a SARA schedule) – observed in the PDA and LAA;

• Bobolink – designated as threatened under ESA and by COSEWIC (not yet on a SARA schedule) – observed in the PDA and LAA;

• Eastern Meadowlark – designated as threatened under ESA and by COSEWIC (not yet on a SARA schedule) – observed in the PDA and LAA; and

• Little Brown Myotis – designated as endangered under SARA and ESA – observed in the LAA.

Other SAR identified through the background review, including Butternut, Eastern Milksnake, Jefferson Salamander, Northern Myotis, Small-footed Myotis and Tri-coloured Bat, but were not recorded within the LAA, nor was suitable habitat for these species.

6.5.3.8 Project Interactions with Species at Risk

Table 6.25 identifies, for each potential effect, the project physical activities that might interact with SAR to result in the identified environmental effect. These interactions are indicated by check marks, and are discussed in detail in Section 6.5.3.9 in the context of effects pathways,

210 File No. 160960844



standard and project-specific mitigation/enhancement, and residual effects. A justification is also provided for non-interactions (no check marks).

Table 6.25: Potential Project Environmental Interactions and Effects on Species at Risk Project Components and Physical Activities



Changes in direct mortality to SAR

Change to critical habitat of SAR

Construction

Site Preparation

Watercourse Crossings and Realignments -

Water Management Facilities -

Site Buildings and Associated Infrastructure - -

Linear Facilities -

Ancillary Facilities - -

Construction Equipment and Operation

Air Contaminant Emissions -

Acoustic Emissions -

Solid Waste Management and Recycling - -

Operations

Truck Entrance/Exit (Gate) -

Train Operations -

Lift Operations - -


Water Management -

Site Buildings, Linear Facilities and Associated Infrastructure

- -

Operation Labour Requirements -

Air Contaminant Emissions - -



Notes:

√ = Potential interactions that might cause an effect.

- = Interactions between the project and the VC are not expected.

File No. 160960844 211



6.5.3.9 Assessment of Residual Environmental Effects on Species at Risk


The environmental effects of the Project on SAR were assessed by determining the relative abundance, distribution and species composition of species at risk in the LAA and their associated critical habitat or residence. The potential of interactions between Project phases and activities and SAR were assessed.

Change in Direct Mortality to Species at Risk

The environmental effects of the Project on SAR were assessed by comparing species likely to be affected by each Project pathway compared to their relative abundance and distribution in the LAA. The relative abundance and distribution were measured through site specific field investigations (i.e., breeding bird point counts; amphibian call counts; reptile area searches; bat acoustic surveys). Wildlife mortality cannot be predicted quantitatively (i.e., number of fatalities per species) with accuracy. As such, a qualitative approach was taken by considering particular risk factors in the habitat or presences of species that would be sensitive to mortality events.

Change to Critical Habitat of Species at Risk

For species with federal recovery strategies, the critical habitat identification in the strategy was used to identify and delineate critical habitat within the LAA. Site-specific information collected through the ELC surveys was used to assist in applying the critical habitat definition.

The residence of SAR were identified based on the definition in the SARA and included such features as nests, dens, roosts or hibernacula. Results of wildlife field surveys (breeding bird point counts; amphibian call counts; reptile area searches; bat acoustic surveys), were used to assess the relative abundance and distribution of residences.

GIS software was used to calculate the area of critical habitat or habitat containing residences affected by Project activities. This analysis produced a rough estimate of the number of individuals of SAR potentially affected by construction and operations.

Baseline and predicted acoustic emission levels were analyzed to assess potential disturbance effects to SAR critical habitats in the LAA.

6.5.3.9.2 Assessment of Change in Species at Risk Mortality

Project Pathways

Based on the pre-construction surveys, Western Chorus Frogs do not presently occur within the LAA. Furthermore, there have been no records of the species within the LAA, either through background information or pre-construction surveys. As such, no mortality to the species is

212 File No. 160960844



anticipated during construction of the Project. In the event Western Chorus Frogs occupy the critical habitat within the LAA in the future there is a potential risk of mortality from vehicular traffic (truck entrance/exit and train operations). However, this risk of mortality is anticipated to remain very low. The critical habitat patch encompasses habitat for all life stages, including movement corridors. As such, occurrences outside of this patch and, within the PDA, are likely to be a rare event.

There is potential for mortality of bird SAR during the site preparation, including removing vegetation, clearing trees, and grubbing (e.g., bird fatalities through nest destruction). Because their nests, eggs, and young are immobile, there is the potential for mortality if these activities occur during the nesting season (end of March to end of August). Site preparation is most likely to affect grassland breeding bird SAR, such as Bobolink and Eastern Meadowlark. Considering the relative amount of habitat to be cleared (50.9 ha), mortality associated with site preparation is unlikely to have an effect on any species at the population level. During operation, these grassland bird species may be at risk of collision with vehicular traffic (truck entrance/exit and train operations). However, this risk of collision is anticipated to be very low. Generally, at the Terminal, equipment operations occur in a large paved area that offers very little bird habitat. Furthermore, most vehicular traffic within the Terminal will be a low speeds.

During construction, Snapping Turtle mortality could occur during in water works associated with watercourse crossings and realignments as well as construction of water management facilities, in particular if heavy equipment is used. Vehicular traffic could be a source of Snapping Turtle mortality during both construction and operation. The most of serious threat to Snapping Turtles in Canada are events that increase adult mortality, particularly of females traveling to nesting sites (COSEWIC 2008). Although moderately high levels of vehicle traffic already occur in the LAA due to pre-existing roads, increased traffic on existing roads and new internal roads may result in an increased risk.

There is no anticipated risk of mortality to the Eastern Wood-Pewee or Little Brown Myotis.

Mitigation Measures

The following mitigation measures will be implemented in order to minimize the potential effects of direct mortality:

• Clearing of vegetation within habitat of Bobolink, Eastern Meadowlark or Barn Swallow will occur outside of the breeding season (end of March to end of August) (Environment Canada 2014).


• Implement and enforce speed limits on internal roads.

File No. 160960844 213



• Conduct turtle rescues to relocate Snapping Turtles before in-water works occur in their habitat. Install exclusionary fencing to prevent individuals from re-entering until construction is complete.

• Permanent exclusionary fencing will be placed around retained/enhanced turtle habitat to avoid interactions with turtles and Project vehicular traffic.

Residual Project Effects on Change in Species at Risk Mortality

The construction and operation of the Project could result in a change in SAR mortality. However, the implementation of applicable mitigation measures is expected to reduce or eliminate most pathways for this effect.

Changes in mortality of Western Chorus Frog are anticipated to be very low to negligible, in particular as individuals of the species are unlikely to occur in the PDA.

During construction, the implementation of timing windows for site preparation and reduced vehicle speeds is anticipated to result in a negligible change in bird species at risk mortality in the LAA. During operation of the Terminal, equipment operations occur in a large paved area that offers very little bird habitat. Furthermore, most vehicular traffic within the Terminal will be a low speeds. As such, it is expected that birds will avoid vehicular traffic in the area, and changes in mortality of bird SAR in the LAA are expected be negligible.

Risk to Snapping Turtle mortality during construction is anticipated to be very low to negligible, with the implementation of mitigation such as relocation of individuals and use of exclusionary fencing. The risk of vehicular collision with Snapping Turtles is also anticipated to be low with mitigation such as speed limits and exclusionary fencing around retained habitat.

Overall, the change in SAR mortality is considered to be adverse, low in magnitude, restricted to the PDA, an irregular event, permanent in duration, and reversible.

6.5.3.9.3 Assessment of Change in Species at Risk Critical Habitat and Residences

Project Pathways

Critical habitat for one species, the Western Chorus Frog, was identified within the LAA. The critical habitat, woodland with vernal pools and adjacent meadow, occurs outside of the PDA and consequently there will be no direct loss as a result of the Project. Potential sources of degradation to critical habitat include siltation or contamination from surface water run-off, associated with water management for the Project. Based on the pre-construction surveys, Western Chorus Frogs do not presently occur within the LAA. As such, disturbance effects on the species are not anticipated from construction of the Project. In the event Western Chorus Frogs occupy the critical habitat within the LAA in the future, potential disturbance effects may occur from Project acoustic emissions (Buchanan 1993; Baker and Richardson 2006; Vargas-Salinas et al. 2014). Predicted, mitigated noise levels at the critical habitat (73 dB) are in the range of those

214 File No. 160960844



measured during baseline conditions (68 dB). As such, potential disturbance effects are expected to be very low to negligible.

While no other species at risk identified within the LAA have critical habitat; potential changes to the residence of these species were considered.

Grasslands consisting of hay and meadow fields provide habitat for Bobolink and Eastern Meadowlark. In total, 40.7 ha of hay and meadow in the PDA will be directly removed during site preparation, resulting in the displacement of the residence of Bobolink and Eastern Meadowlark. Based on the results of the pre-construction point counts, this equates to an estimated 42 residences (pairs) of Bobolink and 14 residences of Eastern Meadowlark. Parcels of Bobolink and Eastern Meadowlark habitat within the LAA, outside of the PDA, are not anticipated to be directly affected by construction. The Project is not anticipated to result in further fragmentation of these parcels beyond the already existing roads and railway. Parcels of Bobolink and Eastern Meadowlark habitat retained within the LAA will be kept in full and not split by Project components. Furthermore, the habitat parcels are separated from the PDA by existing edges (i.e., roads or railway lines).

Bobolink and Eastern Meadowlark habitat that will be retained within the LAA currently experiences disturbance from existing roads and railway. The majority of construction activities will be separated from the habitat by the existing roads and therefore, unlikely to experience disturbance effects. During operation, with mitigation in place, acoustic emissions at Bobolink and Eastern Meadowlark habitats within the LAA are predicted to be 69 to 76 dB, a negligible change from baseline conditions (68 to 74 dB).

One barn within the PDA provides residence for Barn Swallows. During the pre-construction surveys, 11 Barn Swallow residences (i.e., active nests) were confirmed within the barn. This structure will not be removed during site preparation of the Project. Other Barn Swallows residences within the LAA are not anticipated to be indirectly affected by disturbance from the Project. Barn Swallow is a species that commonly nests in proximity to roads, railways (i.e., culverts, bridges) and human presence (e.g., barns, sheds).

Habitat for the Eastern Wood-Pewee occurs in the woodland at the south end of the LAA, outside of the PDA. No direct effects to the residence of the Eastern Wood-Pewee are anticipated. The Eastern Wood-Pewee habitat already receives disturbance from existing roads and railway. Predicted, mitigated noise levels at the habitat (73 dB) are in the range of those measured during baseline conditions (68 dB). As such, noise emissions of the Project are not anticipated to result in abandonment of the residence.

Approximately 3.7 ha of wetland habitat for Snapping Turtle will be altered as result of construction of the Project. These alterations include improvements to Indian Creek (SNTU-3 on Figure 5, Appendix A of Appendix E.16) and restoration of the ponds (SNTU-4 on Figure 5, Appendix A of Appendix E.16). Habitat loss and alteration could result in changes to water levels

File No. 160960844 215



or water quality that may affect the overwintering or summer life cycles of this species. During construction, human activity will occur in Snapping Turtle habitat, which is anticipated to result in temporary disturbance in portions of the habitat within the PDA, in particular during site preparation and watercourse crossings and realignment. However, this disturbance will be short term and use of the habitat is anticipated to return to baseline conditions following construction. Snapping Turtles are generally tolerant to noise disturbance and are not anticipated to be disturbed by the operation of the Terminal.

Little Brown Myotis was recorded within the woodland at the south end of the LAA. No known or potential hibernacula for Little Brown Myotis occur within the RAA. Furthermore, the results of the acoustic surveys did not provide any evidence of residences (i.e., maternity roosts) within the LAA. Regardless, Project construction will not result in any direct loss of woodland habitat where the species was observed. Increases in ambient light or noise are not anticipated to negatively affect Little Brown Myotis. Additional light sources may increase foraging opportunities for bats in the PDA.

Mitigation Measures

The following mitigation measures are recommended for implementation in order to minimize the potential effects of changes to critical habitat or residences of SAR:

• The Project footprint will be minimized. All unnecessary vegetation clearing will be avoided around the Terminal, access roads and rail, wherever and whenever practicable;

• Demarcate construction work area to avoid incidental encroachment into adjacent areas;

• Spill containment kits must be present on site in designated locations where risk of spill is deemed the greatest (e.g., refueling areas);

• Create/protect off-site grassland habitat as offsets for loss of Bobolink and Eastern Meadowlark residences;

• Retain natural vegetation along the boundaries of the Project to provide noise buffers and to limit noise associated with clearing;

• Maintain construction and operations equipment in good order (e.g., vehicle mufflers);

• Where permissible under safety requirements, outdoor lights (i.e., Terminal light standards) will be shielded to minimize light spillage beyond the required areas; and,


Residual Project Effects on Change in Species at Risk Critical Habitat and Residence

The construction and operation of the Project could result in a change in SAR critical habitat or residences. However, the implementation of applicable mitigation measures is expected to reduce or eliminate most pathways for this effect.

216 File No. 160960844



Construction and operation of the Project is not anticipated to directly affect critical habitat for SAR, specifically the Western Chorus Frog. The habitat occurs outside of the PDA, with most outside the LAA. Indirect effects during construction and operation should be negligible with mitigation.

Direct effects of Project construction on the residences of Bobolink, Eastern Meadowlark and Barn Swallow will be offset with habitat compensation. With mitigation, indirect effects to their habitats within the LAA are expected to be very low to negligible.

Residence of the Snapping Turtle will be temporary disturbed during construction of the Project. However, with mitigation and enhancement measures, the residences are anticipated to continue to be used during operation of the Project.

Effects to the woodland habitat, which contain residences of Eastern Wood Pewee and Little Brown Myotis are anticipated to be very low to negligible. The woodland occurs outside of the PDA and only a small portion within the LAA. With mitigation in place, indirect effects should be negligible.

Overall, change to SAR critical habitat and residences is considered to be adverse, low in magnitude, restricted to the LAA, a continuous event, permanent in duration and irreversible.

6.5.3.9.4 Summary of Project Residual Environmental Effects on Species at Risk

The summary of Project residual environmental effects on species at risk is presented in Table 6.26

File No. 160960844 217



Table 6.26: Summary of Project Residual Environmental Effects on Species at Risk

Residual Effect


Project Phase

Direction

Magnitude

Geographic

Extent

Duration

Frequency

Reversibility


ic C

ontext

Changes in direct mortality to federally SAR C, O A L PDA P IR R D

Change to critical habitat of federally SAR. C, O A L LAA P C IR D KEY See Table 6.24 for detailed definitions Project Phase C: Construction O: Operation D: Decommissioning and Abandonment Direction: P: Positive A: Adverse N: Neutral Magnitude: N: Negligible L: Low M: Moderate H: High


Frequency: S: Single event IR: Irregular event R: Regular event C: Continuous Reversibility: R: Reversible I: Irreversible Ecological/Socio-Economic Context: D: Disturbed U: Undisturbed R: Resilient NR: Not resilient

6.5.3.9.5 Determination of Significance of Environmental Effects on Species at Risk


Residual adverse effects on SAR related to the Project include change in direct mortality and changes critical habitat for some species.

The Project will have adverse effects on SAR but all are considered to be low in magnitude, restricted to the LAA and would not substantially affect the local or provincial bird populations. The risk of SAR mortality during construction, including site preparation, is anticipated to be negligible with the implementation of mitigation such as timing windows for birds and relocation of turtles.

Changes in residences during site preparation will be offset by Bobolink and Eastern Meadowlark habitat creation, installation of Barn Swallow nesting structure and enhancements of Snapping Turtle habitat. Noise emissions during operational are estimated to be similar to baseline conditions and as such expected to have a negligible effect.

218 File No. 160960844



In consideration of the low magnitude of the potential project-specific effects and the mitigation measures that will be implemented, Project residual effects are not expected to cause measurable effects to local and provincial SAR populations. The level of certainty for this significance evaluation is considered high.

The conclusion of this EA is that residual of the Project on SAR are predicted to be not significant.

6.5.4 Human Health


Human health has been selected as a VC because of its inherent importance to the wellbeing of humans and based on regulatory requirements. This assessment evaluates the change in human health that could result from a change in air quality from direct exposure via inhalation to COPCs released during the construction and operation phases of the Project. No other exposure pathways of concern are applicable to the evaluation of human health (see Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Human Health Risk Assessment (Appendix E.7).


The scope of the Human Health VC satisfies the requirements under the CEAA, 2012, which considers the potential project effects to human health. The assessment of the Human Health VC relies on results of the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Human Health Risk Assessment (Appendix E.7). The Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Human Health Risk Assessment follows guidance framework published by Health Canada as follows:

• Federal Contaminated Sites Risk Assessment in Canada, Part I: Guidance on Human Health Risk Preliminary Quantitative Risk Assessment, Version 2.0 (Health Canada 2012).

• Federal Contaminated Sites Risk Assessment in Canada, Part II: Health Canada Toxicological Reference Values and Chemical-Specific Factors, Version 2.0 (Health Canada 2010).


Concerns were expressed regarding air quality resulting from pollution (emissions) generated as a result of construction and operation of the Terminal, and corresponding impacts on human health. An analysis of changes to air quality based on baseline conditions and predicted emissions from activities within the care and control of CN was prepared (Appendix E.1). This information was used to inform the completion of a Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report - Human Health Risk Assessment (Appendix E.7).

Measures to minimize air emissions during construction and operation are proposed. Monitoring to confirm predicted effects and ensure compliance with mitigation measures, design plans and approval conditions will occur.

File No. 160960844 219



6.5.4.4 Identification of Environmental Effects and Measurable Parameters

The selection of potential effects to human health for the purposes of assessment is based on regulatory requirements, the expectations of government experts, and the professional judgment of the study team. The potential effects selected for evaluation include:

Change in human health – The construction and operation phases of the Project may release COPCs into the environment. Short-term and long-term direct exposure via inhalation of these chemicals could affect human health.

Measurable parameters are used to assess the potential for change to human health and are based on the risk characterization predictions derived in the Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA). For non-carcinogenic COPCs, exposure ratios (ERs) were used to evaluate the health risk from short-term (acute) and long-term (chronic) exposure to COPCs in air. For carcinogenic COPCs, the assessment of human health risks was expressed as an incremental lifetime cancer risk (ILCR). Technical details for the derivation of the measurable parameter are provided in the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Human Health Risk Assessment (Appendix E.7). Table 6.27 presents the potential effects, effect pathway and measurable parameters for the assessment of effects on human health.

Table 6.27: Potential Environmental Effects, Effect Pathways and Measureable Parameters for Human Health

Potential Environmental

Effect Effect Pathway Measurable Parameter(s) and Units of

Measurement

Change in human health

• Short-term and long-term direct exposure via inhalation of contaminants of potential concern in the air that could be a result of activities during construction and operation phases of the Project.

• Exposure Ratio (ER) - Chemical exposure (i.e., non-carcinogenic) that exceeds objectives established by relevant regulatory organization(s), and are likely to result in a short-term and/or long-term change in the health of an identified receptor(s). This conclusion is based on a consideration of ER and relevant contextual effects attributes.

• Incremental Lifetime Cancer Risk (ILCR) - The estimated incremental increase in lifetime cancer risk ssociated with lifetime of exposure to a carcinogen emitted from the Project.


Spatial Boundaries

The spatial boundaries for human health include both the local assessment area and the regional assessment area. Both assessment areas are based on the spatial boundaries defined

220 File No. 160960844



by the air quality assessment because these areas incorporate the potential changes in environmental media from air emissions as well as from all other Project-related emissions.

The PDA has been defined as the area of physical disturbance directly associated with the Project footprint (i.e., land that will be physically disturbed for the purpose of the Project). The PDA is constituted by a 10 m buffer around all project components as shown in Figure 3, Appendix B.

The LAA encompasses the area where there is a potential for significant changes in air quality due to emissions from the Project. The LAA is consistent with the receptor grid that was established for the air quality assessment dispersion modeling (Refer to Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report - Air Quality (Appendix E.1)) and in this case is a nominal 20 km x 20 km computational domain centered on the PDA. The location of the LAA is shown in Appendix E.1.

The RAA is the area that establishes the context of project-specific effects within which the effects from the Project in combination with those of past, present and reasonably foreseeable projects are assessed. In this assessment, the RAA is equivalent to the LAA (Refer to Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report - Air Quality (Appendix E.1)).

Temporal Boundaries

The temporal boundaries for the assessment of potential Project-related effects on human health encompass both construction and operation of the Project. Construction is expected to start in 2017 and will be 18 to 24 months in duration, with the operation of the Terminal to commence in 2019.


Characterization of residual project effects for a change in human health is presented in Table 6.28.

Table 6.28: Characterization of Residual Environmental Effects on Human Health



Positive—the Project will have a beneficial effect on human health relative to baseline. Adverse—the Project may have a potential detrimental effect on human health relative to baseline. Neutral—the Project will have no effect on human health relative to baseline.

File No. 160960844 221



Table 6.28: Characterization of Residual Environmental Effects on Human Health


Magnitude The amount of change in measurable parameters or the VC relative to existing conditions

Negligible—project-related environmental exposures do not result in a change in human health. Low-project-related environmental exposures are unlikely to substantially change human health. Moderate-project-related environmental exposures may result in a long-term, substantive change in human health. High—project-related environmental exposures are likely to result in a long-term, substantive change in human health.

Geographic Extent

The geographic area in which a health effect occurs


Frequency Identifies when the residual effect occurs and how often during the Project or in a specific phase

Single event—occurs once. Multiple irregular events —occurs sporadically (and intermittently) throughout assessment period. Multiple regular event—occurs repeatedly and regularly throughout assessment period. Continuous—residual effect occurs continuously.


Short-term—effect lasts less than 24 hours (typically associated with reversible effects). Long-term—effect may last for construction, operation, or closure phases (typically associated with reversible effects). Permanent—effect is permanent (human health effects associated with chronic exposure are considered a permanent effect and are typically irreversible).

Reversibility Pertains to whether a measurable parameter or the VC can return to its existing condition after the project activity ceases

Reversible—the effect is likely to be reversed after project completion and reclamation. Irreversible—the effect is unlikely to be reversed (permanent).

Socio-economic Context


Undisturbed—area is relatively undisturbed or not adversely affected by human activity. Disturbed—area has been substantially previously disturbed by human development or human development is still present.

6.5.4.6.1 Significance Definition

A significant residual adverse effect for a Change to Human Health is one that results from Project-related environmental exposures (i.e., inhalation) that are predicted through the HHRA

222 File No. 160960844



to exceed the target benchmarks established by a recognized health organization and are likely to result in a long-term, substantive change in human health. When predicted human health risks are less than the target benchmarks, adverse health effects are not expected and correspondingly a change to human health is not expected. If predicted human health risks exceed the target benchmarks, it does not necessarily indicate an adverse health effect is expected or that a change to human health will occur, but rather triggers a more in-depth review of assumptions and conservatism outlined in the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Human Health Risk Assessment (Appendix E.7).


Existing conditions for human health have been established using a predictive quantitative risk assessment (i.e., HHRA) of the potential human health risks associated with exposures to existing chemical concentrations measured in the environment (i.e., the baseline scenario). A detailed description of existing conditions for the Project is provided in the Milton Logistic Hub Technical Date Report – Human Health Risk Assessment (Appendix E.7).

6.5.4.7.1 Methods

In the LAA, ambient air quality monitoring is conducted as part of the NAPS operated by Environment Canada in populated regions of Canada. The NAPS network data for the recent five years (2009-2013) in the nearest monitoring stations to the LAA were used in the ambient air quality evaluation for the LAA (Appendix E.1). Locations of Ontario's Ambient Air Monitoring Stations were also checked and these locations are consistent with the NAPS stations used in the assessment for the subject area.

The Regional Municipality of Halton has operated an ambient monitoring program in Milton since August 2008 and has published annual Air Monitoring Reports since 2009. The station continuously measures SO2, NO2, CO, O3, and PM2.5, and serves to complement the ambient monitoring program at the Oakville and Burlington stations operated by the MOECC/NAPS for the Halton Region (Halton Region 2014a). Complete sets of hourly ambient monitoring data are available from the Halton Region’s web site for years 2009 and 2010 only. Since there is limited data available, data from this station was not included in the ambient air quality evaluation for the LAA. Monitoring stations in Mississauga, Oakville, and Burlington (i.e., in the Halton Region), and in Hamilton were selected to characterize baseline conditions based on their proximity to the PDA. Since particulate matter up to 10 micrometers in size (PM10), volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and total polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) were measured only at the Hamilton station, two additional monitoring stations closest to the PDA with available VOC and PAH data were added to the list: the Brampton station and the Etobicoke station. VOC data were available from the Brampton station and PM10 and total PAH data were available from the Etobicoke station.

File No. 160960844 223



Existing conditions for human health are predicted through the HHRA using exposure ratios for non-carcinogen COPCs. Since regulators have not recommended an acceptable benchmark applicable to exposures to carcinogenic COPCs associated with existing conditions (i.e., the baseline scenario), carcinogenic health risks for baseline conditions have not been quantified in the HHRA. The HHRA followed a conservative approach and focused on hypothetical receptors with exaggerated exposures so that risks are over-stated, rather than understated. Human receptors that are expected to have the greatest exposure via inhalation are local residents.

6.5.4.7.2 Overview

A detailed description of existing conditions at the Site is provided in the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Human Health Risk Assessment (Appendix E.7) and is summarized below:

• The review of ambient air monitoring data shows that the measured hourly, 24-hour and annual ambient levels for all COPCs are below the relevant air quality standards with the exception of annual benzene and B(a)P background air concentrations.

• Benzene is measured only at two of the selected ambient air monitoring stations in Hamilton and Brampton. The annual average background air concentrations for all available years at both stations were above the applicable ambient air quality standard. The anthropogenic sources include automobile exhaust and fugitive emissions from gas stations, as well as a wide variety of other industrial activities such as steel manufacturing facilities (MOE 2011a).

• B(a)P (i.e., as a surrogate of total PAHs) is measured at ambient air monitoring stations in Hamilton and Etobicoke. The annual average background air concentrations for all available years at both stations were above the applicable ambient air quality standard. In rural and urban areas, anthropogenic sources such as vehicular traffic and incomplete combustion of organic material and fossil fuels produce the majority of the PAHs (including B(a)P) found in the air (MOE 2011b); consequently, because of such widespread sources, PAHs are ubiquitous contaminants in both the general environment and in certain working environments.

• B(a)P Monitoring of ambient air quality at the Project was initiated in early August 2015. The ongoing data collection of air quality parameters will continue for the next several months, once sufficient data are collected they will be analyzed and compared to the published air quality data used as the basis of this assessment. The requirement for an update to the HHRA will be assessed once the analysis of the site-specific air quality measurements is completed.

6.5.4.8 Project Interactions with Human Health

Project components and physical activities that might interact with human health are identified in Table 6.29. These interactions are indicated by check marks, and are discussed in detail in Section 6.5.4.9 in the context of effects pathways, standard and project-specific

224 File No. 160960844



mitigation/enhancement, and residual effects. A justification is also provided for non-interactions (no check marks).

Table 6.29: Project Interactions with Human Health



Change in Human Health

Construction

Site Preparation and Grading Activities

Track Construction and Signals Installation –

Terminal Infrastructure –

Grade Separations –

Utilities –

Watercourse Realignment, Restoration and Naturalization –

Construction Equipment and Operation –

Air Contaminant Emissions

Acoustic Emissions –

Solid Waste Management and Recycling –

Operations

Truck Entrance/Exit (Gate) –

Train Operations –

Lift Operations –

Equipment Maintenance –

Water Management –

Site Buildings, Linear Facilities and Associated Infrastructure –

Operation Labour Requirements –


Acoustic Emissions –

Solid Waste Management and Recycling – NOTES: = Potential interactions that might cause an effect. – = Interactions between the project and the VC are not expected.

Based on the relevance of the Project activities, the professional judgment of the study team, and the ability to mitigate potential adverse effects, some project activities are not expected to directly or indirectly affect human health because they do not result in emissions, these include:

File No. 160960844 225



solid waste management and recycling during construction or operations, water management (i.e., SWM), equipment maintenance, and labour requirements during operations.

All other project activities during the construction and operation phases will directly or indirectly result in a change to air quality and subsequently potentially a change in human health. The potential Project interactions with Human Health with respect to acoustic emissions are evaluated separately (see Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Noise Effect Assessment (Appendix E.10)).

6.5.4.9 Assessment of Residual Environmental Effects on Human Health

The assessment of the potential for change in human health associated with direct exposure to COPC from project-related activities via inhalation is based on the health risks characterized for human receptors as presented in the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Human Health Risk Assessment (Appendix E.7).

As presented in the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Human Health Risk Assessment (Appendix E.7), in order for there to be a health risk three factors must be present (see Diagram 6.2):

1. A receptor (i.e., a person) 2. A chemical of potential concern (i.e., hazard) 3. A way for the receptor to come into contact with the chemical of potential concern

(exposure pathways)

226 File No. 160960844



Diagram 6.2: HHRA Risk Components

If any one of these three components is missing, there would be no potential for health risks. For example, if a receptor and a chemical are present but there is no way for the receptor to come into contact with the chemical (i.e., an exposure pathway is not present), there would be no potential health risk.

For this Project, to assess the potential for change in human health, potential health risks to human receptors from direct exposure to chemicals of potential concern were evaluated for the following exposure pathways:

• People may inhale CACs, including NO2, CO, SO2, PM, including PM10 and PM2.5, B(a)P, and select VOCs, including benzene, 1,3-butadiene, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, and acrolein.

The potential change in human health of CN workers in the PDA is protected by various occupational health and safety standards, codes and regulations; thus occupational health and safety is not addressed in the scope of this assessment.


The HHRA was conducted according to the guidance documents published by Canadian regulatory agencies as outlined and detailed in the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Human Health Risk Assessment (Appendix E.7).

The release of project-related chemicals of potential concern into the atmosphere from air emissions (construction and operation) may result in human exposures. As a result, the HHRA focused on assessing potential human health risks associated with these project activities, using

Receptor

Exposure HazardRisk

File No. 160960844 227



air quality modelling information provided in the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report - Air Quality (Appendix E.1).

The HHRA considered five main scenarios:

1. The “Baseline” scenario evaluates potential health risks based upon measured ambient background air quality levels from existing environmental components or activities.

2. The “Project Construction” scenario evaluates potential health risks from construction activities only.

3. The “Project Alone” scenarios evaluates potential health risks due to the Project operating conditions, which include the emissions from the Project only.

4. The “Baseline + Project Construction” scenario evaluates potential health risks from air quality from other existing sources (i.e., Baseline) in addition to the contribution from the construction of the Project (i.e., Project Construction).

5. The “Baseline + Project Alone” scenario evaluates potential health risks from air quality from other existing sources (i.e., Baseline) in addition to the contribution from the Project (i.e., Project Alone).

The U.S. EPA’s AERMOD air dispersion model was used to predict the maximum off-site 1-hour, 24-hour and annual average GLCs for the contaminants assessed (see Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report - Air Quality (Appendix E.1)). A 20 km by 20 km computational domain of gridded receptors was used in the air quality modelling assessment, as well as a select set of special receptors in close proximity to the PDA.

Special receptors are locations where human activity more regularly takes place. The special receptors selected in the LAA include farmhouses and residences. The majority of the nearby receptors are located along Lower Base Line, Tremaine Road and First Line. A total of 40 special receptor locations were identified to be close to the PDA and are considered in the assessment. Potential future development receptors in the vicinity of the Project area are also included in these receptors.

6.5.4.9.2 Assessment of Change in Human Health

Project Pathways

The construction and operation phases of the Project may release COPCs into the environment where short-term and long-term direct exposure via inhalation of these chemicals could potentially affect human health. The primary air emission sources during the construction and operation phases of the Project are mobile or stationary equipment that discharge emissions from the combustion of fuels (e.g., gasoline and diesel). Fugitive dust emissions may also be generated by road traffic during the movement of mobile equipment (e.g., trucks).

228 File No. 160960844



The emission sources during the construction phase of the Project include non-road equipment (e.g., excavators and graders), and handling and processing of cement and aggregate materials from a temporary portable concrete plant.

The mobile emission sources during operation phase of the Project include locomotives passing along the mainline, locomotives passing along the future track, locomotive idling, non-road equipment (e.g., reach stackers and shunters/hostlers), and trucks transporting containers. The stationary emission sources include the future three on-site powerpack generators and one clip-on generator.

Mitigation Measures

Mitigation measures specific to human health have not been recommended; however, a number mitigation measures will be implemented to eliminate or reduce potential environmental effects from a change in air quality, including:

• Best Management Practices (BMPs) to reduce CACs, Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs) and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions will be incorporated into Project design wherever possible.

• Dust will be controlled through the use of dust suppressants (i.e., water, not oil), minimizing the area of activity, minimizing activities that generate large quantities of dust during high winds, covering truckloads of materials which could generate dust (as necessary), and paving areas as required.

• Materials stored on-site will be covered or wetted to prevent blowing dust, where practicable.

• Access and onsite roads will be watered as required to control fugitive dust emissions.

Residual Project Effects on Change in Human Health

This section provides a summary of the predicted health risks due to the Project. The implementation of applicable mitigation measures is expected to reduce potential human exposures to COPCs related to the construction and operation of the Project.

A detailed description of residual project effects from the Project is provided in the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Human Health Risk Assessment (Appendix E.7) and is summarized below:

• The Air Quality assessment predicted air concentrations of each of the COPCs at the maximum point of impingement (MPOI), which is typically located at the PDA fence-line, and at each of the 40 special receptor locations. By definition, the MPOI concentrations are higher than those modeled to occur at the special receptor locations. The predicted air concentrations were used as inputs to the human health risk assessment to estimate potential health risks associated with short-term (1-hour and 24-hour) and long-term (annual average) inhalation exposures to COPCs for each of the five evaluated scenarios: Project

File No. 160960844 229



Construction, Baseline, Project Alone, Baseline plus Project Construction, and Baseline plus Project Alone. Exposure ratios were used to evaluate the potential magnitude of the human health risks from short-term and long-term (non-carcinogens) exposure to COPCs in air and incremental lifetime cancer risks were used to evaluate long-term carcinogenic health risks.

• At the MPOI, potential human health risks were identified for 24-hour PM10, and 24-hour and annual PM2.5 during the operation phase of the Project when predicted air concentrations were considered with existing conditions (i.e., Baseline plus Project Alone scenario). However, the predicted concentrations for these parameters that result in exposure ratios above the target benchmark, were predicted to occur at the PDA boundary of the Project in uninhabited areas where no special receptor locations are located in the close proximity. As a result, there is a low likelihood of any receptor being exposed in these uninhabited areas at the exact location and time of the predicted PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations that result in exposure ratios above the target benchmark; therefore, short- and/or long-term health risks due to inhalation of PM10 and PM2.5 at the MPOI are not expected. MPOI results are discussed in detail the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Human Health Risk Assessment (Appendix E.7).

• At the special receptor locations, potential human health risks were identified for 24-hour PM10 during the construction phase of the Project when considered with existing conditions (i.e., Baseline plus Project Construction scenario). However, the 24-hour air concentrations for PM10 are predicted at a low frequency and 99.9% of the time PM10 concentrations are anticipated to meet the health-based guideline. As a result, there is a low likelihood for health risks due to short-term exposure to PM10. No health risks were predicted at the special receptor locations from the operation phase of the Project.

6.5.4.9.3 Summary of Project Residual Environmental Effects on Human Health

Overall, although potential health risks were identified as a result predicted project-related changes to air quality, with the application of recommended mitigation measures, the residual environmental effect is negligible and not significant and the Project will not likely result in a change to human health.

230 File No. 160960844



Table 6.30: Summary of Project Residual Environmental Effects on Human Health

Residual Effect


Project Phase

Direction

Magnitude

Geographic

Extent

Duration

Frequency

Reversibility


ic C

ontext

Human Health C, O A N LAA P IR R D



Frequency: S: Single event IR: Irregular event R: Regular event C: Continuous Reversibility: R: Reversible I: Irreversible Ecological/Socio-Economic Context: D: Disturbed U: Undisturbed

6.5.5 Socio-Economic Conditions


The definition of “environmental effect” in the CEAA, 2012 includes any effect of any change that the Project may cause in the environment that could result in an effect on socio-economic conditions. The EIS Guidelines require consideration of “the potential for a change in the environment caused by the Project to affect socio-economic conditions.” The Socio-Economic Conditions VC was selected for inclusion based on its contribution to the quality of life of local stakeholders and its potential effects on the capacity of local services and infrastructure.

The Project is anticipated to affect socio-economic conditions through:

• Changes to community services and infrastructure, specifically road transportation at rail crossings.

File No. 160960844 231



• Changes to the availability and types of land and resource use activities in the PDA and LAA.

The effects assessment for the Socio-Economic Conditions VC has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the EIS Guidelines as provided in Appendix A.


The Project is federally regulated, and as such subject to relevant federal legislation. However, certain provincial laws have also been taken into consideration where appropriate to ensure completeness.

Municipal and regional authorities and relevant government departments and agencies are responsible for monitoring demands on community services and infrastructure as part of their normal planning processes.

Land and resource use activities and municipal and regional planning documents that are referenced in this assessment are managed through regulatory and legal frameworks related to resource management, navigation and municipal and regional planning.

Local jurisdictions and management unit boundaries considered in this assessment include:

• Town of Milton (includes the Boyne Secondary Survey Plan Area);

• Regional Municipality of Halton (Halton Region);

• Greenbelt Plan;

• WMU 79D;

• Registered Bait Harvesting Area AU0003; and,

• Fisheries Management Zone 16.

Local land and resource management plans and policies associated with these administrative areas are considered in assessing the significance of effects.


Concerns were identified relating to the location of the proposed Terminal, compatibility with proposed land uses, traffic, safety and effects of the Project on recreational activities, specifically cycling and land use resulting from Project activities. Baseline studies were completed to identify existing socio-economic conditions within the RAA, such as land use, infrastructure, and recreational activities, as provided in Appendix E.12. These conditions were considered in the design of the Project and identification of appropriate mitigation measures determined through the assessment of environmental effects to minimize impacts on community services, infrastructure and land use.

232 File No. 160960844



6.5.5.4 Identification of Socio-Economic Effects and Measurable Parameters

The assessment of Project-related effects on the Socio-Economic Conditions VC looks at two effects:

• Change in demand for community services and infrastructure –changes may occur as a result of Project-related activities such as the construction of the grade separation at Lower baseline as discussed in Section 6.5.5.9.2; and,

• Change in the quantity and quality of land and resource use –changes may occur as a result of Project-related changes to land cover, navigability of Indian Creek, as well as changes in viewscapes and emissions as discussed in Section 6.5.5.9.3.

Table 6.31 presents the potential effects, effect pathway and measurable parameters for the assessment of effects on Socio-Economic Conditions.

Table 6.31: Potential Environmental Effects, Effects Pathways and Measurable Parameters for Socio-Economic Conditions

Potential Environmental Effect Effect Pathway Measurable Parameter(s) and Units of Measurement

Change in demand for community services and infrastructure

Construction of the grade separation on Lower Base Line may affect traffic flow for road users (e.g., motor vehicle operators, cyclists and others).

• Overlap between Project construction activities and Lower Base Line.

Change in the quantity and quality of land and resource use

Site preparation and changes in access to the PDA may reduce the area available for agriculture. Removal of page-wire fences will improve navigability of Indian Creek and increase potential for recreational resource use. Emissions and changes in viewscapes may affect the quality of the experience of land and resource users, including recreational users (e.g., cyclists).

• Agricultural area (ha) overlapped by Project.

• Level of disturbance from atmospheric (light, dust and other contaminants) and acoustic emissions.

• Changes to viewscapes. • Change in ability to navigate

watercourses.


Spatial Boundaries

The spatial boundaries for the environmental effects assessment with respect to socio-economic conditions are defined below and depicted on Figure 6, Appendix B.

File No. 160960844 233



The PDA encompasses the immediate area in which Project activities and components may occur and as such represents the area within which direct physical disturbance may occur as a result of the Project, temporary or permanent. The PDA is consistent for all VCs as depicted on Figure 3, Appendix B.

Two distinct LAAs are used to assess the effects on the Socio-Economic Conditions VC. The LAA for assessing the change in the quantity and quality of land and resource use is an area extending 1.5 km around the PDA (Figure 3, Appendix E.12). This LAA was selected based on the anticipated extent of direct effects on this component in the PDA as well as indirect effects on the quality of land and resource uses outside the PDA as a result of noise emissions. The LAA for assessing change in demand for community services and infrastructure is the Town of Milton (Figure 2, Appendix E.12). The Town of Milton is the community most likely to experience Project-related change in demand for community services and infrastructure.

The RAA for change in the quantity and quality of land and resource use and change in demand for community services and infrastructure is Halton Region (Figure 6, Appendix B). Where appropriate, reference is also made to the GTHA and GGH.

Temporal Boundaries

Physical works and demands on community services and infrastructure will occur at all stages of the Project. Consequently, direct and indirect effects on community services and infrastructure are anticipated at each stage. As a result, the entire Project life is considered in the assessment.

The temporal boundaries for assessing Project effects on land and resource use are:

• construction – approx. 18 to 24 months; and,

• operation (800 trucks per day each way).


Characterizations of residual effects are defined in Table 6.32.

234 File No. 160960844



Table 6.32: Characterization of Residual Effects on Socio-Economic Conditions

Characterization Description Quantitative Measure or Definition of Qualitative

Categories


Positive—an effect that moves measurable parameters in a direction beneficial to Socio-Economic Conditions relative to baseline. Adverse— an effect that moves measurable parameters in a direction detrimental to Socio-Economic Conditions relative to baseline. Neutral—no net change in measureable parameters for the Socio-Economic Conditions relative to baseline.

Magnitude


Change in Demand for Community Services and Infrastructure Negligible—no measurable change. Low— A measurable change in use of, or access to, infrastructure and services, but on a scale that it is within the current available capacity. Moderate— A measurable effect on a scale that displace public access or use. High— A measurable effect on a scale that will either affect the viability or displace public use of infrastructure and services. Change in the Quantity and Quality of Land Use Where quantitative measurement is not possible, the following qualitative descriptors are employed: Negligible—no change that affects a minimal number of land and resource users. Low—a measurable change that affects a small number of land and resource users. Moderate—measurable change but less than high because the change affects less than the majority of land and resource users. High—measurable change that affects the majority of land and resource users.

Geographic Extent

The geographic area in which environmental effects may occur


Frequency


Single event Multiple irregular event—occurs at no set schedule. Multiple regular event—occurs at regular intervals. Continuous— occurs continuously.

File No. 160960844 235



Table 6.32: Characterization of Residual Effects on Socio-Economic Conditions

Characterization Description Quantitative Measure or Definition of Qualitative

Categories

Duration


Short-term—residual effect restricted to a period of up to 24 months (construction). Permanent—measurable parameter unlikely to recover to pre-existing conditions.

Reversibility



Socio-Economic Context


Change in Demand for Community Services and Infrastructure Low resilience— Infrastructure and services capacity is exceeded or just able to meet existing demand, with no additional capacity available, or capacity is occasionally met or exceeded by demand. Moderate resilience—Infrastructure and service capacity exceeds current demand with some additional capacity available. High resilience—Infrastructure and service capacity greatly exceeds existing demand. Change in Quantity and Quality of Land Use Undisturbed—area is relatively undisturbed or not adversely affected by human activity. Disturbed—area has been substantially previously disturbed by human development or human development is still present. NA— Not applicable.

6.5.5.6.1 Significance Definition

In consideration of the criteria for residual environmental effects on socio-economic conditions listed above, the following thresholds have been established to define a significant adverse residual environmental effect on socio-economic conditions.

A significant adverse residual environmental effect on socio-economic conditions is defined as a Project-related environmental effect that:

236 File No. 160960844



• results in demands for community services or infrastructure that exceed current capacity, such that standards of service are routinely and persistently reduced below current levels for an extended period and are unlikely to recover to existing conditions.

• is one in which the proposed use of land for the Project and related facilities is not compatible with adjacent land use activities as designated through a regulatory land use process, and/or the proposed use of the land will create a change or disruption that widely restricts or degrades present land uses to a point where the activities cannot continue at current levels and for which the environmental effects are not mitigated or compensated.


This section provides an overview of existing socio-economic conditions in the PDA, LAA and RAA. The information included in this section is intended to directly support the assessment of potential Project effects carried out in Section 6.5. A more detailed description of socio-economic baseline conditions is provided in the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report -Socio-Economic Baseline (Appendix E.12). An analysis of the compatibility of the Project with existing plans is provided in the Planning Justification Report (Appendix E.11).

The Project is located in the Town of Milton in Halton Region, which is part of the GTHA and GGH. The GGH is the largest urban area in Canada.

Community Services and Infrastructure

The Town of Milton is responsible for the construction and maintenance of local municipal roads and local land use planning and other local services. Regional roads are constructed and maintained by Halton Region.

The roads bounding the PDA consist of two local, municipal roads (First Line and Lower Base Line) and two regional roads (Britannia Road and Tremaine Road). Traffic congestion is a growing concern within Halton Region although compared to other regions in the GGH, Halton Region has some of the lowest traffic-related road delays. The current operation of the CN mainline through Milton causes regular delays on both Britannia Road and Lower Base Line due to level rail crossings. Halton Region has planned to widen both Britannia Road (between Tremaine Road and Highway 4), Tremaine Road (Britannia Road and Campbellville Road) as well as construct a grade separation at the intersection of the CN Rail and Britannia Road, all by 2016 (Halton Region n.d. a).

Agricultural Land Use

Agricultural land use dominates the LAA and RAA. Lands within the PDA consist primarily of active agricultural lands, the majority of which are used in the cultivation of row crops (i.e., soybeans, corn, wheat, etc.) with some of the fields also used to grow hay. CN owns the agricultural lands within the PDA and currently leases them to individual farmers. Halton Region

File No. 160960844 237



has designated the lands located west of the CN mainline as employment lands and the lands located east of the existing mainline as future strategic employment area.

Utilities, Oil and Gas Facilities

Two existing petroleum pipelines owned by Sun-Canadian cross the PDA, which will be realigned to accommodate the Terminal. Additional detail regarding these pipelines and other utilities is provided in Chapter 3.

Navigation

Within the PDA, there are no ‘Scheduled Waters’ as listed under the Navigation Protection Act (2014). Navigation in Indian Creek is impeded by the presence of a wire fence where the watercourse first enters the PDA. A similar fence is located across the Tributary A channel at the downstream end, prior to it flowing through a set of culverts and discharging into Indian Creek. The agricultural fences are an existing barrier to navigation within Tributary A and Indian Creek.

Recreational Land Use, Land Use Facilities, and Tourism

Cycling is a popular activity and may draw cyclists from outside Halton Region. Within the LAA for Land Use (defined in Section 6.5.5) there are five established cycling routes (Figure 10, Appendix A of Appendix E.12). Of these routes, only the Lower Base Line route intersects with the PDA. No dedicated bike lanes or paths occur within the PDA.

6.5.5.8 Project Interactions with the VC

Table 6.33 identifies Project activities that have the potential for effects on Socio-Economic Conditions. These interactions (indicated by check marks) are discussed in detail in the context of effects mechanisms, standard and Project-specific mitigation, and residual effects in Sections 6.5.5.9.2, 6.5.5.9.3 and 6.5.5.9.4. A justification for non-interactions (no check marks) is also provided below.

238 File No. 160960844



Table 6.33: Project Interactions with Socio-Economic Conditions



Change in Demand for Community

Services and Infrastructure

Change in the Quantity and

Quality of Land and Resource Use

Construction

Site Preparation -

Track Construction and Signals Installation -

Terminal Infrastructure -

Grade Separations

Utilities - - Watercourse Realignment, Restoration and Naturalization -

Construction Equipment and Operation -



Solid Waste Management and Recycling - - Operations

Truck Entrance/Exit (Gate) - - Train Operations -

Lift Operations -


Water Management - -

Site Buildings, Linear Facilities and Associated Infrastructure -





Interactions between Project activities and change in demand for community services and infrastructure are anticipated in relation to the grade separation that will be built on Lower Base Line. Most Project activities will have no interaction because they will not affect regional or municipal services. Although solid waste management and recycling activities during construction and operation could interact with a similar project, no interaction is anticipated in

File No. 160960844 239



the case of the Project because the Project will rely on licensed contractors to collect and dispose of waste at licensed facilities with sufficient capacity. Furthermore, on-site water recycling and capture and the use of licensed wastewater and water service providers will avoid any Project-related demand on municipal and regional services. Other potential interactions that could result from labour requirements associated with various Project activities are not anticipated because most Project labour will come from within the Town of Milton or GGH and therefore demand on community services and infrastructure from Project-related in-migration will be negligible.

For change in the quantity and quality of land and resource use interactions are anticipated with remove area or a resource from use (i.e., activities that occur in the PDA once the site has been cleared and facilities have been erected) or generate disturbance to land and resource users through emissions and changes to viewscapes. As such, during the construction phase, there will be no interaction with the following:

• utilities;

• water management;

• truck entrance/exit (gate);

• equipment maintenance;

• water management;

• site buildings, linear facilities and associated infrastructure; and,

• solid waste management and recycling.

Once site preparation is able to proceed, the assessment assumes that all other activities can proceed without conflict. As a result, this is treated as a continuous effect.

6.5.5.9 Assessment of Residual Environmental Effects on Socio-Economic Conditions


The assessment of the Socio-Economic Conditions VC considers the Project’s effects on baseline socio-economic conditions: baseline conditions are described in the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Socio-Economic Baseline (Appendix E.12), as are data collection methods. Generally, data collection consisted of desktop literature review and analysis of local and regional land use plans.

Fieldwork was not carried out specifically for the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Socio-Economic Baseline (Appendix E.12); however, observations made during fieldwork for other VCs (e.g., Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Fish and Fish Habitat (Appendix E.4)) have been considered in the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Socio-Economic Baseline (Appendix E.12) and VC assessment.

240 File No. 160960844



The assessment of the Project’s potential effects on Socio-Economic Conditions relies largely on a qualitative analysis of the interaction between Project activities (described in Chapter 3), baseline conditions and mitigation, including both standard and Project-specific measures. With respect to the assessment of effects on the quality and quantity of land and resource use, spatial analysis of overlap between the Project effects and existing land use was carried out to determine to quantify potential Project effects in the PDA, LAA and RAA. Qualitative analysis was also conducted.

Due to the relationship between the Socio-Economic Conditions VC and other biophysical VCs, reference is made to other assessment sections, as appropriate, and residual effects to these VCs are used as inputs to Project mechanisms for the assessment of change in the quality and quantity of land and resource use.

A conservative approach is used throughout the assessment of Project effects on Socio-Economic Conditions to compensate for limitations in data availability. Where there is uncertainty in the characterization of residual effects, the assessment conservatively predicts the greater option.

6.5.5.9.2 Assessment of Change in Demand for Community Services and Infrastructure

Project Pathways

The Project may affect road users (e.g., motor vehicle operators, cyclists and others) the construction of a grade separation at Lower Base Line. During construction, this activity could require temporary lane closures or detours; however, once completed, this infrastructure change would improve existing traffic flow.

Mitigation Measures

Mitigation measures for potential changes in demand for community services and infrastructure are presented in Table 6.34. Mitigation includes those practices, policies and commitments that constitute technically and economically feasible mitigation measures and applied as part of standard practice regardless of location.

Table 6.34: Environmental Effects Mitigation Measures for Change in Demand for Community Services and Infrastructure


Effect Effect Pathway Mitigation Measure

Change in Demand for Community Services and Infrastructure

Project-related effects on road capacity resulting from construction activities on roadways

• Prior to initiating construction activities, CN will communicate the location and schedule of construction activities to the community and stakeholders.

• CN will work with the Town of Milton towards the construction of the underpass at Lower Base Line.

File No. 160960844 241



Residual Project Effects on Change in Demand for Community Services and Infrastructure

Potential lane closures or detours associated with the grade separation on Lower Base Line during construction will be carried out in collaboration with local and regional authorities. Potential effects on road infrastructure will be managed through standard mitigation and Project-specific measures. Although CN will work with the Town of Milton on the details of construction, road users may still experience some level of inconvenience during construction as a result of potential detours or lane reductions during construction. The residual effect of construction activities is considered adverse, low magnitude, short-term, local in extent, continuous and reversible. Once construction activities are complete, the result will be an overall improvement in traffic flow compared to baseline conditions, effectively separating rail and road on Lower Base Line. The residual effect is therefore considered positive compared to baseline conditions, low in magnitude, permanent, continuous and irreversible.

6.5.5.9.3 Assessment of Change in the Quantity and Quality of Land and Resource Use

Project Pathways

Agricultural land use is the dominant activity in the LAA. Site preparation, construction of facilities within the PDA and their continued presence throughout operation will result in the loss of 30 ha of planned Agricultural Area (as per the Halton Region Official Plan [Halton Region 2014a]) that overlaps the PDA. This represents approximately 0.1 % of the total planned Agricultural Areas in the RAA.

Land and resource use may also be affected by externalities associated with construction and operation, namely through Project-related air contaminants, acoustic emissions and other activities associated with Project construction and operation that change views of the landscape (e.g., site preparation, the construction of facilities and their continued presence and train and lift operations). Stakeholder comments received by CN have also highlighted the importance of general (i.e., non-specific) land use opportunity in the area (see Chapter 4). The physical presence of the Project, including acoustic and atmospheric emissions, has the potential to reduce the quality of land use for users within the LAA. The presence of the Project, including associated acoustic and atmospheric emissions, and changes in the landscape may also reduce the quality of the experience for cyclists in the region. Cycling is a popular activity in Halton Region and there are five established cycling routes in the LAA. These routes and their relationship to the PDA are described in the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report - Socio-Economic Baseline (Appendix E.12).

Navigation could be affected by watercourse realignments. As mentioned in Section 6.5.5.7, within the PDA, there are no ‘Scheduled Waters’ as listed under the Navigation Protection Act (2014). While a canoe could be floated in Indian Creek, navigation is presently impeded by the presence of a wire fence where the watercourse first enters the PDA. Watercourse realignments would affect navigation by changing the dimensions of channel widths and depths to provide a stable pattern and profile with appropriate bed and bank materials. The proposed channel

242 File No. 160960844



conditions for Tributary A are similar in dimension to the existing conditions. The navigability of the proposed channel realignments will be similar to the existing conditions for Tributary A and Indian Creek. The Indian Creek realignment will remove the existing fence and would thus remove a barrier to navigation.

Mitigation Measures

Mitigation measures for potential changes in the quantity and quality of land and resource use are presented in Table 6.35. This includes those practices, policies and commitments that constitute technically and economically feasible mitigation measures and are applied as part of standard practice regardless of location.

Table 6.35: Project-Specific Mitigation Measures for Change in the Quantity and Quality of Land and Resource Use

Effect Effect Pathway Mitigation Measure

Change in the quantity and quality of land and resource use

Loss of agricultural land as a result of Project activities

• CN will work with Halton Region and Town of Milton to stay within the designated land use areas; and,

• CN will work with local farmers for agricultural lease opportunities where they may exist.

Quality of experience of land and resource users

• As per Project design, berms will be constructed in key locations around the PDA and will be vegetated to provide quality experience for land and resource users.

Residual Project Effects on Change in the Quantity and Quality of Land and Resource Use

As noted above, the Project will result in the loss of 30 ha of planned agricultural lands that overlap the PDA. This represents approximately 0.1 % of the total agricultural land within the RAA. Due to the relatively small scale of this loss, and through other mitigation noted above, the magnitude of this interaction is low and is limited in extent to the PDA.

For other forms of recreational land use in the area, including general use and enjoyment of the LAA, mitigation measures in place for the management of the acoustic and atmospheric emissions and light, including standard management practices, will reduce these effects to an acceptable level.

With the application of mitigation measures, the residual effects of Project construction and operation on the quantity and quality of land and resource use are low in magnitude, neutral (for emissions) and adverse (for loss of agricultural areas and changes to viewscapes) in direction, permanent and limited to the LAA. A conservative approach is appropriate due to the qualitative nature of the effect.

File No. 160960844 243



6.5.5.9.4 Summary of Project Residual Environmental Effects on Socio-Economic Conditions

A summary of Project residual environmental effects on socio-economic conditions is presented in Table 6.36.

Table 6.36: Summarizes the Residual Effects of the Project on Socio-Economic Conditions

Residual Effect


Project Phase

Direction

Magnitude

Geographic

Extent

Duration

Frequency

Reversibility

Ecological and Socio-

Economic

Context

Change in demand for community services and infrastructure

C,O A, P L LAA ST, P C R, I HR

Change in the Quality and Quantity of Land and Resource Use

C,O A, N L LAA P C I D

KEY See Error! Reference source not found. for detailed definitions Project Phase C: Construction O: Operation Direction: P: Positive A: Adverse N: Neutral Magnitude: N: Negligible L: Low M: Moderate H: High


Frequency: S: Single event IR: Irregular event R: Regular event C: Continuous Reversibility: R: Reversible I: Irreversible Socio-Economic Context: D: Disturbed U: Undisturbed LR: Low resiliency MR: Moderate resiliency HR: High resiliency


As discussed in Section 6.5.5, adverse residual effects on change in demand on community services and infrastructure are related to short-term effects on traffic flow from construction of a grade separation on Lower Base Line. During road work, traffic may be affected by lane closures or detours along other roads in the LAA. Considering the short-term duration of the residual

244 File No. 160960844



adverse effect and the fact that traffic will still be able to flow through the LAA and RAA while this work is going on, the residual effect is not anticipated to reduce current levels of service for an extended period and once the grade separation is completed, traffic along Lower Base Line and alternate routes is expected to recover to existing conditions. In the case of traffic along Lower Base Line, the traffic flow will actually have been improved compared to baseline conditions by eliminating delays caused by train crossings. Therefore, the adverse residual effect is predicted to be not significant. Based on the assessment team’s strong understanding of the Project Description, the availability of information related to Project workforce requirements, environmental effects pathways and the effectiveness of mitigation described in Section 6.5.5.9, the prediction is made with a moderate degree of confidence.

Change in the Quantity and Quality of Land and Resource Use

The presence of the Project has the potential to alter the overall environment that provides the background for the enjoyment of the area by all recreational users. The overall presence of the Project will be managed to an acceptable level through the application of standard mitigation for acoustic and atmospheric emissions. This includes the use of berms to reduce sound effects and reduce effects on viewscapes.

The quality of cycling will be affected due to the interaction between existing trails and traffic associated with the Project. This interaction can be managed through consultation with cyclists and other road users. Many resource users including cyclists coexist in urban environments.

Based on the knowledge of the existing environment, the assessment team’s strong understanding of the Project Description, environmental effects pathways and the effectiveness of mitigation described in Section 6.5, the residual environmental effects of the Project on change in quantity and quality of land and resource use are predicted to be not significant. The prediction is made with a high degree of confidence.

6.5.6 Archaeological and Heritage Resources


Heritage resources are human and natural resources created by activities from the past that remain to inform present and future societies of that past. Heritage resources include archaeological, architectural and historical resources. Heritage resources have been selected as a VC to meet regulatory requirements set out by the federal regulatory agencies responsible for the effective management of these resources and in the interest of local Aboriginal peoples, the municipality, the general public, and the scientific community. In recognition of the importance of these resources and potential for their loss as a result of development, they are a required component under the CEAA, 2012.

Archaeological resources are defined as any physical remnants recovered from the ground surface or below its surface which show evidence of manufacture, alteration or use by humans.

File No. 160960844 245



If present, these resources provide information on past human use of, and interaction with, the physical environment in the area. Archaeological resources may be from the earliest times of human occupation to the more recent past (e.g., 100 years before present).

Architectural and historical resources, referred to throughout this chapter as cultural heritage resources including both built heritage resources and cultural heritage landscapes, are defined as any human-made standing structure or cultural landscape that provides information regarding a person, place, or event from the past or that may have intrinsic value due to some element of its design, construction, or use. In addition to being susceptible to the activities of Project development, these resources are also considered susceptible to changes in their setting, such as the addition of new structures in the immediate area.

Considering the definitions of the various heritage resources discussed, the environmental assessment of heritage resources is focused on the following effects:

• loss or displacement of archaeological resources; and,

• loss, displacement, or disruption of architectural and/or historical resources.

These environmental effects have been selected in recognition of the requirements to consider effects on physical and cultural heritage as defined in the EIS Guidelines for the Project. Archaeological, architectural, and historical resources are protected under the Ontario Heritage Act (OHA). The assessment of Project effects addresses those regulatory requirements.

Any Project activity that includes surface or subsurface ground disturbance has the potential for interaction with heritage resources. Project construction therefore has the greatest potential for interaction with heritage resources, because it includes the majority of the initial earthworks. It is not anticipated that there will be any additional ground disturbance which occurs during the operation phase of the project. Therefore the assessment of effects addresses the construction phase of the project exclusively.


Federal Setting

Archaeological and cultural heritage resources require consideration under the CEAA, 2012 under Section 2(1) by “any change that the project may cause in the environment, including any effects of such change … on physical and cultural heritage … or on any structure, site or thing that is of historical, archaeological or architectural significance.” This is reflected in the EIS Guidelines.

Provincial Setting

The Project is federally regulated, and as such subject to relevant federal legislation. However, certain provincial laws have also been taken into consideration where appropriate to ensure completeness, as follows.

246 File No. 160960844



Archaeological sites are regulated under the OHA as administered by the MTCS. MTCS issues licenses for archaeological fieldwork, issues project information numbers (PIFs) for archaeological fieldwork, reviews the resultant license reports and accepts recommendations for any additional work or mitigation measures necessary for the project. No development related disturbance should occur to archaeological sites or areas where archaeological sites might be present without the prior notification of the MTCS. Development projects are subject to a four stage archaeological assessment process which provides for:

• the identification of known sites and identification of areas where archaeological resources might be located in Stage 1;

• the field survey of areas of archaeological potential to identify previously unknown sites in Stage 2;

• the assessment of the cultural heritage value and interest of identified sites in Stage 3; and,

• the development and implementation of appropriate mitigation of sites with cultural heritage value or interest in Stage 4.

The MTCS reviews and accepts the report findings and recommendations, including any additional requirements for archaeological assessment as warranted.

Municipal Setting

The municipality has an interest in cultural heritage as outlined in the Town of Milton Official Plan which relies largely upon the provincial frameworks listed above. The Project is outside of municipal jurisdiction however cultural heritage is considered as it pertains to CEAA, 2012.


Concerns were expressed for potential impacts on archaeological and cultural heritage resources potential impacted as a result of Project activities. Baseline studies were completed to identify known archaeological resources and heritage structures within the LAA, followed but site specific surveys to confirm resources within the PDA, as provided in the Appendix E.14 and E.3. Representatives from the MNCFN participated in field programs in support of archaeological baseline studies.

These conditions were considered in the design of the Project and identification of appropriate mitigation measures determined through the assessment of environmental effects to minimize potential impacts on archaeological sites and cultural heritage resources. Further investigations are proposed to document existing archaeological resources prior to site disturbance (Stage 3 AA). Information pertaining to archaeological resources was circulated to Aboriginal communities for review. Monitoring of potential effects during construction will occur.

File No. 160960844 247



6.5.6.4 Identification of Environmental Effects and Measureable Parameters

Archaeological Sites

Generally the primary environmental effects of projects on archaeological resources occur during construction activities that cause disturbances to the soil matrix that contains the archaeological site and thus removing artifacts and/or features from their horizontal and/or vertical context. Construction activities that can cause effects include: clearing and grubbing of trees or brush; removal of soils; grading; soil compaction from vehicular traffic; and excavation of soils for infrastructure.

Secondary effects are associated with any increased access to archaeological sites which may result in unauthorized artifact collection by construction workers or the general public and vandalism to sites.

The measurable parameter for archaeological resources is the number of known archaeological sites within the PDA. The number of known sites within the PDA is a quantitative measure of sites identified prior to Project related archaeological assessment and those sites identified during the field component of the Project related assessment.

Cultural Heritage Resources

Determination of Project effects is undertaken based on Info Sheet #5 in Heritage Resources in the Land Use Planning Process, Cultural Heritage and Archaeology Policies of the Ontario Provincial Policy Statement, 2005 (Government of Ontario 2006). Effects are categorized by potential direct and indirect effects. Direct effects include destruction and alteration, while indirect effects include shadows, isolation, land disturbance, change in land use, and obstruction. Where a heritage attribute was determined to be situated within the PDA potential project effects were evaluated according to this policy.

In addition to these six effects, there is also the potential for indirect effects resulting from vibration due to construction and operation activities and the transportation of Project components and personnel. Although the existing effect of traffic and construction vibrations on historic period structures is not fully known, negative effects have been demonstrated on historic buildings with a setback of less than 40 m from the curbside (Crispino and D’Apuzzo 2001; Ellis 1987; Rainer 1982; Wiss 1981).

A summary of potential environmental effects, effects pathways and measurable parameters for archaeological and heritage resources is presented in Table 6.37.

248 File No. 160960844



Table 6.37: Potential Environmental Effects, Effects Pathways and Measurable Parameters for Archaeological and Heritage Resources

Potential Environmental Effect Effect Pathway Measurable Parameter(s) and Units

of Measurement

Unauthorized disturbance or destruction of part or all of an archaeological site or sites

• Removal or disturbance of artifact or archaeological site through site preparation and clearing or surface/subsurface disturbance.

• Number of known sites within the PDA.

Unauthorized disturbance or destruction of part or all of a heritage resource

• Loss or alteration to documented heritage resources through site preparation and clearing and vibration effects.

• Number of known heritage resources within the PDA.


Spatial Boundaries

Archaeological Resources Spatial Boundaries


The LAA for the archaeological component is the PDA and a buffer zone of 1 km for receiving archaeological information from the MTCS and for the Stage 1 assessment. The 1 km boundary is a MTCS prescribed area for documenting registered archaeological sites for an archaeological assessment (Standard 1.1 (1) of the Standards and Guidelines for Consulting Archaeologists).

The RAA for archaeological resources for the Project encompasses the area of south-central Ontario from roughly the Trent River system in the east, south Simcoe County in the north, the Niagara Peninsula and Haldimand Region in the west and Lake Ontario to the south. This area generally encompasses the region within which common archaeological cultural historical traditions have occurred.

Cultural Heritage Resources Spatial Boundaries


File No. 160960844 249



The LAA encompasses the area where there is potential for effects on the environment from the Project. The LAA for this study includes the PDA plus a 50 m buffer surrounding the project development area to account for the area within which vibration effects may be identified.

The RAA for cultural heritage resources includes the former Trafalgar Township. This was based on historical similarities including, but not limited to, survey patterns, settlement patterns, growth, and current cultural heritage conditions. Trafalgar Township has been affected by late 20th and early 21st century growth much like the LAA. The area provides a comparable historical context against which the larger effects of the Project on heritage resources generally can be measured.

Temporal Boundaries

The temporal boundary of a Project effect is evaluated in relation to the specific phases and activities of the Project. These are based on the timing and duration of Project activities as well as the nature of those interactions with archaeological and cultural heritage resources. In this case, the temporal boundary includes:

• Construction – 18 to 24 months; and,

• Operation.


Table 6.38 provides the effects classification criteria that are applied to make a determination with respect to Project residual effects on archaeological and heritage resources.

Table 6.38: Characterization of Residual Environmental Effects on Archaeological and Heritage Resources



Positive—an effect that moves measurable parameters in a direction beneficial to the VC relative to baseline. Adverse— an effect that moves measurable parameters in a direction detrimental to the VC relative to baseline. Neutral—no net change in measureable parameters for the VC relative to baseline.

250 File No. 160960844



Table 6.38: Characterization of Residual Environmental Effects on Archaeological and Heritage Resources


Magnitude


Negligible—no measurable change to any archaeological or heritage resource. Low—a measurable change to an archaeological or heritage resource of lesser importance, that can be mitigated. Moderate—measurable change to an archaeological or heritage resource of greater importance that can be mitigated. High—measurable change to any archaeological or heritage resources that cannot be mitigated.

Geographic Extent

The geographic area in which a potential environmental effect may occur.


Frequency


Single event Multiple irregular event – occurs at no set schedule. Multiple regular event—occurs at regular intervals. Continuous— occurs continuously (use combinations of the terms above to provide characterization).

Duration


Short-term—effect can be repaired or removed within days of occurrence. Medium-term—effect can be repaired or removed within 5 to 10 years of occurrence. Long-term— effect can be repaired or removed after decommissioning of project. Permanent – once the effect has occurred it cannot be returned to its pre-project condition.

Reversibility



Socio-economic Context


Undisturbed—area is relatively undisturbed or not adversely affected by human activity. Disturbed—area has been substantially previously disturbed by human development or human development is still present.

File No. 160960844 251



Archaeological Resources

A significant adverse residual environmental effect on archaeological resources is defined as one that results in an unauthorized Project-related disturbance to, or destruction of, all or part of an archaeological resource considered by regulators to be important and that is not mitigated or compensated as required by regulators.


A significant adverse residual environmental effect on heritage resources is defined as one that results in the loss of or alteration to, the cultural heritage value or interest of a resource without appropriate mitigation.



No previously identified archaeological sites were determined to be located within the PDA and no previous archaeological assessment had occurred within the limits of the PDA. However, the Stage 1 AA did identify that the majority of the PDA had the potential to contain archaeological resources and a further Stage 2 AA was recommended.

The Stage 2 archaeological assessment of the PDA resulted in the identification of 60 archaeological ‘locations’ (i.e., spatially discrete groups of artifacts or single artifacts) (Table 6.39). Of these 60 Locations 34 met MTCS criteria sufficient to warrant registration as an archaeological site. Of those 34 sites 14 met MTCS criteria such that Stage 3 AA was recommended. Details regarding the required follow-up work are presented in Chapter 9.

Table 6.39: Archaeological Locations within the PDA

Location # Borden # Cultural Affiliation Stage 3

Recomm’d Location

# Borden # Cultural Affiliation Stage 3 Recomm’d

1 AiGx-389 Euro-Canadian No 31 N/A Pre-contact Aboriginal No

2 AiGw-982 Euro-Canadian Yes 32 AiGx-403 Pre-contact Aboriginal No

3 AiGw-983 Euro-Canadian Yes 33 N/A Pre-contact Aboriginal No

4 AiGx-390 Pre-contact

Aboriginal (Early Archaic)

Yes 34 AiGx-404 Pre-contact Aboriginal No


Aboriginal (Middle Woodland)

No 35 N/A Multi-component No

6 N/A Pre-contact Aboriginal No 36 N/A Multi-component No

252 File No. 160960844





Recomm’d Location



Aboriginal (Late Paleo-Indian)

Yes 37 N/A Euro-Canadian No


Aboriginal (Early Woodland)

No 38 AiGx-405 Pre-contact Aboriginal Yes


Aboriginal (Early Woodland)

No 39 N/A Euro-Canadian No

10 N/A Pre-contact Aboriginal No 42 AiGx-406 Pre-contact

Aboriginal No

11 AiGx-395 Euro-Canadian No 43 AiGx-407 Pre-contact

Aboriginal (Late Archaic)

No

12 AiGx-396 Euro-Canadian Yes 45 AiGx-408 Multi-component Yes

13 AiGx-397 Pre-contact Aboriginal Yes 46 AiGx-409 Pre-contact

Aboriginal No

14 N/A Euro-Canadian No 47 N/A Pre-contact Aboriginal No

15 N/A Pre-contact Aboriginal No 48 N/A Pre-contact

Aboriginal No

16 N/A Pre-contact Aboriginal No 49 AiGx-410 Multi-component No

17 N/A Pre-contact Aboriginal No 50 N/A Multi-component No

18 AiGx-398 Multi-component Yes 51 AiGx-411 Pre-contact

Aboriginal (Early Archaic)

Yes

19 N/A Euro-Canadian No 52 AiGx-412 Pre-contact Aboriginal No


Aboriginal No

21 N/A Pre-contact Aboriginal No 54 AiGx-413

Pre-contact Aboriginal (Late

Archaic) No

22 N/A Multi-component No 55 AiGx-414 Multi-component No

23 AiGx-399 Pre-contact Aboriginal No 56 N/A Pre-contact

Aboriginal No

24 AiGx-400 Multi-component No 57 AiGw-984 Pre-contact Aboriginal Yes

25 N/A Pre-contact Aboriginal No 58 AiGw-985

Pre-contact Aboriginal

(Woodland) Yes


Aboriginal No

File No. 160960844 253





Recomm’d Location


28 AiGx-401 Pre-contact Aboriginal Yes 60 N/A Pre-contact

Aboriginal No

29 AiGx-402 Pre-contact Aboriginal Yes

30 N/A Pre-contact Aboriginal No


In order to identify the presence of cultural heritage resources, a Cultural Heritage Assessment was completed to screen for resources of potential cultural heritage value or interest based on the definition found in Ontario Regulation 9/06. Listings of provincially and locally protected properties, districts, and easements were collected from the MTCS, Ontario Heritage Trust, and the Town of Milton. A total of 17 properties where some level of protection was in place were identified within the project LAA, including one designated under Part IV of the OHA. During the course of a windshield survey, two additional potential heritage resources were identified and the properties identified by the Town of Milton were visited and reviewed. Once evaluated against the criteria for determining cultural heritage value or interest, it was determined that all of the properties designated or listed by the Town of Milton contained cultural heritage value or interest and were given CHR numbers. The other two properties identified during the windshield survey were found not to contain cultural heritage value or interest and were removed from assessment of potential effects. The properties evaluated for cultural heritage value or interestare Table 6.40 and indicated on Figure 3, Appendix A of the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Cultural Heritage Assessment (Appendix E.3).

Table 6.40: Summary of Determination of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest

Municipal Address Cultural Heritage Value or Interest Identified

Cultural Heritage Resource (CHR) Number

4259 Tremaine Road No N/A

4393 Tremaine Road Yes CHR-1


5123 Tremaine Road No N/A






254 File No. 160960844



Table 6.40: Summary of Determination of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest

Municipal Address Cultural Heritage Value or Interest Identified

Cultural Heritage Resource (CHR) Number






5122 First Line Yes CHR-13



1390 Bronte Street South Yes CHR-16

6.5.6.8 Project Interactions with the VC

Table 6.41 identifies, for each potential effect, the Project’s physical activities that might interact with archaeological and heritage resources. These interactions are indicated by check marks, and are discussed in detail in Section 6.5.6.9 in the context of effects pathways, standard and project-specific mitigation/enhancement, and residual effects.

Table 6.41: Project Interactions with Archaeological and Cultural Heritage Resources


Archaeological and Cultural Heritage Resources

Unauthorized disturbance or

destruction of part or all of an

archaeological site or sites

Unauthorized loss of, or alteration to, the

cultural heritage value or interest of a Cultural Heritage resource, or an element thereof

Construction


Track Construction and Signals Installation – –

Terminal Infrastructure – –

Grade Separations

Utilities

Watercourse Realignment, Restoration and Naturalization


File No. 160960844 255



Table 6.41: Project Interactions with Archaeological and Cultural Heritage Resources



Unauthorized disturbance or

destruction of part or all of an

archaeological site or sites

Unauthorized loss of, or alteration to, the

cultural heritage value or interest of a Cultural Heritage resource, or an element thereof

Air Contaminant Emissions – –

Acoustic Emissions – –

Solid Waste Management and Recycling – –

Operations

Truck Entrance/Exit (Gate) – – Train Operations – –

Lift Operations – –

Equipment Maintenance – –

Water Management – –

Site Buildings, Linear Facilities and Associated Infrastructure – –

Operation Labour Requirements – – Air Contaminant Emissions – – Acoustic Emissions – –

Solid Waste Management and Recycling – – NOTES: = Potential interactions that might cause an effect. – = Interactions between the project and the VC are not expected.

6.5.6.9 Assessment of Residual Environmental Effects on Archaeological and Heritage Resources



As the majority of the PDA was identified as having archaeological potential, a Stage 2 archaeological assessment was conducted on the PDA in order to identify archaeological resources. Field Liaison Representatives from the MNCFN participated in the Stage 2 field

256 File No. 160960844



assessment. The Stage 2 assessment identified a total of 60 archaeological resources, 14 met criteria for further assessment, including 10 pre-contact aboriginal sites, 3 Euro-Canadian historic period sites and one multi-component (pre-contact and Euro-Canadian) site.

Approximately 82.3% of the PDA consists of agricultural fields and was subject to pedestrian survey at five m intervals based on Section 2.1.1 of the MTCS’ 2011 Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists (Government of Ontario 2011). During the pedestrian survey, when archaeological resources were identified, the survey transect was decreased to a 1 m intervals and spanned a minimal 20 m radius around the identified artifacts. This approach was established to determine if the artifact was an isolated find or part of a larger surface scatter. If the artifact was part of a larger scatter, the 1 m interval was continued until the full extent of the scatter was defined, based on Standard 7 of the 2011 Standards and Guidelines (Government of Ontario 2011). For each isolated find, the artifact was collected and a UTM coordinate was taken. Five UTM coordinates were taken for large surface scatters: a coordinate at the site centre and four readings at the furthest extents in each of the cardinal directions.

Approximately 12.8% of the PDA and assessment area consists of active pasture, non-agricultural scrubland, meadow, and residential lawn that were inaccessible for ploughing. These areas were subject to test pit assessment at a 5 m intervals based on Section 2.1.2 of the MTCS’s 2011 Standards and Guidelines (Government of Ontario 2011). Test pitting was also conducted within 1 m of built structures based on Section 2.1.2 Standard 4 of the MTCS’ 2011 Standards and Guidelines (Government of Ontario 2011). Each test pit was approximately 30 cm in diameter and excavated 5 cm into sterile subsoil. The soils and test pits were then examined for stratigraphy, cultural features or evidence of fill. All soil was screened through 6 mm mesh hardware cloth to facilitate the recovery of small artifacts and then used to backfill the pit.

When archaeological resources were encountered during the Stage 2 test pit survey, the test pit excavation continued on the survey grid to determine the extent of further positive test pits. UTM coordinates were recorded for all positive test pits. All artifacts were collected and recorded according to their associated positive test pit. When the initial finds of the test pit assessment were sufficient to recommend Stage 3 AA, no further Stage 2 archaeological methods were employed at that location. However, when the initial finds of the test pit assessment were insufficient to determine the need for additional Stage 3 AA, the archaeological location was intensified.

Approximately 3.1% of the PDA and assessment area was not assessed due to low and permanently wet areas. A small portion of the PDA and assessment area, approximately 0.4%, was not assessed due to steep slope. The remaining 1.4% of the PDA and assessment area consists of modern disturbances which were not assessed, including the existing CN line and railway ROW, modern residences and associated outbuildings, and paved/gravel laneways and parking areas.

File No. 160960844 257




Where a heritage resource was determined to be situated within the LAA, the effects of the proposed undertaking were evaluated. The assessment of potential effects was conducted according to InfoSheet #5 (Government of Ontario 2006). Seven potential negative effects are identified (Government of Ontario 2006), including:

1. destruction of any, or part of any significant heritage attributes or features;

2. alteration that is not sympathetic, or is incompatible with the historic fabric and appearance;

3. shadows created that alter the appearance of a heritage attribute or change the viability of a natural feature or plantings, such as a garden;

4. isolation of a heritage attribute from its surrounding environment, context or a significant relationship;

5. direct or indirect obstruction of significant views or vistas within, from, or of built and natural features;

6. a change in land use such as rezoning a battlefield from open space to residential use, allowing new development or site alteration to fill in the formerly open spaces; and,

7. land disturbances such as a change in grade that alters soils, and drainage patterns that adversely affect an archaeological resource.

In addition to direct effects related to destruction, the indirect effects resulting from vibration due to construction and operation activities were also evaluated. Although the existing effect of traffic and construction vibration on historic period structures is not fully known, studies have evaluated vibration impacts on historic buildings with a setback of less than 40 m from the curbside (Crispino and D’Apuzzo 2001; Ellis 1987; Rainer 1982; Wiss 1981). While the vibration sources and location-specific factors evaluated in these studies do not allow for direct extrapolation to the Project, the proximity of Project components to historical resources was considered, particularly those within 50 m of potential Project activities. The 50 m buffer represents a conservative approach to effects identification.

The LAA was used as an indicator of potential effects because it surrounds the area where Project activity is anticipated to occur with a 50 m buffer. This distance, as discussed in the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Cultural Heritage Assessment (Appendix E.3), is typically used to delineate where vibration effects may be experienced. To determine the potential for effects resulting from construction vibration, the distance of heritage attributes as defined in Appendix B of the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Cultural Heritage Assessment (Appendix E.3) were measured; where the distance from an attribute to proposed Project activities was less than 50 m, potential for vibration effects was identified.

258 File No. 160960844



Analysis of potential Project related effects on the 17 identified CHR resulted in the determination that only two resources, at 4393 Tremaine Road (CHR-1) and 5269 Tremaine Road (CHR-4), would experience Project related effects (see Figure 4, Appendix A of the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Cultural Heritage Assessment (Appendix E.3)). For both sites it was determined that there was a potential for heritage resources to be affected indirectly by land disturbance during construction activities. For CHR-4 it was also determined that a shed would be directly affected by construction from Project related activities.

6.5.6.9.2 Assessment of Unauthorized disturbance or destruction of part or all of an archaeological site or sites

Project Pathways

Any remaining archaeological sites identified during field survey located within the limits of the PDA may be affected during construction activities including site preparation and grading, grade separation, utilities, watercourse realignment, restoration and naturalization and construction equipment operations or labourer disturbance.

Site preparation and grading activities of trees, brush and other ground cover may cause disturbances to any remaining archaeological resources as the roots pull up soil as they are removed and can cause displacement of artifacts and destroy features in archaeological sites. Moreover, removal of vegetation can result in unstable soil conditions that can also result in movement of remaining artifacts and the soil matrix. During watercourse realignment, restoration and naturalization, similar conditions may be caused based on root disturbance, vegetation removal or planting and removal of subsurface material.

Grading of the ground surface, excavation and removal of soils and general site preparation for construction of facilities such as roads, berms, yard tracks, storm water management facilities and buildings have the potential to cause disturbance and/ or removal of remaining archaeological resources. Grade separation construction will include the temporary relocation of tracks and will require disturbance of soil which could lead to unstable soil conditions and movement of artifacts and the soil matrix. Relocation or installation of utilities may also lead to similar disturbance of subsurface conditions, resulting in displacement or destruction of archaeological resources.

In areas where there has been continual cultivation, the surface of the soil may be vulnerable to rutting and other disturbances from wheeled and tracked vehicles where parking areas, marshaling yards or other temporary work spaces are required.

Mitigation Measures

The objective of the mitigation is to limit the loss of archaeological resources or site integrity due to Project-related activities. The best and regulator preferred mitigation option is avoidance and protection of the resource(s). This can occur through Project redesign, excluding the

File No. 160960844 259



archaeological site area from the Project, or incorporating the area of the archaeological site into the Project location but without alteration. Any of these avoidance options would also require the installation of a protective barrier around the site and a buffer zone.

If avoidance and protection of archaeological resources is not feasible then controlled salvage excavations of the archaeological resources, or parts thereof as applicable, will be required. These salvage excavations will be based on the requirements as outlined in the MTCS Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists Sections 4.1.6, 4.2 and 4.23.

Other mitigation measures may also include:

• implementation of an Archaeological Resources Protection Plan;

• Areas in proximity to known archaeological resources will be monitored during construction;

• a worker education program about appropriate protocols in case of accidental discoveries; and,

• further assessment of changes to the PDA.

The initial step in mitigation measures for archaeological resources will be the completion of recommended Stage 3 AAs. The purpose of the Stage 3 assessment is to both delineate the extent of an archaeological site with cultural heritage value or interest and to, if possible, further refine our understanding of the age and/or cultural affiliation of the site. Once the Stage 3 assessments are completed the appropriate mitigation measures for the sites can be determined. Stage 3 AAs will occur on the 14 sites recommended for Stage 3 prior to Project development. Stage 3 assessments must be completed prior to the development of specific mitigation measures for each individual site. Once the Stage 3 assessment has been completed the proponent will determine whether an individual site can be avoided and protected or whether further controlled salvage excavations is required. At this stage, that the latter option is anticipated, however, this cannot be confirmed until the extent of each site recommended for Stage 3 assessment is completed.

If an archaeological resource is discovered during the construction phase, all construction will cease within a 20 m radius of the archaeological resource. In the event of a discovery, CN will stop work immediately and inform MTCS prior to the implementation of procedures and mitigation. A licensed archaeologist will be retained by CN and a Stage 2 AA will be conducted with the participation of any interested Aboriginal communities. Follow-up Stage 3 or Stage 4 archaeological investigations will be conducted as required. Once any archaeological resources of cultural heritage value or interest have been mitigated through excavation, construction will proceed.

In addition, key construction staff will be trained in the recognition of basic archaeological artifacts such as Aboriginal material culture (e.g., clay ceramics, lithic artifacts, and faunal remains), and Euro-Canadian material culture (e.g., refined ceramics, glassware, construction

260 File No. 160960844



debris, and personal effects) in case any archaeological resources are found during Project construction. The staff training would also include a brief history of potential and documented historic use and occupation of the PDA.

Although it is not anticipated that human remains will be found, if a discovery is made, CN will stop work immediately and contact the police or coroner, registrar or Deputy Registrar of the Cemeteries Regulation Section of the Ontario Ministry of Government and Consumer Services, as well as the Archaeology Programs Unit.

Residual Project Effects on an Unauthorized Disturbance or Destruction of Part or All of an Archaeological Site or Sites

As project specific environmental effects on archaeological resources are continually mitigated to the standards set by the regulatory agency, after implementation of the mitigation measures, there will be no residual environmental effects. The stage 3 assessment is scheduled for 2016.

With the application of regulatory agency approved mitigation, specifically Stage 3 AA and, if necessary avoidance or Stage 4 assessment, effects of the Project on archaeological resources will be not significant. With the accumulation of new knowledge from the archaeological assessment and any follow-up work the residual effect of the project on archaeological resources could be considered as positive.

6.5.6.9.3 Assessment of an Unauthorized disturbance or destruction of part or all of a cultural heritage resources site(s)

Project Pathways

The primary project pathways for unauthorized alteration or destruction of cultural heritage resources are related to potential land disturbances during the construction phase. This relates specifically to the following project activities: site preparation and grading activities, grade separations, utilities, watercourse realignment, restoration and naturalization, and construction equipment and operation. These activities may result in removal of cultural heritage value or interest.

Secondary project pathways include vibration effects for those cultural heritage resources that may be within 50 m of the construction activities in the PDA. This will be contained within construction activities as described above.

Mitigation Measures

Mitigation measures are based on guidelines provided by the MTCS and supplemented by those developed by Parks Canada and CEAA.

File No. 160960844 261



The requirement to recommend technically and economically feasible mitigation measures was considered as described by CEAA in the CEAA Technical Guidance for Cultural Heritage. Here it is suggested that mitigation should take one of two forms:

• Elimination, reduction or control of a designated project’s environmental effect is preferred.

• Where this is not possible, restitution for any damage to the environment caused by the environmental effect should be considered, e.g., replacement, restoration, compensation.

• Given the determination of indirect effects related to potential vibration effects, the use of fencing around protective buffer-zones has been recommended. For the direct effects to the shed, mitigation in the form of relocation or documentation and salvage has been recommended

Residual Project Effects on an unauthorized disturbance or destruction of part or all of a cultural heritage resources site(s)

This assessment considers residual effects on heritage resources after mitigation is implemented. The primary mitigation measure to avoid unauthorized interactions between Project related activities and cultural heritage resources, as described above, is to provide for a physical barrier (i.e., fence) that ensures a 50 m buffer zone around the resource. A 50 m buffer ensures no direct effects and also adequately provides the setback necessary to avoid indirect vibration effects. Where removal of a structure is proposed, as is the case with 5269 Tremaine Road (CHR-4), mitigation measures have been proposed to document and salvage the resource as discussed in the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Cultural Heritage Assessment (Appendix E.3).

As Project specific environmental effects on heritage resources are continually mitigated to the standards established by the regulatory agencies, after implementation of these mitigation measures, there will be no residual environmental effects from the Project. With the application of regulatory agency approved mitigation, effects of the Project on heritage resources will be not significant.

6.5.6.9.4 Summary of Project Residual Environmental Effects on Archaeological or Heritage Resources

Based on the completion of the necessary follow-up work and mitigations, including Stage 3 AAs and, if necessary, Stage 4 assessment or avoidance of the site, the Project-related environmental effects on archaeological resources are assessed to be Neutral. In addition, with the accumulation of new knowledge regarding the archaeological environment could be considered Positive.

Based on the completion of the necessary follow-up work and mitigations, including the use of buffer zones and selective documentation and salvage, the Project-related environmental effects on cultural heritage resources are assessed to be neutral.

262 File No. 160960844



A summary of Project residual environmental effects of archaeological and cultural heritage is presented in Table 6.42.

Table 6.42 Summary of Project Residual Environmental Effects on Archaeological and Cultural Heritage Resources

Residual Effect


Project Phase

Direction

Magnitude

Geographic

Extent

Duration

Frequency

Reversibility

Ecological and Socio-

economic

Context

Changes to sites/or things of archaeological significance

C N, P N PDA P S I D, U,

Changes to cultural heritage resources considered to be of significance

C N N PDA P S I D, U,



Frequency: S: Single event IR: Irregular event R: Regular event C: Continuous Reversibility: R: Reversible I: Irreversible Ecological/Socio-Economic Context: D: Disturbed U: Undisturbed

File No. 160960844 263



6.5.6.9.5 Determination of Significance of Environmental Effects on Archaeological or Heritage Resources


Based on the analysis of the potential Project related activities related to known archaeological resources and cultural heritage resources and the provision of appropriate mitigations for expected or potential effects the residual environmental effects of the Project on archaeological resources and cultural heritage resources are considered to be not significant.

6.6 OTHER EFFECTS TO CONSIDER

6.6.1 Cumulative Effects

The Project is in a region where growth rates for urbanization are among the highest in the country (CBRE Milton Industrial Market First Quarter 2015 Report). In response to this growth, the regional planning councils have created a Regional Official Plan (Halton Region Official Plan) where land use plans are used to manage growth and direct physical change and its effects on the social, economic and natural environment of the Region.

6.6.1.1 Assessment of Cumulative Environmental Effects on Fish and Fish Habitat

The Project residual effects for fish and fish habitat described in Section 6.5.1.9 likely to interact cumulatively with residual environmental effects from other physical activities (past, present and reasonably foreseeable future) that overlap in time and space are identified in this section and the resulting cumulative environmental effects are assessed.

6.6.1.1.1 Project Residual Effects Likely to Interact Cumulatively

The Project is within the Indian Creek subwatershed, the largest subwatershed within the Bronte Creek Watershed. The Indian Creek subwatershed has been subject to the pressures of urbanization, including agricultural conversion, residential and infrastructure development and linear infrastructure developments, which has affected the water quality and quantity and subsequently resulting in downstream degraded aquatic habitat (Conservation Halton 2002, 2009).

All past and present physical activities and resource use listed in Table 6.43 have contributed to a Change in Fish Mortality in the RAA. Agricultural conversion, residential and infrastructure development and linear development have contributed to direct fish mortality due to in-water construction or by the introduction of deleterious material (i.e., sediment) within Indian Creek and tributaries to Indian Creek within the RAA.

The Boyne Planning District, the Britannia Road Transportation Corridor and the Union Gas Hamilton-Milton Project overlaps the Project LAA spatially and temporally for construction and

264 File No. 160960844



residual effects from a change of fish mortality area may occur. Assessment of cumulative effects is completed below.

Due to the lack of temporal and spatial overlap of the RAA between the Project residual effects and the residual effects from the Tremaine Road Widening and Union Gas Burlington-Oakville Project, cumulative effects on fish mortality are not further discussed for the Union Gas Burlington-Oakville Project.

Table 6.43: Potential Cumulative Environmental Effects on Fish and Fish Habitat

Other Projects and Physical Activities with Potential for Cumulative Environmental Effects

Potential Cumulative Environmental Effects

Change in Fish

Mortality

Past and Present Physical Activities and Resource Use

Agricultural Conversion

Residential and Infrastructure Development

Linear Infrastructures (Utilities, roadways, transmission lines)

Project-Related Physical Activities

Future Physical Activities

Boyne Planning District

Britannia Road Transportation Corridor Improvements

Tremaine Road Widening (Derry Road to Britannia Road) –

Urban and Rural Road upgrades –

Union Gas Hamilton-Milton (Dawn Parkway System Expansion) Project.

Union Gas Burlington-Oakville (Dawn Parkway System Expansion) Project –

NOTES: = Other projects and physical activities whose residual effects are

likely to interact cumulatively with Project residual environmental effects.

– = Interactions between the residual effects of other projects and those of the Project residual effects are not expected.

File No. 160960844 265



6.6.1.1.2 Cumulative Effects Assessment for the Change in Fish Mortality

Cumulative Effect Pathways

Activities that may result in fish mortality for the Project activities, the Boyne Planning District, Britannia Road Transportation Corridor and the Union Gas Hamilton-Milton Project are limited to the construction phase. Construction activities for all four projects may increase mortality risk through a number of pathways including in-water works (e.g., contact with machinery, impingement on pump intakes, accidental removal from a watercourse or water body via construction equipment or asphyxiation as a result of dewatering activities), or through the introduction of a deleterious substance during construction (i.e., sediment).

Mitigation for Cumulative Effects

Mitigation measures for Project effects on fish mortality are presented in Section 6.5.1.9. Implementation of mitigation, best management practices, and working outside of the RAP during construction will reduce effects of the Project and the Projects contributions to cumulative effects on fish mortality.

Residual Cumulative Effects

The continued agriculture practices within the RAA has already accounted for contributions to the incidents of fish mortality, in particular through various alterations of the creek or the introduction of deleterious substances such as sediment into the watercourse. Current and future urban growth within the RAA and Town of Milton may also contribute to fish mortality. Consequently, current and future physical activities and the Project activities will contribute to the incidents of fish mortality in the RAA.

For the four projects included in the cumulative assessment, the risk of fish mortality would be most evident during construction phases. Presence of in-water works, construction of the Terminal and channel realignment, restoration, and naturalization within each project footprint would increase the potential for loss of fish as would the removal of natural vegetation and construction within the riparian area surrounding the water courses. It is expected that conditions at any watercourse within the Project RAA and the footprints of the Boyne Planning District, Britannia Road Transportation Corridor and the Union Gas Hamilton-Milton Project will all be short-term in duration, and Indian Creek and tributaries will be restored to pre-developed conditions or a naturalized, realigned condition. Further to that, with the employment of appropriate mitigation strategies as described previously, the potential for fish mortality will be minimal.

Overall the Project contribution to cumulative effects will be adverse as mortality of fish may occur, low in magnitude based on location and duration of activities and through proper mitigation implementation. Residual cumulative effects will be permanent and reversible.

266 File No. 160960844



6.6.1.1.3 Summary of Cumulative Effects

Table 6.44 summarizes cumulative effects on Fish and Fish Habitat.

File No. 160960844 267



Table 6.44: Summary of Cumulative Environmental Effects on Fish and Fish Habitat

Case

Other Projects, Activities and

Actions

Residual Cumulative Environmental Effects Characterization

Direction Magnitude Geographic Extent Duration Frequency Reversibility Ecological Context

Cumulative Change On Fish Mortality

Cumulative environmental effect A L RAA P IR I D

Contribution from the Project to the overall cumulative environmental effect

When current and future project effects on fish mortality are considered, the Project’s contribution to direct fish mortality is low in magnitude. In-water work will be completed outside of RAP, erosion measures will be implemented and appropriate isolation methods and fish salvage will occur. Effects are permanent and extend to the RAA.

KEY See Table 6.10 for detailed definitions. Direction: P: Positive A: Adverse N: Neutral H: High

Geographic Extent: PDA: Project Development Area LAA: Local assessment area RAA: Regional assessment area

Duration: ST: Short-term; MT: Medium-term LT: Long-term P: Permanent

Frequency: S: Single event IR: Irregular event R: Regular event C: Continuous

Reversibility: R: Reversible I: Irreversible

Magnitude: N: Negligible L: Low M: Moderate

Ecological Context: D: Disturbed U: Undisturbed

268 File No. 160960844



6.6.1.1.4 Determination of Significance of Environmental Effects on Fish and Fish Habitat

Significance of Cumulative Environmental Effects

Significant adverse cumulative environmental effects were assessed for fish mortality for the Project’s contribution to cumulative environmental effects based on the significance criteria used for residual environmental effects. Although death of fish may occur, the productivity and sustainability of a CRA fishery will not be affected by the contribution of the Project’s residual environmental effects. Therefore, through the use of best management practices, mitigation measures and adhering to RAP’s, the cumulative environmental effects from Project-related activities have been evaluated to be not significant.

6.6.1.2 Assessment of Cumulative Environmental Effects on Migratory Birds

The Project residual effects for migratory birds described in Section 6.5.2.9 likely to interact cumulatively with residual environmental effects from other physical activities (past, present and reasonably foreseeable future) that overlap in time and space are identified in this section and the resulting cumulative environmental effects are assessed.


Key areas for natural habitat have been identified and set aside to continue to provide suitable habitat in the region for wildlife such as migratory birds. Most of this habitat is found towards the Niagara Escarpment and is outside of the RAA for the Project.

All past and present physical activities and resource use listed in Table 6.45 have contributed to a Change in Migratory Bird mortality in the RAA. Residential and infrastructure development have the potential to increase risk of bird strikes by use of vehicles for construction. Instances may occur during the site preparations, including removing vegetation, clearing trees and grubbing (e.g., bird fatalities through nest destruction). Residential development contributes to bird-window strikes and predation by domestic cats. The residual effects from these activities overlap with the residual effects of the Project on Migratory Bird mortality, which are also primarily risk of strikes by vehicle use, clearing of the site and bird-window strikes (Section 6.5.2.9). Agricultural conversion has the potential to cause wildlife mortality through management of agricultural fields (i.e., grassland bird fatalities from hay cutting).

Three reasonably foreseeable projects listed in Table 6.45 may overlap spatially and temporally with the Projects residual effects on the direct migratory bird mortality. Effects from the clearing and development of the Boyne Planning district, widening along Britannia Road and ROW clearing for the Union Gas Hamilton-Milton Project are anticipated to overlap in time and space with Project effects.

File No. 160960844 269



The Union Gas Burlington-Oakville Project does not overlap with the Project spatially. Clearing will be localized and occurs outside of the RAA, therefore further assessment of cumulative effects of these two projects is not warranted.

All past and present physical activities and resource use listed in Table 6.45 have contributed to a Change in Migratory Bird use in the RAA. Agricultural conversion, residential and infrastructure development and linear development have contributed to a loss of suitable habitat for Migratory Birds and the possible displacement of bird use to other areas within or outside of the RAA.

Development associated with the Boyne Planning District and Britannia Road Transportation Corridor overlaps the Project LAA spatially and temporally and the residual effects from a change of Migratory Bird use in the area may occur. Assessment of cumulative effects will completed below.

Due to the lack of spatial overlap between the Project residual effects, cumulative effects on Migratory Bird use in the area are not further discussed for either Union Gas Hamilton-Milton Project or the Union Gas Burlington-Oakville Project.

Sensory disturbance within the RAA for areas of residential or industrial use has occurred as growth in the region continues. For the Project, sensory disturbance has been limited to effects of artificial lighting and the attraction of Migratory Birds, leading to indirect bird strikes. The Project residual effects from sensory disturbance may overlap with residual effects from the Boyne Planning District based on spatial and temporal overlaps. Assessment of cumulative effects will follow below.

Due to the lack of sensory disturbance residual effects from road widenings or improvements, the Union Gas Hamilton-Milton Project or the Union Gas Burlington-Oakville Project, cumulative effects assessment for sensory disturbance are not discussed further.

270 File No. 160960844



Table 6.45: Potential Cumulative Environmental Effects on Migratory Birds



Direct M

igratory Bird M

ortality

Change in

Migratory Bird

use of Area

Sensory Disturbance


Agricultural Conversion – –


Linear Infrastructures (Utilities, roadways, transmission lines) – –




Britannia Road Transportation Corridor Improvements –

Tremaine Road Widening (Derry Road to Britannia Road) – – –

Urban and Rural Road upgrades – –

Union Gas Hamilton-Milton (Dawn Parkway System Expansion) Project. – –

Union Gas Burlington-Oakville (Dawn Parkway System Expansion) Project – – –

NOTES: = Other projects and physical activities whose residual effects are likely to interact cumulatively with

Project residual environmental effects. – = Interactions between the residual effects of other projects and those of the Project residual effects are

not expected.

6.6.1.2.2 Cumulative Effects Assessment for Direct Migratory Bird Mortality


Activities that may result in direct Migratory Bird mortality for the Project activities, the Boyne Planning District and Britannia Road Transportation Corridor can occur during both construction and operation phases, whereas residual effects from the Project and the Union Gas Hamilton-Milton Project are limited to the construction phase. Construction activities for all four projects may increase mortality risk through a number of pathways including ROW/footprint vegetation removal and site clearing through destruction of nests or through vehicular strikes.

The presence and operation of the Project and the Boyne Planning District residential development will result in additional mortality risks through bird strikes with buildings/houses, above ground utility connections and train operations.

File No. 160960844 271




Mitigation measures for Project effects on Migratory Bird mortality is presented in Section 6.5.2.9. Implementation of mitigation and best management practices during construction and operation at the Terminal will reduce effects of the Project and the Projects contributions to cumulative effects on direct Migratory Bird mortality.


The continued urban growth within the RAA and Town of Milton has already accounted for and will continue to contribute to the incidents of Migratory Bird mortality. Consequently, future physical activities and the Project activities will contribute to the incidents of Migratory Bird mortality in the RAA.

For the four projects included in the cumulative assessment, the risk of Migratory Bird mortality would be most evident during construction phases. Presence of vehicle traffic within each project footprint would increase the potential for strikes during the removal of natural vegetation, based on the increased potential presence of Migratory Birds. Vehicle strikes are expected to be minimal, as all four projects are in areas with little overlap with key habitat for Migratory Birds. Further to this, habitat along the Union Gas Hamilton-Milton Project will be largely returned to similar pre-construction conditions, which will eliminate contributions to cumulative effects and the development of the Boyne Planning District, Britannia Road Transportation Corridor and the Terminal will result in large paved areas which will offer limited bird habitat. It is expected that birds will avoid vehicles in these areas, resulting in negligible direct Migratory Bird mortality. Additional pathways for direct Migratory Bird mortality include infrastructure strikes, which can be mitigated to negligible effects through proper site lighting. Overall the Project contribution to cumulative effects will be adverse as mortality of birds will occur, negligible in magnitude based on location and duration of activities and through proper mitigation implementation. Residual cumulative effects will be permanent and irreversible.

6.6.1.2.3 Cumulative Effects Assessment for Change in Migratory Birds use of Area


Residual effects arising from past, present and reasonably foreseeable future activities have similar pathways as those resulting in the Project. These pathways are expected to be through direct loss of suitable habitat by vegetation removal and site clearing activities and indirect sensory disturbance based on noise and activities from equipment during construction and operations.

Residual effects from future physical activities and projects listed in Table 6.45 are anticipated to have minimal spatial overlap with the Project’s residual effects based on the localized Project effects. The Project and the Boyne Planning District spatial overlap is limited to the existing rail line right-of-way where the track will be doubled and extended on the northwest side of Britannia Road, although the two are directly adjacent to each other on both sides of Britannia

272 File No. 160960844



Road and will have similar habitat that will be removed during construction creating fragmentation of habitat in the area.

Noise and activity disruption during Project construction and operations may cause Migratory Bird avoidance of adjacent remaining suitable habitat.


Mitigation measures to be implemented in order to minimize the potential effects of habitat loss or alteration from the Project are in Section 6.5.2.9. Implementation of these mitigation measures will reduce effects of the Project and the Projects contribution to cumulative effects on the change in Migratory Bird use of the area.


Site clearing of land for development or agricultural use is the main factor in affecting Migratory Bird use in the RAA.

The Boyne Planning District and the Project are both anticipated to contribute to a change in Migratory Bird use of the area. The cumulative loss of terrestrial habitat is restricted to the residential development of the Boyne Planning District (934 ha) and the loss or alteration of approximately 54.6 ha of terrestrial habitat; including 50.9 ha of grassland habitat and 3.7 ha of wetland habitat. No woodland breeding bird habitat will be removed as a result of construction of the Project. The loss of habitat may displace some migratory bird residences into habitat outside the PDA and the residential development footprint.

Effects from indirect sensory disturbance from noise and activities from Project construction and operations may act cumulatively with construction noise and activities from construction in the residential development of the Boyne Planning District. These effects are anticipated to be minimal as background noise in the range of 68 to 74 dB in the grassland and woodland habitats in the LAA as measured. As such, these habitats are anticipated to already be affected by high noise levels from existing roads and development and are expected to be similar if not higher in the Boyne Planning District based on proximity to existing residential development.

Overall cumulative effects from the change in Migratory Bird use of the area is anticipated to be adverse as habitat will be altered or removed from the RAA. This however is anticipated to be low in magnitude based on the size of the areas to be altered in relation to the overall available habitat in the RAA. Furthermore, to compensate for clearing of habitat during site preparation, grassland and wetland enhancement/compensation measures will be implemented to result in no net loss of habitat. Disturbance effects during construction, including construction labour requirements and noise emissions may result in bird density, however, this is likely to be short term in nature; restricted to the cumulative construction period of the Project and the Boyne Planning District.

File No. 160960844 273



6.6.1.2.4 Cumulative Effects Assessment for Sensory Disturbance


Residual effects arising from past, present and reasonably foreseeable future activities have similar pathways as those resulting in the Project, Section 6.5.2.9. These pathways are expected to be through sensory disturbance based on artificial lighting influencing bird behaviour.

Residential and industrial development in urban and rural environments includes the use of artificial lighting as a necessity for safety. Artificial lighting will be used for both the Project and the Boyne Planning District for both construction and operation phases. Any project components that are lit at nighttime may have the potential to attract birds, including buildings, light standards or other external lights. In particular, external lights that direct light upwards are anticipated to have a particular effect of attraction of migrating birds.


Mitigation measures to be implemented in order to minimize the potential effects of sensory disturbance due to artificial lighting from the Project are in Section 6.5.2.9. Implementation of these mitigation measures will reduce effects of the Project and the Projects contribution to cumulative effects on sensory disturbance of migratory birds.


Effects from sensory disturbance from nighttime artificial lighting for Project construction and operations may act cumulatively with nighttime artificial lighting used in the residential development of the Boyne Planning District as it occurs within the LAA.

Within the RAA, there are no habitat types or natural heritage features that are likely to result in a concentration migration or staging birds. The RAA is situated away from shorelines of lakes; the RAA is approximately 10 km from the Lake Ontario shoreline. The Niagara Escarpment, a linear feature known to concentration migration of some species such as diurnal raptors, occurs outside of the RAA, approximately four kilometers to the west of the PDA. Regardless, this is unlikely to contribute to a concentration nocturnal migration; the group most affected by artificial lighting.

Based on the limited, overall use of the LAA by the types of migratory birds that are most affected by artificial lighting the cumulative residual effect of sensory disturbance is adverse as it indirectly contributes to behaviours and mortality of migratory birds, however it is low in magnitude with the implementation of mitigation measures to reduce light spill, continuous and reversible.


Table 6.46 summarizes cumulative effects on Migratory Birds.

274 File No. 160960844



Table 6.46: Summary of Cumulative Environmental Effects on Migratory Birds

Case


Actions


Direction Magnitude Geographic Extent Duration Frequency Reversibility Ecological Context

Cumulative Change on the Direct Migratory Bird Mortality

Cumulative environmental effect A N RAA P IR I D


When current and future project effects on Migratory Bird mortality are considered, the Project’s contribution to direct Migratory Bird Mortality is negligible in magnitude. Site clearing will be completed outside of sensitive breeding bird windows, vehicle speed limits will be adhered to and wildlife interaction training will be provided to onsite workers. Effects are permanent and extend to the RAA.

Cumulative Change on the Migratory Bird Use of the Area

Cumulative environmental effect A L LAA P C I D


The Project is in an area where continuous growth and urbanization is occurring, resulting in habitat changes and thus Migratory Bird use of the area. When current and reasonably foreseeable future project effects on habitat are considered, the Projects direct contribution to the change in Migratory Bird use of the area is low in magnitude. Land clearing related to the Project is limited to 54.6 ha of terrestrial habitat, and implementation of enhancement and compensation of new habitat in the LAA will result in a no net loss of habitat. Indirect effects related to noise and activity during construction and operations is expected to be short term and temporary.

Cumulative Sensory Disturbance

Cumulative environmental effect A, P L LAA P C R D


The Project is in an area adjacent to residential and industrial development where nighttime lighting is continuously on resulting in sensory disturbance to Migratory Birds. With the addition of reasonably foreseeable future activities and project effects are considered, the Project direct contribution to Migratory Bird Sensory Disturbance is considered to be low in magnitude. Further to the amount of planned lighting, by implementing mitigations to the type and amount of lighting, the effects will be limited to the LAA. Effects are permanent and are continuous in frequency.

KEY See Table 6.20 for detailed definitions Direction: P: Positive A: Adverse N: Neutral H: High

Geographic Extent: PDA: Project Development Area LAA: Local assessment area RAA: Regional assessment area NA: Not applicable


Frequency: S: Single event IR: Irregular event R: Regular event C: Continuous



Ecological Context: D: Disturbed U: Undisturbed

File No. 160960844 275



6.6.1.2.6 Determination of Significance of Environmental Effects on Migratory Birds


The Project is predicted to result in residual effects on migratory birds and these will act cumulatively with the effects from other projects and activities in the area. However, it is not expected that the Project’s contribution to these cumulative effects will affect the sustainability of migratory bird populations in the RAA for several reasons:

• Direct mortality events are expected to be rare.

• The avoidance of habitats by migratory birds in the LAA is expected to be minimal.

There is unlikely to be any substantial mortality of Migratory Birds due to the effect of habitat loss. Further, direct mortality events during construction and operation are expected to be rare. Effects will be localized and will affect a negligible proportion of the Migratory bird population in the region. Displaced birds will still have access to suitable habitat elsewhere within the RAA.

Cumulative effects as a result of habitat loss or alteration is not expected to be substantial. Effects will be localized and will affect a negligible proportion of the migratory bird population in the region. Displaced birds will still have access to suitable habitat elsewhere within the LAA and RAA. It is therefore expected that the contribution of the Project to cumulative effects of migratory birds will not be a substantial factor.

It is expected that the majority of the cumulative effects will result from increased sensory disturbance from noise due to an increase in the frequency of construction and operations traffic and in the intensity and duration of lighting at the Terminal. As discussed previously, birds in the RAA, LAA and PDA are currently exposed to elevated levels of noise from existing vehicle traffic. The increase from baseline noise levels due to construction activities associated with the Project are not expected to be substantial.

Due to the low magnitude, small geographical extent and applied mitigation, cumulative effects of the Project will likely not affect the stability and long-term survival of Migratory Birds in the RAA. The Project’s contribution to cumulative effects is predicted to be not significant.

6.6.1.3 Assessment of Cumulative Environmental Effects on Species at Risk

The Project residual effects for species at risk described in Section 6.5.3.9 likely to interact cumulatively with residual environmental effects from other physical activities (past, present and reasonably foreseeable future) that overlap temporally and spatially are identified in this section and the resulting cumulative environmental effects are assessed.

276 File No. 160960844




Key areas for natural habitat have been identified and set aside by the Halton Region to continue to provide suitable habitat in the region for wildlife such as SAR. Most of this habitat is found towards the Niagara Escarpment and is outside of the RAA for the Project.

All past and present physical activities and resource use listed in Table 6.47 have contributed to a change in SAR mortality in the RAA. Agricultural conversion has the potential to cause wildlife mortality through management of agricultural fields (i.e., grassland bird fatalities from harvesting hay).

Residential and infrastructure development have the potential to increase risk of wildlife strikes by vehicles. Instances may occur during site preparation, including removing vegetation, clearing trees and grubbing (e.g., bird fatalities through nest destruction). Residential development contributes to bird-window strikes and predation by domestic cats. The residual effects from these activities overlap with the residual effects of the Project on SAR mortality, which are also primarily risk of strikes by vehicle use, clearing of the site and bird-window strikes (Section 6.5.3.9).

Linear infrastructure, in particular roadways, also has the potential to increase risk of wildlife strikes through vehicular collisions. Transmission lines contribute to bird mortality through strikes with power lines.

Two reasonably foreseeable projects listed in Table 6.47 may overlap spatially and temporally with the Projects residual effects on SAR mortality. Effects from the clearing and development of the Boyne Planning district and ROW clearing for the Union Gas Hamilton-Milton Project are anticipated to overlap in time and space with Project effects.

The Union Gas Burlington-Oakville Project does not overlap with the Project spatially. Clearing will be localized and occurs outside of the RAA, therefore further assessment of cumulative effects of this project is not warranted.

All past and present physical activities and resource use listed in Table 6.47 have contributed to a change in critical habitat for SAR in the RAA. Agricultural conversion, residential and infrastructure development and linear development have contributed to a loss of suitable habitat for SAR and the possible displacement of SAR use to other areas within or outside of the RAA.

The Boyne Planning District overlaps the Project LAA in time and space and the residual effects from a change of SAR use in the area may occur. Assessment of cumulative effects is completed below.

File No. 160960844 277



Due to the lack of spatial overlap between the Project’s residual effects for critical habitat for SAR, cumulative effects on SAR use in the area are not further discussed for either Union Gas Hamilton-Milton Project or the Union Gas Burlington-Oakville Project.

Table 6.47: Potential Cumulative Environmental Effects on Species at Risk



Direct Mortality for Federal SAR

Change to Critical Habitat for Federal SAR








Britannia Road Transportation Corridor Improvements – –

Tremaine Road Widening (Derry Road to Britannia Road) – –

Urban and Rural Road upgrades – –

Union Gas Hamilton-Milton (Dawn Parkway System Expansion) Project –

Union Gas Burlington-Oakville (Dawn Parkway System Expansion) Project – –



not expected.

6.6.1.3.2 Cumulative Effects Assessment for Direct Mortality of Federally SAR


Activities that may result in direct SAR mortality for the Project and the Boyne Planning District can occur during both construction and operation phases, whereas residual effects from the Project and the Union Gas Hamilton-Milton Project are limited to the construction phase. Construction activities for all three projects may increase mortality risk through a number of pathways including ROW/footprint vegetation removal, site clearing (Bobolink and Eastern Meadowlark), in-water works (Snapping Turtle) or through vehicular/equipment strikes (all SAR).

278 File No. 160960844



The presence and operation of the Project and the Boyne Planning District residential development will result in additional mortality risks through collisions with vehicular traffic.


Mitigation measures for Project effects on SAR mortality is presented in Section 6.5.3.9. Implementation of mitigation and best management practices during construction and operation at the Terminal will reduce effects of the Project and the Project’s contributions to cumulative effects on direct SAR mortality.


The continued agriculture practices within the RAA has already accounted for contributions to the incidents of SAR mortality, in particular Bobolink and Eastern Meadowlark during hay cutting. Current and future urban growth within the RAA and the Town of Milton may also contribute to SAR mortality. Consequently, current and future physical activities and the Project activities will contribute to the incidents of SAR mortality in the RAA.

For the three projects included in the cumulative assessment, the risk of SAR mortality would be most evident during construction phases. Presence of increased vehicle traffic within each project footprint would increase the potential for strikes as would the removal of natural vegetation and in-water works, based on the increased potential presence of SAR. Vehicle strikes are expected to be minimal, as all three projects are in areas with little overlap with key critical habitat or residence for SAR. Further to this, habitat along the Union Gas Hamilton-Milton Project will be largely returned to similar pre-construction conditions, which will eliminate contributions to cumulative effects and the development of the Boyne Planning District and the Terminal will result in large paved areas which will offer limited habitat for SAR.

Overall the Project’s contribution to cumulative effects will be adverse as mortality of SAR will occur, negligible in magnitude based on location and duration of activities and through proper mitigation implementation. Residual cumulative effects will be permanent and irreversible.

6.6.1.3.3 Cumulative Effects Assessment for Change to Critical Habitat for Federal Species At Risk


Residual effects arising from past, present and reasonably foreseeable future activities have similar pathways as those resulting from the Project. These pathways are expected to be through direct loss of Bobolink and Eastern Meadowlark residences through vegetation removal and site clearing activities or Snapping Turtle by watercourse realignments. Indirect disturbance to critical habitat or residences of SAR include noise and labour requirements during construction and operations.

File No. 160960844 279



Residual effects from future physical activities and projects listed in Table 6.47 are anticipated to have minimal spatial overlap with the Project residual effects based on the localized Project effects. The Project and the Boyne Planning District spatial overlap is limited to the existing rail line ROW where the track will be doubled and extended on the northwest side of Britannia Road; however both areas are directly adjacent to each bisected by Britannia Road and will have similar habitat that will be removed during construction creating fragmentation of habitat in the area.

Noise and activity disruption during Project construction and operations may cause indirect effects to SAR in remaining critical habitat or residences.


Mitigation measures to be implemented in order to minimize the potential effects of critical habitat or residence loss or alteration from the Project are in Section 6.5.3.9. Implementation of these mitigation measures will reduce effects of the Project and the Project’s contribution to cumulative effects on the change in critical habitat and residences of SAR in the RAA.


Site clearing of land for development or agricultural use is the main factor in affecting SAR use in the RAA as the area has already been converted to agricultural use or been developed to residential and industrial land use.

The Boyne Planning District and the Project are both anticipated to contribute to a change in SAR use of the area. The cumulative loss of SAR habitat is restricted to the residential development of the Boyne Planning District and the loss or alteration of approximately 44.4 ha of SAR habitat; including 40.7 ha of Bobolink and Eastern Meadowlark habitat and 3.7 ha of Snapping Turtle habitat. The loss of habitat may displace some SAR residences, into habitat outside to the RAA.

Effects from indirect disturbance from noise and activities from Project construction and operations may act cumulatively with construction noise and activities from construction in the residential development of the Boyne Planning District. These effects are anticipated to be minimal as background noise in the range of 68 to 74 dB in the grassland (Bobolink and Eastern Meadowlark) and woodland (Western Chorus Frog and Eastern Wood-Pewee) habitats in the LAA were measured. As such, these habitats are anticipated to already be affected by high noise levels from existing roads and development and are expected to be similar if not higher in the Boyne Planning District based on proximity to existing residential development.

Overall cumulative effects from the change in critical habitat for federal SAR are anticipated to be adverse as critical habitat or residences will be altered or removed from the RAA. This however is anticipated to be low in magnitude based on the size of the areas to be altered in relation to the overall available habitat in the RAA. Furthermore, to compensate for clearing of

280 File No. 160960844



habitat during site preparation, grassland and wetland enhancement/compensation measures will be implemented to result in no net loss of habitat at the Project site. Disturbance effects during construction, including construction labour requirements and noise emissions may result in a decrease to SAR density, however, this is likely to be short term in nature; restricted to the cumulative construction period of the Project and the Boyne Planning District.


Table 6.48 summarizes cumulative effects on SAR.

File No. 160960844 281



Table 6.48: Summary of Cumulative Environmental Effects on SAR

Case


Actions


Direction Magnitude Geographic Extent Duration Frequency Reversibility Ecological

Context

Cumulative Change on the Direct Mortality of SAR

Cumulative environmental effect

A N RAA P IR I R


When current and future project effects on Federally SAR mortality are considered, the Project’s contribution to direct Federally SAR Mortality is negligible in magnitude. Site clearing will be completed outside of sensitive breeding bird windows, vehicle speed limits will be adhered to and wildlife interaction training will be provided to onsite workers. Effects are permanent and extend to the RAA.

Cumulative Change to Critical Habitat for Federal SAR


A L LAA P C I R


The Project is in an area where continuous growth and urbanization is occurring, resulting in removal of critical habitat for federal SAR of the area. When current and reasonably foreseeable future project effects on habitat are considered, the Projects direct contribution to the change to critical habitat is low in magnitude. Land clearing related to the Project is limited to 44.4 ha of terrestrial and wetland habitat, and implementation of enhancement and compensation of new habitat in the LAA will result in a no net loss of habitat. Indirect effects related to noise and activity during construction and operations is expected to be short term and temporary.

KEY See Table 6.24 for detailed definitions

Direction: P: Positive A: Adverse N: Neutral



H: High


NA: Not applicable


Ecological Context: D: Disturbed U: Undisturbed R: Resilient NR: Not resilient Frequency: S: Single event IR: Irregular event R: Regular event C: Continuous

282 File No. 160960844



6.6.1.3.5 Determination of Significance of Environmental Effects on Species at Risk


The Project is predicted to result in residual effects on SAR and these will act cumulatively with the effects from other projects and activities in the area. However, it is not expected that the Project’s contribution to these cumulative effects will affect the sustainability of any SAR populations in the RAA for several reasons:

• Direct mortality events are expected to be rare.

• The removal of critical habitats in the LAA is expected to be minimal.

There is unlikely to be any substantial mortality of SAR due to the effect of habitat loss. Further, direct mortality events during construction and operation are expected to be rare. Effects will be localized and will affect a negligible proportion of the SAR population in the region. Displaced SAR will still have access to suitable habitat elsewhere within the RAA.

Cumulative effects as a result of critical habitat loss or alteration is not expected to be substantial. Effects will be localized and will affect a negligible proportion of population in the region. Displaced birds and snapping turtles will still have access to suitable habitat elsewhere within the LAA and RAA and new habitat will be created at the Project based on the no net loss of habitat. It is therefore expected that the contribution of the Project to cumulative effects of SAR will not be a substantial factor.

It is expected that the majority of the cumulative effects will result from increased sensory disturbance due to an increase in the frequency of construction traffic, and in the intensity and duration of lighting at the Terminal. As discussed previously, SAR in the RAA are currently exposed to elevated levels of noise from existing vehicle traffic. The increase from baseline noise levels due to construction activities associated with the Project are not expected to be substantial.

Due to the low magnitude, small geographical extent, and applied mitigation, cumulative effects of the Project will likely not affect the stability and long-term survival of SAR in the RAA. The Project’s contribution to cumulative effects is predicted to be not significant.

6.6.1.4 Assessment of Cumulative Environmental Effects on Human Health


A potential cumulative effect occurs if a residual effect of the proposed Project acts cumulatively with the effects of other planned physical activities. Given that residual Project effects are likely to be negligible with respect to a change in human health, a cumulative effects assessment was not undertaken.

File No. 160960844 283



6.6.1.5 Assessment of Cumulative Environmental Effects on Socio-Economic Conditions

Section 6.5.5.8 describes the effects of the Project on the environment after mitigation has been implemented. This section identifies and assesses cumulative effects that may result from the spatial and temporal overlap of Project residual effects with those of other projects and activities. An analysis of the Project’s contribution to cumulative residual effects will follow.


Table 6.2 in Section 6.2.10, presents the project and physical activities inclusion list, which identifies other projects and physical activities that might act cumulatively with the Project. Where residual environmental effects from the Project act cumulatively with those from other projects and physical activities (Table 6.36), a cumulative effects assessment is undertaken to determine their significance.

Residual effects resulting in a change in demand for community services and infrastructure were evaluated to be adverse during construction based on potential lane closures or detours associated with improvements to rail crossings and then to be positive once construction is completed as vehicle movement will no longer be inhibited or delayed based on train movement. Current construction or development schedules of the identified projects listed in Section 6.2.4 do not overlap temporally with the Project, as road upgrades to Britannia Road (Tremaine Road to Reg. Road 25) are scheduled by the Halton Region to be completed by 2016. Once these upgrades (widening) are complete, effects from lane closures or detours will be minimized and short in duration. As such, the potential for this residual effect to interact cumulatively with other physical activities is not significant and does not warrant further evaluation.

There are a number of projects in the local and regional area being planned that could act cumulatively with the Terminal on the Socio-Economic Conditions VC as listed in Table 6.49. Each of these projects have contributed to or have the potential to contribute to a loss of agricultural land, change in recreational resource use through the navigability of watercourses, and a change in the viewscape, while also contributing to the economic activity and land use development for the RAA.

Growth in the RAA has been controlled through municipal and regional plans developed or overseen by Halton Region. As part of Halton Region Official Plan, agricultural land has been set aside as urban development continues (Halton Region 2014a). As the need for growth continues, areas designated for expansion that are currently used as agricultural land will be converted. Much of this land is being converted to support residential or linear development within the region. CN owns the property within the PDA and leases undeveloped land to local farmers for continued agricultural use. Land designated for development consists of 30 ha, or

284 File No. 160960844



about 0.1% of the RAA agricultural base, however it may contribute to cumulative residual effects based on the overall loss of agriculture to the RAA.

The Boyne Survey Secondary Plan area sets out 930 ha for residential expansion in the Town of Milton, as passed in By-law 069-2015 by the Town of Milton Council. The area is bound by Louis St. Laurent Avenue to the north, James Snow Parkway to the east, Britannia Road to the south and Tremaine Road to the west. This area will contribute to a loss of agricultural land and a change in viewscape as it is developed for growth to the year 2021, which could overlap with effects of this Project and may result in cumulative residual effects. The development of the area also has a potential for effects on Indian Creek during construction of new residential development, however these effects are not anticipated to overlap spatially or temporally with effects of this Project.

The proposed Union Gas Hamilton-Milton Project and the Union Gas Burlington-Oakville Project are part of the Dawn Parkway System Expansion that will service the planned growth and need for natural gas in the Milton, Burlington and Oakville communities through the installation of a 20 inch diameter pipeline. The Hamilton-Milton Project is planned to use the existing pipeline corridor between Highway 6 at Carlisle Road and Derry Road to between Ontario Street and Third Line. Construction is scheduled to begin in 2016 and be completed and operating by 2021. The Hamilton-Milton Project spatially overlaps an area of agricultural land within the Boyne Planning district and Indian Creek Tributary within the RAA. As the pipeline installation is temporary, it is expected the land base will be returned to similar conditions post installation as it was pre-disturbance. Further to that, the portion of creek that will be crossed by the pipeline is not part of the navigable portion of the creek; therefore this project will not have overlapping effects with the Project.

The Burlington-Oakville Project is proposed to be parallel to 9th Line from just east of Dundas Street to the Parkway West Station just off Derry Road. The Hamilton-Milton Project received regulatory approval in March 2015, while the Burlington-Oakville Project is still in the regulatory review stage. Neither of these projects overlap spatially or temporally with the Project and are anticipated not to have overlapping effects.

File No. 160960844 285



Table 6.49: Potential Cumulative Environmental Effects on Socio-Economic Conditions



Change in the Quality and Quantity of Land and Resource Use








Britannia Road Transportation Corridor Improvements –

Tremaine Road Widening (Derry Road to Britannia Road) –

Urban and Rural Road upgrades –

Union Gas Hamilton-Milton (Dawn Parkway System Expansion) Project –

Union Gas Burlington-Oakville (Dawn Parkway System Expansion) Project –



not expected.

6.6.1.5.2 Cumulative Effects Assessment for Change of the Quality and Quantity of Land and Resource Use


Past, present and future projects have the potential to interact cumulatively with the Project, if due to the additional conversion of agricultural land related to development, the Boyne Survey Secondary Plan Area and the Project will act cumulatively to the loss of available land for agricultural lands in the RAA. The Boyne Survey Secondary Plan Area is anticipated to result in the conversion of 3% of agricultural land within Halton Region (Town of Milton n.d.). When considered with the Project, the total area of land affected is still only 3% of land available in the

286 File No. 160960844



Land and Resource Use RAA. Further to this, both the Project and the Boyne Survey Secondary Plan Area are set to occur within land use areas set aside for urban growth in the Town of Milton.

Viewscapes are a dynamic feature of land and resource use. As a result, the continued development of lands will result in ongoing changes. Buildings and infrastructure will alter landscape views as rural areas continued to be developed.


Implementation of mitigation measures described in Section 6.5.5.9 will reduce effects of the Project and the Project’s contribution to cumulative effects on agriculture and viewscapes. Additionally, the planning process described in the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Socio-Economic Baseline (Appendix E.12) will provide a framework for the development and approval of Projects within Halton Region.


The current land base in the RAA is predominantly agriculture and natural heritage designated land (Halton Region 2014a). The conversion from agricultural land use to employment or residential lands has been managed throughout the area by the implementation of careful planning and preparation by the Town of Milton and Halton Region in order to provide for the sustainable management of growth. The conversion of agricultural land is predicted to be an adverse cumulative effect, permanent in duration and low in magnitude based on the overall size contribution. This change will take place within the policies and frameworks in place in the region for the stewardship of agricultural resources.

From a site development perspective, a positive cumulative effect is predicted as the Project will complement existing infrastructure and improve economic opportunities for the GTHA and Canadian economy. This positive cumulative effect can be maximized with communication between the Town of Milton and other stakeholders (e.g., CN, regional planners) during Project planning and implementation to successfully service the economic needs of the community.

With respect to the quality of the viewscape being changed, through the use of berms and strategic site layout, CN is limiting the adverse view that will be experienced by resource users (e.g., cyclists). As the Project will be one of the first to be developed in the RAA, the cumulative effect will increase as the development increases and infrastructure is built up. The overall cumulative effects will be adverse, low in magnitude and irreversible.


Table 6.50 summarizes cumulative effects on the Socio-Economic Conditions VC.

File No. 160960844 287



Table 6.50: Summary of Cumulative Environmental Effects on Socio-Economic Conditions

Case

Other Projects, Activities

and Actions


Direction Magnitude Geographic Extent Duration Frequency Reversibility

Socio-economic

Context

Cumulative Change on the Quality and Quantity of Land Resource Use


A, P L RAA P IR I R


When current and future project effects on the change in the quality and quantity of land and resource use, the Project’s contribution to this change is low in magnitude. The Project-related effects are both adverse (agricultural conversion and viewscape) and positive (contribution to economic opportunities) , as the land for which the Project is being developed on is within Employment Land designated use, next to areas set aside for urban growth. Effects are permanent and extend to the RAA.

KEY See Table 6.32 for detailed definitions

Direction: P: Positive A: Adverse N: Neutral


Magnitude: N: Negligible L: Low M: Moderate H: High



NA: Not applicable

Socio-Economic Context: R: Resilient NR: Not resilient Frequency: S: Single event IR: Irregular event R: Regular event C: Continuous

6.6.1.5.4 Determination of Significance of Environmental Effects on Socio-Economic Conditions


The loss of agricultural resource in the PDA is permanent and will contribute to a cumulative loss in the RAA, albeit in a very limited amount. The planned growth in the area has already accounted for the change in resource use and has made allowances by designating agricultural resource land in areas that are separated from areas where development will continue to support the growth for the region. By doing this, the conflict in the various land uses will be limited to change over time as development progresses. Until such time, agricultural use will continue adjacent to planned growth areas, and next to the Project.

The change in the quality of viewscape in the PDA is permanent; however it will be reduced after construction is completed through the use of berms, trees and vegetation, grade separations and placement of infrastructure within the Terminal. As development continues in the LAA and RAA, the viewscape will change from rural based to urban based. Many resource users including cyclists coexist in urban environments.

288 File No. 160960844



In summary, the low magnitude of the loss of agricultural land, resource use and the change in viewscapes is outweighed by the predicted positive effect of land development for its intended use and the threshold for cumulative environmental effects are not expected to be exceeded or reached and are therefore assessed as not significant.

6.6.1.6 Assessment of Cumulative Environmental Effects on Archaeological or Heritage Resources


A potential cumulative effect occurs if a residual effect of the proposed Project acts cumulatively with the effects of other planned physical activities. Given that no residual Project effects are likely for both the unauthorized disturbance or destruction of part or all of an archaeology site(s) or cultural heritage site(s), a cumulative effects assessment was not undertaken.

6.6.2 Effects of Potential Accidents or Malfunctions

In accordance to section 6.6.1 of the Final EIS Guidelines, effects of potential accidents or malfunctions will be identified for the Project construction and operation and the potential effects on each of the VCs. The assessment will include an identification of the magnitude of an accident and/or malfunction, including the quantity, mechanism, rate, form and characteristics of the contaminants and other materials likely to be released into the environment during the accident and malfunction events and would potentially result in an adverse environmental effect as defined in section 5 of CEAA, 2012. Safeguards have been established to protect against such occurrences and the contingency and emergency response procedures have been put in place or will be implemented if an event occurred.

Based on discussions with the Project team, experience and knowledge of intermodal terminals and environmental assessments and in consideration of the design, construction and operation of the Project, the following potential accidents and malfunctions were identified:

• Hazardous materials spill (including fuel oil, glycol, lubricants and hydraulic fluid) on land or water

• Spill of an intermodal shipping container on land

• Traffic accidents in relation to the entry points of the Terminal

• Derailment

6.6.2.1 Identification of Potential Interactions with VCs

A preliminary screening was conducted on each VC to determine if any of the potential accident or malfunction scenarios as described above were likely to affect the VC.

File No. 160960844 289



Based on the initial screening of potential Project interactions with the various VCs (Table 6.51), it was determined that Traditional Land Use will not be directly affected by potential Project-related accidents and malfunctions and therefore will not be considered further in this assessment as there are no traditional land use areas located within the PDA.

Table 6.51: Potential Interactions between Accidents and Malfunctions and VCs

Potential Accidents and Malfunctions

VCs

Fish and Fish Habitat

Migratory Birds

Species at Risk

Socio-Economic

Conditions

Human Health

Archaeology and

Cultural Heritage

Resources

Hazardous materials spill (including fuel, oil, glycol, lubricants and hydraulic fluid) or ignition of spilled fuel

- -

Intermodal container spill on land - - -

Traffic accidents at the entry points to the Terminal - - - - -

Derailment involving a release of fuel from a locomotive - - - -



The potential environmental effects of accidents and malfunctions on each VC were assessed based on the significance criteria, spatial and temporal boundaries as defined for each VC and as defined in Section 6.2.2 (Table 6.1) of this EIS. Specifically, the potential environmental effects of accidents and malfunctions were assessed as follows:

• As described in Section 6.2.11;

• Mechanisms through which the accident or malfunction could result in an effect on the VC;

• Project design measures that would minimize the risk of the accident or malfunction, as well as emergency response measures and other mitigation measures that would help minimize the effect;

• Potential residual effect, taking into account the emergency response and/or Project design measures, described or quantified using the measurable parameter(s);

290 File No. 160960844



• Significance of the predicted residual effect was evaluated using the same significance criteria for the VC as for routine Project environmental effects; and,

• Follow-up and/or monitoring programs that might be required if an accident or malfunction event occurred.

Baseline conditions for each VC considered in the accidents and malfunctions evaluation are outlined in Section 6.3.

6.6.2.3 Emergency Response Planning

Issues related to safety, accidents and malfunctions are of paramount importance. The following response plans are currently in place by CN for emergency response and management:

• Hazardous Materials Action Plan (component of Emergency Plan; 2003, Revised August 2008)

• CN Emergency Response Plan (CN 2008)

• Evacuation Procedures (component of Emergency Preparedness Plan, August 2014)

These plans will be updated as necessary to reflect the Project.

The CN Emergency Response Plan is updated as required and ensures adequate response equipment is available at key locations. CN uses local emergency responders as appropriate given the type and severity of incident. These resources can range from local contractors, vacuum truck operators, environmental consultants, specialized emergency responders, etc.

6.6.2.4 Hazardous Materials Spill

6.6.2.4.1 Sources

A “spill” is defined as discharge into the natural environment from or out of a structure, vehicle or other container that is abnormal in quality or quantity in light of all circumstances of the discharge (Ontario Environmental Protection Act). Further, for the purpose of this assessment, a discharge into the natural environment includes:

• the deposit of a deleterious substance into a watercourse that is fish bearing or contains fish habitat (Fisheries Act)

• a hazardous material that is in contact with the air, land or water beyond a containment or mitigation system

The potential for a discharge may be the result of:

• abnormal operation conditions (e.g., extreme weather event)

• equipment failure

• work procedure changes

File No. 160960844 291



• human error

Hazardous material spills are discussed in terms of spills during Project construction and operations, including onsite vehicle use (e.g., rupture of a hydraulic line, vehicle accident). Minor leaks from equipment and vehicles are addressed in CN’s Environmental Response Plan 2013 and are not further addressed in this section.

Spills during Project Construction and Operations

Operation and maintenance of construction and operations equipment will include the use of fuels (diesel and propane), lubricants (engine oil, transmission oil, drive train oil, hydraulic oil, gear oil, lubricating grease), coolants (ethylene glycol) and general process chemicals (methanol, paints and solvents). These hazardous liquids could pose an increased threat to the environment as they can seep or flow in an uncontrolled manner if not contained or stored properly. Some of these liquids are comprised of components that may affect vegetation or wildlife (e.g., antifreeze) yet attract wildlife based on their smell. In addition, many of these liquids are readily flammable or explosive. Onsite vehicle use could result in additional releases through ruptures of hydraulic lines or fuel tank releases as a result of a vehicle accident. Inadvertent spills could result in contamination of soil, water, vegetation, riparian habitat, groundwater, wetland, wildlife and wildlife habitat, and human health. Further damage could result to soils and vegetation during clean-up or remediation of spills.

While these types of spills are more likely to occur during construction based on the number of equipment, vehicles and workers, they are still considered to be small in volume and localized and easily cleaned up. The likelihood of a large spill is low as large volumes of these materials will not be stored onsite.

6.6.2.4.2 Effect Pathways

VCs with potential interactions that could cause an environmental effect were carried through further assessment. These VCs are Fish and Fish Habitat, Migratory Birds and Other Socio-Economic Conditions.

Deleterious substances with the potential for introduction during construction activities include sediment and hydrocarbons (via spills from construction equipment). Introduction of sediment into a watercourse or water body might induce a wide range of biological effects. Fish mortality might also occur as a result of heavy gill abrasion at high sediment concentrations (Newcombe and Jensen 1996; DFO 2013c). Continuous, elevated sediment levels might reduce overall fish production in a watercourse or water body because of turbidity-related reductions in algae and in benthic and aquatic invertebrate production. Hydrocarbons, such as oil, gasoline, lubricants and hydraulic fluids, might enter surface water from machinery used for in-water construction or from maintenance and fueling activities carried out near a watercourse or water body. Ecological effects might range from direct mortality of fish or other aquatic biota to persistent and progressive accumulation in sediment or biological tissues which could impair health, vigour, or productive capacity (Alberta Transportation 2009). The extent of the effect is

292 File No. 160960844



determined by the amount of the release, the type of hydrocarbon (that affects the residence time in the aquatic system) and the flow rate in the watercourse (that determines the extent of downstream transport).

Hazardous material spills resulting from construction activities (e.g., equipment fueling or faulty components) and may lead to direct or indirect mortality of birds through contamination of water, soil, or food resources. Many chemicals could be directly absorbed by animals through dermal contact with contaminated soils or water or ingested by way of contaminated prey, soil, or water.

Hazardous materials spills can affect public health and safety if they occur in the immediate vicinity of the public or if the spilled material comes into contact with environmental resources used by the public.

Hazardous materials spills have the potential to lower the interpretive value of archaeological and heritage resources.

6.6.2.4.3 Mitigation Measures

To minimize the potential for a hazardous material spill, CN, in cooperation with all contractors, and subcontractors will implement mitigation measures as follows:

• The Hazardous Materials Action Plan and CN Emergency Response Plan will be created, where necessary, to accommodate the Project. These plans will be in place during construction and operations and will include the location of spill equipment on site, methods to prevent containerized material spills from spreading and for recovering the materials in the water. The plan will also identify any sensitive habitats to best direct response efforts.

• A Spill Response & Contingency Plan will be developed and implemented during the construction phase.

• Establish and clearly identify a riparian buffer before the start of clearing activities.

• Restrict disturbance in this area to activities associated with realignment, restoration and naturalization.

• Install erosion and sediment control at appropriate locations adjacent to all watercourses and/or water bodies, or as directed by the Environmental Monitor(s). Appropriate temporary erosion and sediment control structures shall be installed and maintained through all phases of construction.

• Restrict grubbing, stripping and grading on approach slopes to watercourses and water bodies to the amount required to allow safe passage of equipment and completion of the relevant work.

• Delay grading of the primary banks of watercourses and water bodies until immediately before construction of temporary crossings and watercourse realignment, where

File No. 160960844 293



practicable. All construction and operations equipment will be properly maintained and free of fluid leaks.

• Spill containment will be in place, as appropriate.

• Designated refueling areas will be established for yard equipment and will be a safe distance (30 m setback minimum distance from top of bank) from fish habitat and ignition sources.

• Equipment will be inspected and properly maintained to avoid potential malfunction. Infrastructure will be regularly maintained as per Transport Canada requirements.

• Construction management plans will include hazardous materials storage and handling procedures.

• The SWM system will be equipped with oil grit separators and shut off valves will be installed on the SWM pond outlets.

• Storage of hazardous materials will be restricted to designated areas with proper containment and in accordance with appropriate safety procedures and requirements.

• Safe and proper handling and storage of hazardous materials, and implementation of spill contingency procedures, will follow CN standards in place.

Should a hazardous materials spill occur, the primary goal is to ensure safety, and, if safe to do so, contain the material and to keep it out of the drainage system. At any time, if a hazardous material is seen to be leaking on-site, the CN Emergency Response Program will be initiated and the site will be secured.

Spill response kits will be available on-site. Kits will include booms and fences to contain spills and to prevent wildlife from entering spill areas. Emergency response actions will be directed towards identified areas of sensitive habitats.

Implementation of the Project design measures will reduce the likelihood of a spill occurring. Contingency Plan(s) will help to reduce the spill volume and extent, should a spill occur. It is not expected that a spill would result in subsequent ignition. Monitoring and follow-up activities will take place to return the environment to its previous state.

General spill management procedures involves the responsible parties implementing their spill response plan, which usually involves engaging a contractor specializing in spills on-site as soon as possible. CN staff will provide support as required, as well as follow steps in the response plan to properly contain and limit the effects of the spill until professionals can respond.

Typical Employee Training includes the following:

• Stop the leak;

• Eliminate the sources of fire;

• Evacuate all individuals;

294 File No. 160960844



• Contain the spill;

• Prevent seepage of the product;

• Advise supervisor (who will in turn notify Agencies if applicable); and

• Clean up site.

6.6.2.4.4 Residual Effects and Evaluation of Significance

The magnitude of potential effects from hazardous spills is expected to be low because of the limited quantity of fuel likely to be released. With the implementation of mitigation, response, and clean-up measures outlined above the volume of spilled materials is expected to be minimal and contained to the immediate site of the spill. Based on equipment and vehicle management onsite through designated roads or pathways during construction and operations and based on limited speeds, it is unlikely that there would be a collision resulting in the release of larger quantities of fuel. Any potential spill events are expected to be short term in duration and could occur sporadically at irregular intervals.

Mitigation measures, such as proper isolation, sediment control, overland water management, and construction outside the RAP (i.e., within the MNRF construction timing window for in-water work) are expected to limit introduction of deleterious substances. Following DFO’s Measures to Avoid Causing Harm to Fish and Fish Habitat during operation of machinery (DFO 2013b) is expected to limit the introduction of hydrocarbons or other deleterious substances related to equipment use. As a result, environmental effects to Fish and Fish Habitat resulting from deleterious materials such as sediment and hazardous materials, are expected to be not significant.

As a result, environmental effects to Migratory Birds resulting from most hazardous material spills are expected to be not significant; that is, they are not likely to alter terrestrial habitats within the PDA in quality or extent, in such a way as to cause a change or decline in the ecological function of that habitat, and/or result in a change or decline in the distribution or abundance of a Migratory Bird population that is dependent upon that habitat, such that natural recruitment would not re-establish the population to its original level within several generations. Environmental effects to Migratory Birds are therefore not significant.

The CN Emergency Response Plan includes standard operating procedures and work instructions designed to reduce the possibility of accidents and malfunctions. CN generally takes leadership or a coordination role to activate the emergency response plans. Given the precautionary safety measures in place and the emergency planning and mitigation measures for the Project, the likelihood of a hazardous materials spill resulting in human health issues is low. This systematic approach to public health and safety provides a level of assurance that accidents or malfunctions resulting in harm to the public are unlikely to occur.

File No. 160960844 295



A severe accident or malfunction at the proposed terminal could lead to the temporary closure of the Project including temporary work stoppages and labour disruptions possibly only lasting a few hours; longer disruptions are considered highly unlikely or remote. The adverse environmental effect of accidents and malfunctions on the local economy due to work stoppages and interruption of terminal activities is predicted to be not significant, given that any closure is likely to be short term and reversible. Given the mitigation and safety measures in place for the Project and the contingency plans to be implemented in the event of an accident or malfunction, it is unlikely that a closure longer than short-term would occur.

Accidents of this type are not likely to affect Archaeology and Heritage resources. Most of the Archaeology and Heritage resources that fall within the construction zone will be assessed, documented and potentially removed during construction. The loss of Archaeology and Heritage resources to hazardous materials spills are therefore considered not significant.

In the event of a hazardous materials spill, it would likely occur on disturbed areas and would not likely result in direct spillage onto fish or fish habitat. In addition, initial spill containment methods and subsequent spill clean-up measures as outlined above will help to minimize the spread of hazardous materials into adjacent habitat. Spill containment kits must be present on site in locations where risk of spill is deemed the greatest (e.g., designated refueling areas). Therefore, based on previous experience and professional judgment, a spill of hazardous materials is predicted to have no significant environmental effect on fish and fish habitat.

6.6.2.5 Spill of Containerized Material

6.6.2.5.1 Sources

Intermodal containers are designed for the direct transfer of a container and its contents to and from railcars to trucks. During the life of the Project a container could overturn during transportation to or from the yard, due to the potential malfunction of reach stackers or a trucking accident causing, release of all or part of its load. Examples of products shipped in containers include all household goods such as food, household appliances, furniture and cleaning products. Less than 3% of all goods shipped in intermodal containers are dangerous goods. Of these containers identified as carrying dangerous goods, the products include items such as household cleaning products, automotive parts, maintenance products and lawn care equipment. Spills of hazardous materials are discussed in Section 6.6.2.4.


Based on a screening of the potential effects of an intermodal container spill on land with each VC, the VCs that are considered to be most likely affected are fish and fish habitat, migratory birds and SAR.

Land-based vehicle accidents could result in the release of intermodal containers onto the adjacent water environment and could result in contamination water and have an effect on fish

296 File No. 160960844



habitat, migratory birds and SAR depending on if floating material is carried into shallow sections of the watercourse and the type of material spilled. The extent of such effects would depend on factors such as the nature of the substance, location of the accident, timing of the accident (e.g., during peak migration) and environmental conditions (e.g., rain events).


The Project has been designed to allow for the efficient transfer of intermodal containers between railcars and trucks. To minimize the potential for intermodal container spills, the following measures will be implemented by CN in cooperation with contractors and sub-contractors:

• regular maintenance of all transfer equipment (reach stackers, rail transfer equipment) will be conducted to avoid potential equipment malfunction;

• proper construction and maintenance of access roads will be undertaken and speed limits will be established;

• the site will have emergency response equipment to limit the consequence of intermodal container spills by prompt containment and clean-up actions; and,

• Intermodal containers will be properly handled within the Terminal.

If a spill of an intermodal container does occur, an emergency response protocol will be immediately initiated as described below.

Emergency Response Approach for the Spill of an intermodal container

The emergency response to be initiated for a spill of intermodal container includes:

• Notification of all CN responders as required in the CN Emergency Response Plan Activation of spill handling procedures including assessing feasibility of containment and clean-up based on environmental terrain and conditions.

• Completion of reporting and disposal procedures.

The emergency response plan will include methods and equipment to prevent intermodal container spills from spreading and for recovering the materials in the water.

6.6.2.5.4 Residual Effects

Intermodal container spills could result from container loading, unloading and transferring activities (e.g., from faulty equipment components) and may lead to direct or indirect mortalities of fish, birds and SAR by contaminating water, soil or food resources, depending on the contents of the container. Experience with similar terminal projects in other locations suggests that the probability of intermodal container spills is low if the mitigation measures as outlined above are

File No. 160960844 297



implemented. As a result, it is likely that the effects of intermodal container spills to fish and fish habitat, migratory birds and SAR will be not significant.

6.6.2.6 Traffic Accidents at the Entry Points to the Terminal

6.6.2.6.1 Sources

Public access to the Terminal and CN right of way is restricted and, as a result, there will be limited interaction between the Project and the public. While a detailed assessment of human safety has not been conducted for the Project, the potential for traffic accidents between vehicles and equipment entering and exiting the Terminal site exist. As described in Section 3.3.5, it is anticipated that the entrance will be signal controlled to accommodate safe vehicle movements in and out of the Terminal. CN will work with the Town of Milton and Halton Region to accommodate a turning lane for trucks entering the Terminal from the east on Britannia Road.

Access for employee and service/delivery vehicles will be via a new entrance on Tremaine Road. The intersection of this access with Tremaine Road is not anticipated to require a signalized intersection.

Project-related vehicle traffic will consist of:

• Deliveries of material and equipment associated with physical works during construction, and to a lesser extent operations.

• Daily commuting by Project construction workers, representing approximately 150 to 200 vehicles per day throughout construction (assumes each worker drives their own vehicle).

• Daily commuting by Project operations workers, representing approximately 130 vehicles entering and exiting the PDA via the Tremaine Road entrance daily.

• Trucking operations, where it is estimated that approximately 650 trucks per day will be entering and subsequently exiting the Terminal at the beginning of operation and approximately 800 trucks per day each way at full operation.

6.6.2.6.2 Incident Prevention

It is expected that standard traffic safety measures will be implemented along Britannia Road and Tremaine Road where access to the Terminal will be constructed. All traffic along these roads will be expected to conform to the Highway Traffic Act of Ontario. It is anticipated that the new Making Ontario's Roads Safer Act will also be enforced by local authorities where appropriate to reduce potential accidents. To further reduce the potential interactions between truck traffic entering the Terminal site, 6 queuing lanes to accommodate approximately 140 trucks will be built at the Terminal gate. This will limit the risk of queuing of traffic on Britannia Road.

298 File No. 160960844




Project construction and operation activities may affect safety for road users (i.e., motor vehicle operators, cyclists and pedestrians) at one or two entries to the Terminal by generating increased vehicle volumes entering and exiting the PDA.


To minimize the potential for traffic accidents at the entrance to the Terminal, CN, in cooperation with all contractors, and subcontractors will implement mitigation measures as follows:

• Proper construction and maintenance of access roads will be undertaken and speed limits for all roads will be observed and enforced;

• National and international engineering codes and standards will be followed including the American Railway Engineering and Maintenance-of-Way Association (AREMA) manual;

• A new two-lane private roadway will be built in the PDA to accommodate truck queuing entirely on CN property; and,

• CN will seek collaboration with Halton Region to install a signalized intersection, as necessary, on Britannia Road with a turning lane for trucks entering the terminal from the east to manage vehicle movements and the safety of other road users, including motor vehicle operators, cyclists and pedestrians.

6.6.2.6.5 Residual Effects

Potential effects on road user safety at the entry points to the PDA will be managed by through Project-specific mitigation measures described above. In addition, standard road rules will apply to Project-related vehicle traffic as well as other road users and will be enforced by local authorities to protect road user safety. Although traffic will increase at the entry points to the Terminal as a result of the Project, the residual effect on road safety for road users will be largely managed through Project-specific and standard mitigation, including on-going communication with local and regional service providers, including emergency services. Therefore, it is expected that the risk of traffic accidents at the entry points to the Terminal will be not significant.

6.6.2.7 Derailment

6.6.2.7.1 Sources

There will be no increase in the risk of a derailment with the addition of two additional trains per day being added to the 25 to 30 trains per day that currently travel on the mainline. The proposed Lower Base Line underpass will remove the risk of a vehicle collision during train operations, which decreases the likelihood of derailment.

File No. 160960844 299



As a result of Project activities that currently do not occur today, there is an increased potential for a derailment to occur within the Terminal. As locomotives will be travelling at low speeds (approximately 15 mph), potential derailments are expected to be minor in nature with limited consequences (i.e., during car movement, single cars may derail within the confines of the Terminal).

To minimize the potential for a derailment and any associated spills, the following suite of measures will be implemented by CN:

• Equipment will be inspected and properly maintained to avoid potential malfunction;

• Infrastructure will be regularly maintained as per Transport Canada requirements;

• Speed limits will be observed; and,

• National and international engineering codes and standards will be followed including the Manual for Railway Engineering.

If a spill does occur in the event of a derailment, an emergency response protocol will be immediately initiated as described Section 6.6.2.4 and 6.6.2.5.

Upon completion of detailed Terminal design, a risk assessment will be prepared, as required by Transport Canada, to address the risk of potential incidents, including derailments.

6.6.3 Effects of the Environment on the Project

As required by the EIS Guidelines, the EIS focuses on the following aspects of the environment that could potentially affect the Project. Section 19(1)(h) of CEAA, 2012 requires consideration of “any change to the designated project that may be caused by the environment”. This section considers how local environmental conditions and natural hazards (e.g., extreme weather) could adversely affect the Project and thus result in effects to the environment (e.g., accidental events). Potential effects of the environment on a project are typically a function of project design and environmental conditions that could affect the project.

For the purposes of this assessment, this section considers how the following environmental conditions and hazards could affect the Project:

• Extreme weather or climate conditions including winds, extreme temperatures, severe precipitation, ice storms, tornadoes and lightning, that are applicable to the Project region;

• Climate change and its potential effects on future average and extreme climate conditions; and,

• Regional geotechnical and geophysical hazards, including ground instability, erosion and earthquakes.

Each of these conditions and hazards is described in further detail below, including existing conditions, potential effects and proposed mitigation.

300 File No. 160960844



In some cases, these effects on the Project can lead to effects on the receiving environment. Mitigation of these effects requires planning, design and operation procedures that consider both normal and extreme physical environmental conditions for the operational setting. There must also be monitoring and forecasting of physical environmental conditions allowing Project activities to be adaptively managed to maintain a safe working environment.

Proper planning is the primary tool for mitigation. Engineering designs will adhere to industry standards and will reflect CN’s experience with similar projects. The Terminal will be designed to resist normal and extreme physical environmental conditions, based on the historical records.


A significant adverse residual environmental effect of the environment on the Project is defined as one that results in one or more of the following:

• damage to the Project infrastructure resulting in harm to Project workers or the public;

• a substantial effect to the Project schedule delaying ongoing Project activities resulting in a shutdown of terminal operations for 72 hours or more; or,

• damage to the Project infrastructure resulting in repairs that cannot be technically or economically implemented.

6.6.3.2 Effect of Extreme Weather and Climate Conditions on the Project

6.6.3.2.1 Existing Conditions

For the purpose of this EIS, extreme weather includes winds, extreme temperatures, severe precipitation, ice storms, tornadoes and lightning. A description of climate conditions for the Project is provided in Section 6.3.1.2. The Project is within the Mixedwood Plains Ecozone, characterized by cool winters and warm summers and is subject to highly variable weather (Environment Canada 2005). The region is within a significant North American Storm Belt, southern cities within this region (e.g., Woodstock and Guelph) receive considerable amounts of snow (Environment Canada 2005).

Based on temperature and precipitation data from Hamilton, Toronto and Georgetown (nearest stations in relation to the PDA) extreme cold temperatures are below -33°C for all locations and extreme high temperatures are above 37°C at all locations. The highest amounts of extreme daily precipitation at each station historically occurred in the months of July, August, September and October and ranged from 80.8 mm to 121.8 mm during the record period between 1981 to 2010. Maximum observed wind gust speed ranged from 124 kph at Toronto to 133 kph at Hamilton.

File No. 160960844 301



Due to climate change, annual precipitation in Southern Ontario is expected to decline by 10%, while extreme weather events will be increased in rainfall intensity and occurrence and decrease in the total number of winter storms (MNR, 2007). Southern Ontario could experience a decrease in freezing rain events during the months of November, April and May (10% by 2050, and 15% by 2080). Future freezing rain events could increase during the months of December, January and February (40% by 2050, and 45% by 2080) (Cheng et al. 2007).

Southwestern Ontario sees some of the highest lightning flash densities in the country. The PDA falls within the range of 2-2.5 flashes per square kilometer cloud to ground, based on 1999 to 2013 data (Environment Canada 2014).

A severe thunderstorm is defined as having wind gusts of greater than 90 km per hour, hail with a diameter of greater than 20 mm, rainfall of greater than 50 mm in an hour or greater than 75 mm in three hours, or tornadoes. While not all severe thunderstorms produce tornadoes, they can produce serious straight line wind damage as severe as a tornado, which can actually cover a much wider area than a tornado usually does (Environment Canada 2015).

Severe storms can produce localized flooding resulting from short-lived thunderstorms; Ontario experience up to 20 short-lived severe thunderstorms per year (Environment Canada 2015). Flooding can result in the overflow of water from nearby watercourses, coastal or lake shorelines, or inundated low-lying areas.

Freezing rain occurs when three layers of atmospheric conditions exist:

• a layer of below-freezing air (furthest from the surface);

• a layer of above-freezing air (middle atmospheric layer); and,

• a layer of sub-freezing temperatures (closest to the surface).

Frozen precipitation melts to rain while falling into the warm air layer, and then begins to refreeze in the cold layer below. If the precipitate refreezes while still in the air, it will land on the ground as sleet. Alternatively, the liquid droplets can continue to fall without freezing, passing through the cold air just above the surface. This thin layer of air then cools the rain to a temperature below freezing (0 °C). However, due to a phenomenon known as “supercooling”, i.e., the formation of supercooled drops of precipitation, the drops themselves do not freeze. When the supercooled drops making contact, including with powerlines, trees, and light poles, a slowly thickening film of ice forms. While meteorologists can predict when and where an ice storm will occur, some storms still occur with little or no warning.

6.6.3.2.2 Effects Analysis and Mitigation

During construction, runoff from extreme precipitation may cause damage to erosion and sediment control measures or may shut down Project activities until conditions return to normal. Extreme events can cause unsafe working conditions, which could create work stoppages or

302 File No. 160960844



delays. This could in turn increase the potential for accidents or malfunctions (e.g., spills), which could affect the environment.

During the operation of the Terminal, extreme weather including precipitation and temperatures will be mitigated through the change in maintenance/inspection schedules, design and engineering of the facility. The operations at the Terminal site will continue with minor work stoppages as necessary to ensure worker safety. Severe thunderstorms may result in work stoppages and workers taking shelter within existing building, however with the existing storm warning systems in place for the area, effects from the environment are anticipated to be eliminated.

• during extreme temperature events (both ends) changes to railway operation occur. This includes increased track inspection, reduced speeds, reduced train length;

• extreme rain events will results in increased track inspections;

• extreme weather events are monitored on an ongoing basis and notification delivered to field crews;

• backup power exists for communication systems and rail traffic control in event of power outages; and,

• serious weather events such as tornadoes would result in terminal and train operation shut downs.

Infrastructure could be damaged by tornadoes, lightning or hail. Lightning strikes can result in flashovers, whereby electricity jumps across an air gap to create a conductive path. Flashovers can occur from utility lines (transmission lines) to other metal infrastructures or to the ground and can be potentially life-threatening to people nearby or within the vicinity, can damage nearby equipment or powerlines and cause power outages.

A transformer will be placed next to the administration building to support electrical needs of the Terminal. Powerlines that are needed to cross the yard tracks will be installed underground, while lines that will not interfere with the Terminal operations will be above ground. Radio communication tower will be either a new free standing transmission tower (~45 m) or will be one transmission antenna (~30 m) collocated on a light pole and will be the tallest structure on site. Backup generators will be installed to be used as secondary power sources.

CN has Emergency Management Systems with response procedures to address extreme weather and climate conditions.

6.6.3.2.3 Residual Effect Characterization

Despite mitigation measures, residual effects from extreme weather conditions on the Project may still remain. During construction, tornadoes, lightning and precipitation may cause unsafe working conditions, whereby increasing the occurrence of an effect to the environment from an

File No. 160960844 303



accident or malfunction which includes spills. While extreme weather conditions do increase the chance of this occurring, CN has procedures and policies in place to encourage safe working conditions, including limited speed limits, designated driving directions throughout the site and temporary shutdowns at site, during adverse weather conditions. Spill prevention procedures are also in place at the site and will be adhered to by all contractors onsite.

During operations at the Terminal, regardless of design or operating procedures, damage from tornadoes, hail, or wind can occur to equipment or cause temporary disruption to intermodal transport of goods or movement of trains along the rail line. This could result in safety concerns for the public or onsite workers (e.g., derailment of railcars) or, increase risks of spills from equipment or of containerized goods.

CN has policies in place to address worker safety and will work to inform the public of dangers in such an event through media communications.

While extreme weather may result in a disruption of operations at the Terminal site, the frequency of extreme weather events are anticipated to be low and effects to the Project are considered to be not significant.

6.6.3.3 Effect of Climate Change on the Project


In accordance with standard practice, the CEAA procedural guide, Incorporating Climate Change Considerations in Environmental Assessment: General Guidance for Practitioners (Federal-Provincial-Territorial Committee on Climate Change and Environmental Assessment 2003) was used as guidance. Over the next 100 years, Canada will likely experience warmer temperatures, a greater frequency of storm events, increasing storm intensity, and flooding (MNR 2007).

The EIS Guidelines issued for the Project require a climate change assessment to understand potential effects and potential climate change adaptation alternatives for the Project. The potential effects of climate change can be assessed with respect to temperature and precipitation change effects on surface water resources. The climate change assessment was conducted through a review of Ontario climate change literature, climate change scenarios recommended by regulators and future climate predictive tools.

A future climate IDF relationship was developed using the Computerized IDF Climate Change tool (Version: 1.0.3892) created by Western University and the Canada Water Network (Facility for Intelligent Decision Support 2014). The model used for this study within the IDF Climate Change tool is the CanESM2 (Canadian Center for Climate Modelling and Analysis) model and the Representative Concentration Pathway 8.5 scenario. The Representative Concentration Pathway 8.5 scenario represents a worst case climate change scenario where radiative forcing

304 File No. 160960844



continues to and past the year 2100. The scenario simulated in the IDF Climate Change tool had a time period of 2015 to 2080 with input climate data from Toronto Pearson station.

Limitations of Model Results

The effects of climate change are becoming better understood. Since it is not possible to conduct experiments on the climate or to reproduce its intricacies in the laboratory, climate models facilitate increased understanding of climate change (Natural Environment Research Council 2011). Climate models are based on the laws of physics to describe how temperature, pressure, winds, currents, and other variables interact and change over time (Natural Environment Research Council 2011). Climate models are the only scientifically-credible tools for making detailed predictions about climate at the scale of geographical regions. Nonetheless, because climate models are mathematical approximations of the climate system and not the real system itself, their results must be treated with due scientific caution (Natural Environment Research Council 2011).

Predicting future environmental effects of climate change for a specific area using global data sets can be problematic because generic data does not take into account local natural mechanisms, such as variations in ocean circulation and changes in the atmospheric composition, and others, which “force” the climate to change by upsetting the energy balance (climate forcing). Accurate regional and local projections require specific regional and local climate variables and climate change scenarios (Lines et al. 2005).

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2007) recommends the use of ensemble models, which compile outputs from different datasets to develop a mean prediction, to predict climate change. This is due to the ability of these models to outperform individual models in seasonal forecasts (Hagedorn et al. 2005) and long-term simulations (Boer and Lambert 2008).

Regardless of the variability and inconsistency in the predictions from these models, the climatological community generally agrees on the overall anticipated environmental effects of climate change.


Temperature and Hydrological Conditions

Annual precipitation is projected to increase 4.02% under the low emission scenario and 4.65% under high emission scenario. The largest change in precipitation is projected for the winter with precipitation increasing between 7.88% (low emissions) and 10.35% (high emissions). The smallest changes in precipitation are projected for the summer with precipitation increasing by 0.86% under the low emission scenario and decreasing by 1.39% under the high emission scenario.

Projected intensity-duration-frequency (IDF) curves for the Toronto Pearson Station meteorological station were developed using the Computerized IDF Climate Change Tool

File No. 160960844 305



(Facility for Intelligent Decision Support 2014). The CANESm2 model was run using the Representative Concentration Pathway 8.5 climate scenario to generate the IDF for the time period of 2015 to 2080.

The projected climate change rainfall intensity for the RAA can be estimated using the following equation. The total precipitation amounts of all return periods and storm durations for the projected IDF range from 26.7 to 37.2% greater in value than the current IDF total precipitation amounts from Environment Canada.

Additional information, including detailed tables and analysis can be found in Appendix E.15.

Climatic factors are important for defining the hydrologic conditions because precipitation and temperature significantly affect basin run-off characteristics and streamflows. A number of regional climate monitoring stations in and around the RAA are listed in Table 6.52. Of these stations, the Toronto Lester B. Pearson International Airport station (Toronto Pearson station) (station #6158733) provides comprehensive year-round monitoring with a long period of record for characterizing long-term climate conditions in the RAA and LAA. Toronto Pearson Station is located approximately 30 km north east of the study area, represents a similar climatic regime to the PDA and has a comprehensive data set; therefore data obtained from the station is used to characterize the climate conditions at the project site. The Georgetown WWTP climate station is not used as it is missing daily temperature and precipitation measurements for long time periods for any given year (e.g., 187 days of climate data missing in 2014). The Oakville TWN climate station has a much shorter period of record (2007 to 2014) and is relatively close to Lake Ontario, approximately 6.5 km, compared to the PDA (approximately 12.5 km). As such, it could not be used to develop long-term climatic trends and may experience more lake effect climate characteristics than the PDA.

Table 6.52: Environment Canada Meteorological Stations (2015a)

Station ID Station Name Latitude Longitude Elevation, m Data Period

Distance from PDA,

km

6158733 Toronto Lester B. Pearson International Airport

43°40'38.000" N 79°37'50.000" W 173.4 m 1937-2014 29.6

6152695 Georgetown 43°38'24.018" N 79°52'45.018" W 221.0 m 1962-2015 20.8

6155750 Oakville 43°30'45.000" N 79°41'24.000" W 168.0 m 2007-2015 13.3 Climate data from the Toronto Pearson Station was analyzed using statistical methods to characterize climate conditions using long-term average, climate normal and extreme events. Wet year and dry year climatic conditions were also selected based on a period of climate data.

306 File No. 160960844



Precipitation data for the 24-hour storm events were derived from the available IDF curves at Toronto Pearson Station (Climate ID: 6158733) for 2 to 100 year return periods (Environment Canada 2014). Flood potential was derived using the Regional Storm – Hurricane Hazel.

Mitigation Measures in place for managing interactions with the atmospheric environment will also apply to the management of effects related to climate change. BMPs to reduce CACs, HAPs and GHG emissions will be incorporated into Project design wherever possible. Equipment will be properly tuned and maintained and will use low sulphur fuel when available.

The projected Toronto Pearson station 100 year return period, 24 hour duration storm is expected to have a 28.6% increase in precipitation. For SWM Ponds 1 and 2, this equates to an increase in the 100 year flood control volumes for the extended detention scenario to 37,290 and 38,359 m3, respectively. The increased 100 year flood control volumes are greater than the regional flood control volumes for SWM Ponds 1 and 2 and would have less than 0.25 and 0.3 m of freeboard to the top of the embankment. Both SWM ponds are designed with sufficient capacity to accommodate projected increases in precipitation for storm events with return period equal to or less than 100 years.


The potential effects of climate change are anticipated and have been addressed through the design of the Terminal. As discussed above, while disruption of operations at the Terminal site may result from extreme weather events and climate conditions, the frequency of extreme weather events are anticipated to be low and effects to the Project are considered to be not significant.

6.6.3.4 Effect of Geophysical and Geotechnical Hazards on the Project


Baseline conditions for the Project related to the geology and the potential seismic activities in the PDA are discussed in detail in Section 6.3.2. The Project is located within Zone 1 of the 7 potential seismic zones in Canada (i.e., zones 0 to 6, where seismic hazards increase with each zone from 0 to 6). Seismic zone mapping is derived from the analysis of past earthquakes, and from existing knowledge of Canada’s tectonic and geological structure. The expected seismic hazard and intensity of ground shaking are expressed in terms of ground acceleration as expressed as a fraction of the acceleration of gravity. Based on a search of the National Earthquake Database (Natural Resources Canada 2015), there have been no recorded earthquakes within the PDA, LAA or RAA for the project.

As described in Sections 6.3.2 and 6.3.3, the regional geology/topography does not support the potential for debris flow and debris slides. The Terminal site is relatively flat with a gradual slope downward to the southwest corner along the length of the PDA. The PDA has low-relief with an overall west facing aspect (i.e., land drains to the west) and is bisected by one watercourse,

File No. 160960844 307



which drains into Indian Creek. However sediment stability was assessed locally with instability and potential long term creep observed in an area of Indian Creek along the outside of a meander bend and a floodplain along the inside of the bend with a 10 m to 15 m high valley wall (Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Channel Realignment (Appendix E.2) and Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Geotechnical Investigation (Appendix E.5)). The slope of the ground bank has an overall slope in the order of 1.1H: 1.0V.


Based on the geology and topography the Terminal will be constructed and operated on, there are no effects analysis required to consider the seismic hazards or debris flow or slides. Local instability along Indian Creek will be addressed during construction of the channel realignment. Designed based on natural channel design principles to emulate local stable reaches of Indian Creek, potential long term creep previously observed will be removed. All other sediment stability concerns at the site will be mitigated through appropriate construction procedures and therefore, no adverse Project effects caused by sediment instability are expected.


Through the engineering and design of the Terminal and the use of appropriate mitigation measures, residual effects expected to occur as a result of geophysical or geotechnical hazards on the Project are negligible and not significant.

308 File No. 160960844


Summary of Environmental Effects Assessment December 7, 2015

7.0 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ASSESSMENT

A detailed evaluation of the VCs selected for the Project, including the potential environmental effects, proposed mitigation measures, and the potential for residual effects for each of the VCs, is provided in Chapter 6. The purpose of this chapter is to provide a summary of the following key information:

• potential environmental effects;

• proposed mitigation measures to address the effects identified in Chapter 6; and,

• potential residual effects and the significance of the residual environmental effects.

The details and discussion regarding the environment effects of the Project are presented in Chapter 6. Table 7.1 has been prepared in accordance with the EIS Guidelines to provide a summary of the effects assessment for the six VCs identified for the Project, as follows:

• Fish and Fish Habitat;

• Migratory Birds;

• Species at Risk;

• Human Health;

• Socio-Economic Conditions; and,

• Archaeology and Cultural Heritage Resources.

Based on project components and activities, existing baseline conditions and anticipated changes to the environment, with the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures (Appendix G), it is predicted that adverse residual environmental effects of the Project can be characterized as not significant for all VCs.

A summary of key mitigation measures and commitments essential to ensure that the Project will not result in significant adverse environmental effects is present in Table 7.1. A complete list of mitigation measures and Project commitments is provided in Appendix G.

309




310 File No. 160960844



Table 7.1: Summary of Environmental Effects Assessment

VC Affected

Area of Federal

Jurisdiction from CEAA,

2012

Project Phase

Potential Effects Proposed Mitigation Residual Effect

Dire

ctio

n

Mag

nitu

de

Geo

grap

hic

Exte

nt

Dura

tion

Freq

uenc

y

Reve

rsib

ility

Ecol

ogic

al a

nd S

ocio

-ec

onom

ic C

onte

xt

Significance of Residual

Adverse Effect

Con

stru

ctio

n

Ope

ratio

n Fish and Fish Habitat

Change in fish habitat

5(1)(a)(i) • Alteration or removal of habitat or riparian vegetation (including critical habitat of SAR) during construction of water management facilities/buildings/ infrastructure and watercourse realignments

• Temporary or longer-term degradation of habitat quality from increased sediment input (and sediment load)

• Reduction of cover through removal of riparian vegetation may, increase water temperature and negatively affect invertebrate populations.

Realign and reconstruct Tributary A and Indian Creek and incorporate habitat offset

• Direct measures in PDA: o Natural channel design (including

natural bed morphology, planform geometry) incorporating 2,400 m2 of new channel

o An increase in diversity of habitat types – e.g., grass spawning areas with suitable hydrology to permit egg deposition, maturation and movement of YOY back to the main branch

• Indirect measures in PDA, LAA, and RAA: o Riparian cover along the watercourse

(decreased average water temperature, increased bank stability, increased cover, increased and more diversified allochthonous inputs)

o Improved habitat conditions to facilitate the future re-establishment of Silver Shiner (SAR)

• Potential operational effects will be mitigated through successful implementation of the SWM plan.

• Tributary A to Indian Creek: o Net loss of approximately

2,800 m2 of low quality fish habitat for YOY Largemouth Bass and White Sucker and small bodied fish

o Reduction in rearing and foraging habitat, except for White Sucker where spawning habitat conditions are not present

o Reduction in productive capacity of the CRA fishery within the PDA. Further offsetting will occur following a discussion with DFO. Implementation of the final offsetting plan will result in there being no significant residual effects to a CRA fishery in Tributary A

• Tributary C to Indian Creek o The installation of

approximately a 30 m long culvert on this feature will result in the alteration of poorly defined channel the contributes indirectly to fish habitat, or supports fish habitat during spring freshet

N N RAA LT C I D Not Significant

Change in fish movement, migration and fish passage

5(1)(a)(i) • Fish migration and movement passages may temporarily be partially or completely blocked during removal of earthen plugs to change flow of realignments

• Acoustic emissions associated with construction may alter fish behaviour,

• New channel will be constructed in the dry, while leaving earthen plugs at the connection points.

• Maintain downstream flow at all times when conducting in-water construction activities.

• Ensure water and pump intakes reduce or avoid disturbance of the watercourse bed

• The use of mitigation measures and removal of temporary blockage from periods of channel realignment immediately following construction will mean that there will be no change in fish movement, migration, or fish

N L PDA ST IR R D Not Significant

File No. 160960844 311




VC Affected

Area of Federal


2012

Project Phase


Dire

ctio

n

Mag

nitu

de

Geo

grap

hic

Exte

nt

Dura

tion

Freq

uenc

y

Reve

rsib

ility

Ecol

ogic

al a

nd S

ocio

-ec

onom

ic C

onte

xt


Adverse Effect

Con

stru

ctio

n

Ope

ratio

n affecting movement patterns by causing fish to temporarily avoid or move out of the PDA and LAA.

and are screened with a maximum mesh size consistent with DFO’s Freshwater Intake End-of-Pipe Fish Screen Guideline (DFO 1995).

passage as a result of Project-related activities.

Change in fish mortality

5(1)(a)(i) - • Potential increased mortality during construction and channel realignment, restoration, and naturalization from direct in-water

• Potential for fish mortality by the introduction of a deleterious substance

• Project personnel are not permitted to fish on the work site.

• Where required, conduct a fish salvage led by a qualified aquatic biologist.

• Release all captured fish to areas within the same watercourse, outside of the work area, where suitable habitat exists.

• Activities near water should be carried out following standard guidance that reduce effects on fish and fish habitat.

The use of mitigation measures will limit the effects of the construction on fish mortality, such that adverse environmental effects are likely to be low.

A L LAA ST IR R D Not Significant

Change in water quality

5(1)(a)(i) • Potential to induce a wide range of biological effects, including behavioural changes in fish, sub-lethal effects, and fish mortality.

• Reduce overall fish production in a watercourse or water body due to turbidity-related reductions in algae and in benthic and aquatic invertebrate production.

• Smothering of benthic invertebrate communities or fish eggs and larvae from suspended sediment settling when water velocities slow.

• Establish and clearly identify a riparian buffer. Restrict disturbance to allow only activities associated with realignment, restoration, and naturalization.

• Install erosion and sediment control at appropriate locations adjacent to all watercourses, or as directed by the Environmental Monitor(s).

• When implementing erosion and sediment control mitigation is not practicable (e.g., due to weather conditions), reduce the number of vehicles on access roads or cleared work areas to limit erosion risks.

• Ensure that grubbing, stripping and grading on approach slopes to watercourses is restricted to an amount required to allow the safe passage of equipment and completion of the relevant work.

• Develop water quality monitoring plans to monitor for sediment release events during in-water construction activities and implement corrective actions. Corrective actions are not successful, construction activities will be temporarily suspended until effective solutions are identified.

• Ensure water from flumes, dams and pumps

• Localized, positive changes to surface water and sediment quality with respect to in-water concentrations of sediment, nutrients, metals and hydrocarbons within Tributary A and Indian Creek.

• Following project completion, a low magnitude increase in water quality is expected through construction of SWM facilities and channel alteration/riparian enhancements.

• Change in water quality from the introduction of hydrocarbons or other deleterious substances related to equipment use is expected to be low

• Change in water quality from introduction of hydrocarbons or other deleterious substances from construction activities is expected to be low

P L LAA LT C I D Not Significant

312 File No. 160960844




VC Affected

Area of Federal


2012

Project Phase


Dire

ctio

n

Mag

nitu

de

Geo

grap

hic

Exte

nt

Dura

tion

Freq

uenc

y

Reve

rsib

ility

Ecol

ogic

al a

nd S

ocio

-ec

onom

ic C

onte

xt


Adverse Effect

Con

stru

ctio

n

Ope

ratio

n do not cause erosion or introduce sediment into the channel.

• For dewatering activities, pump water onto stable, well vegetated areas, tarpaulins, sheeting, rocks, sand bags, or into settling ponds, filter bags, or other appropriate sediment filtering devices, as determined by the Environmental Monitor(s) or the mitigation plan. Complete dewatering in a manner that does not cause erosion or allow sediment to re-enter a watercourse.

• Collect and treat all storm water and surface runoff within the Terminal site and release to Indian Creek or Tributary

Migratory Birds

Change in migratory bird mortality

5(1)(a)(iii) • Bird mortality could occur during the site preparation and watercourse realignment, including removing vegetation, clearing trees, grubbing, and blasting (e.g., bird fatalities through nest destruction).

• Bird mortality from vehicular collisions due to increased construction equipment and operation activities in and around the Project.

• Mortality of migratory birds during operations from SWM facilities, in the event they encounter floating hydrocarbons.

• Site buildings and associated infrastructure pose the potential risk of migratory bird collisions.

• Construction activities with the potential to remove migratory bird habitat, outside of the breeding season (March to end of August in this region)

• Should vegetation clearing activities be unavoidable during this window, conduct nest sweeps and avoidance of clearing during key sensitive periods and in key locations;

• Provide a wildlife education program for employees so they can respond appropriately to bird encounters;

• Speed limits should be implemented and enforced on internal roads;

• Pre-treatment of water run-off before discharge to SWM ponds, including installation of oil grit separator;

• A Spill Response Plan should be developed and implemented to contain contamination, including shut-off valves on SWM ponds

• In the event a SWM pond becomes contaminated with a spill, bird deterrents should be implemented to prevent use of the pond until cleanup measures have been completed;

• Migratory bird mortality in the LAA during construction is expected to be low though mitigation implementation.

• During operation, it is expected that birds will avoid vehicular traffic in the area, based on limited suitable habitat availability and changes in bird mortality in the LAA should be low.

• Bird mortality during operation, including SWM pond contamination and strikes with buildings and infrastructure, should be greatly reduced through applicable mitigation measures and should not result in any reduction in species diversity within the LAA.

A L PDA P R R D Not Significant

File No. 160960844 313




VC Affected

Area of Federal


2012

Project Phase


Dire

ctio

n

Mag

nitu

de

Geo

grap

hic

Exte

nt

Dura

tion

Freq

uenc

y

Reve

rsib

ility

Ecol

ogic

al a

nd S

ocio

-ec

onom

ic C

onte

xt


Adverse Effect

Con

stru

ctio

n

Ope

ratio

n • To reduce the risk of collision with Project

infrastructure, Project lighting used to illuminate the Terminal should be as efficient as possible,

• Implement BMPs including locating vegetation or greenery away from glass to minimize risk of avian collision with windows, (refer to the Bird Friendly Development Guidelines, City of Toronto 2007).


5(1)(a)(iii) • Loss or alteration of terrestrial habitat. • Displacement of some migratory bird

residences. • No changes in use of migratory bird

habitat are anticipated due to fragmentation.

• Construction noise may cause a change in migratory bird use within the LAA.

• Birds nesting near construction areas may abandon their nests.

• Acoustic emissions during operation may result in changes to habitat use.

• Disturbance from human presence may result in indirect disturbance to adjacent migratory bird habitat use during operation.

• The project footprint will be minimized, whereby unnecessary vegetation clearing around facility, access roads and rail will be avoided wherever practicable.

• Enhancement and creation of wetlands within the LAA to improve breeding opportunities for wetland birds.

• Offsite grassland habitat will be created to offset loss of grassland habitat on-site.

• Construction work areas will be demarcated to avoid incidental encroachment.

• Natural vegetation along the boundaries of the Project will be retained to provide noise buffers

• Construction and operations equipment will be maintained in good order (e.g., mufflers);

• Project layout will be designed to avoid effects on natural features, including: o Trafalgar Moraine Earth Science ANSI; o North Oakville-Milton West Wetland

Complex; and, o Protected Countryside land use

designation under the Greenbelt Plan. • Provide a wildlife education program for

employees so they can respond appropriately to bird encounters.

• Iimplementation of applicable mitigation measures is expected to reduce or eliminate any change in use of migratory bird habitat.

• Grassland offsets measures will be implemented to result in no net loss of habitat.

• Disturbance impacts during construction may result in a decrease in bird density, however, this is likely to be short term in nature and be restricted to the two year construction period.

• Change in acoustic emissions at grassland and forest habitats within the LAA from baseline conditions expected to be low.

A L LAA P C I D Not Significant

314 File No. 160960844




VC Affected

Area of Federal


2012

Project Phase


Dire

ctio

n

Mag

nitu

de

Geo

grap

hic

Exte

nt

Dura

tion

Freq

uenc

y

Reve

rsib

ility

Ecol

ogic

al a

nd S

ocio

-ec

onom

ic C

onte

xt


Adverse Effect

Con

stru

ctio

n

Ope

ratio

n Sensory Disturbance

5(1)(a)(iii) • Artificial lighting may create sensory disturbance to migratory landbirds by influencing bird behaviour.

• Within the PDA, any project components that are lit at night have the potential to attract birds, including buildings, light standards or other external lights.

• Project lighting used to illuminate the Terminal should be as efficient as possible, while providing enough light to make the site safe and secure at night.

• Light fixtures will project light downward to minimize light spillage beyond the PDA.

• During construction, use of site flood lighting will be limited during the migration periods.

• The construction and operation of the Project facility could result in sensory disturbance to migrating birds through

• Attraction to Project lighting, however the effect is anticipated to be minimized with the implementation of mitigation measures.

A L RAA P R R D Not Significant

Species at Risk

Change in Species at Risk Mortality

5(1)(a)(ii) and 5(2)(a)

• No mortality to Western Chorus Frog is anticipated during construction of the Project.

• Low risk of mortality to Western Chorus Frog in the event of future occupation of critical habitat within the LAA.

• No bird, fish, amphibian, mammal or reptile Schedule 1 SAR found within the PDA.

• Potential for mortality of bird SAR during the site preparation, including removing vegetation, clearing trees, and grubbing (e.g., fatalities through nest destruction).

• Low risk of grassland breeding bird mortality during operation due to collisions with vehicular traffic.

• During construction, potential for Snapping Turtle mortality during in-water works.

• Increased risk of mortality to Snapping Turtle during construction and operation from vehicular traffic.

• No anticipated risk of mortality to the Eastern Wood-Pewee or Little Brown Myotis.

• Construction activities with the potential to remove residences of Bobolink, Eastern Meadowlark or Barn Swallow such as vegetation clearing or barn removal should be avoided during the breeding season (end of March to end of August).

• Provide a wildlife education program for employees so they can respond appropriately to bird encounters;

• Speed limits should be implemented and enforced on internal roads.

• Where applicable conduct turtle rescues to relocate Snapping Turtles before in water works and install exclusionary fencing to prevent individuals from entering the construction zone.

• Avoid construction in-water during Snapping Turtles overwintering period from October to April.

• Permanent exclusionary fencing around retained/enhanced turtle habitat to avoid interactions with turtles and Project vehicular traffic.

• Mortality of Western Chorus Frog are anticipated to be very low to negligible.

• During construction, the implementation of timing windows for site preparation and reduced vehicle speeds is anticipated to result in a low risk of mortality in the LAA.

• It is expected that birds will avoid vehicular traffic in the area during operation, and mortality of bird SAR in the LAA will be low.

• Very low to negligible risk of Snapping Turtle mortality during construction with the implementation of mitigation measures.

• Low risk of vehicular collision with Snapping Turtles with implementation of mitigation measures.

A L PDA P IR R D Not Significant

File No. 160960844 315




VC Affected

Area of Federal


2012

Project Phase


Dire

ctio

n

Mag

nitu

de

Geo

grap

hic

Exte

nt

Dura

tion

Freq

uenc

y

Reve

rsib

ility

Ecol

ogic

al a

nd S

ocio

-ec

onom

ic C

onte

xt


Adverse Effect

Con

stru

ctio

n

Ope

ratio

n Change in Species at Risk Critical Habitat and Residences

5(1)(a)(ii) and 5(2) (a)

• Occurrence of Western Chorus Frogs critical habitat in the LAA and indirect acoustic emissions from Project operations may occur

• Removal of Bobolink and Eastern Meadowlark habitat during construction and displacement of the residence of these species within the PDA.

• Removals of any barns within the PDA will displace Barn Swallow residence.

• Changes in water levels or water quality may affect the overwintering or summer life cycles of Snapping Turtle.

• During construction, human activity will occur in Snapping Turtle habitat, which is anticipated to result in temporary disturbance in portions of the habitat within the PDA.

• Minimize project footprint: avoid all unnecessary vegetation clearing around facility, access roads and rail wherever and whenever practicable.

• Demarcate construction work areas to avoid incidental encroachment into adjacent areas.

• Implement turtle habitat enhancements in Indian Creek and onsite ponds.

• Create/protect offsite grassland habitat as offsets for loss of Bobolink and Eastern Meadowlark residences.

• Retain natural vegetation along the boundaries of the Project to provide noise buffers and to limit noise associated with clearing.

• Retain natural vegetation along the boundaries of the Project to provide noise buffers and to limit noise associated with clearing.

• Maintain construction and operations equipment in good order (e.g., mufflers).

• Where permissible under safety and navigation requirements, outdoor lights will be shielded to minimize light spillage beyond the required areas.

• Provide a wildlife education program for employees so they can respond appropriately to turtle encounters.

• Construction and operation of the Project is not anticipated to directly affect critical habitat for SAR.

• Indirect affects during construction and operation to Western Chorus Frog should be negligible with mitigation.

• Habitat offsets will offset direct effects of the Project on the residences of Bobolink, Eastern Meadowlark.

• Residence of the Snapping Turtle will be temporary disturbed during construction of the Project. However, with mitigation and enhancement measures, the residences are anticipated to continue to be used during operation of the Project.

• Effects to the woodland habitat, which contain residences of Eastern Wood Pewee and Little Brown Myotis are anticipated to be very low to negligible.

• Indirect effects on woodland habitat are through acoustic emission expected to be negligible.

A L LAA P C IR D Not Significant

316 File No. 160960844




VC Affected

Area of Federal


2012

Project Phase


Dire

ctio

n

Mag

nitu

de

Geo

grap

hic

Exte

nt

Dura

tion

Freq

uenc

y

Reve

rsib

ility

Ecol

ogic

al a

nd S

ocio

-ec

onom

ic C

onte

xt


Adverse Effect

Con

stru

ctio

n

Ope

ratio

n Human Health

Change in human health

5(2)(b) • Change in human health from short-term and long-term exposure via inhalation of chemicals from air emission sources during construction and operation phases. Primary Air emissions sources are expected to be from mobile or stationery equipment discharging emissions from combustion of fuel (e.g., gasoline, etc.). Mobile emission sources include locomotives, trucks, non-road equipment. Stationary emissions sources include the three future powerpack generators and one clip-on generator

• Change in human health from exposure to fugitive dust emissions from road traffic during movement of mobile equipment (e.g., trucks).

• BMPs to reduce CAC, HAP and GHG emissions will be incorporated into Project design wherever possible.

• Dust will be controlled through the use of dust suppressants (i.e., water, not oil), minimizing the area of activity, minimizing activities that generate large quantities of dust during high winds, covering truck loads of materials which could generate dust (as necessary), and paving areas as required.

• Materials stored on-site will be covered or wetted to prevent blowing dust, where practicable.

• Access and onsite roads will be watered as required to control fugitive dust emissions.

• The implementation of applicable mitigation measures is expected to reduce potential human exposures to COPCs related to the construction and operation of the Project

A N LAA P IR R D Not Significant



5(2)(b) • Temporary land closures or detours during construction may affect road users (e.g., motor vehicle operators, cyclists and others).

• Prior to initiating construction activities, the Proponent will use community media outlets such as newspapers and radio stations, and email updates, to announce the location and schedule of construction activities.

• CN will cooperate with the Town of Milton to provide an underpass at Lower Base Line (road will cross beneath the existing mainline).

• Road users may experience some level of inconvenience during construction.

• Once construction is completed, there will be a positive residual effect on vehicle movement compared to baseline conditions by reducing existing sources of road delays from train crossings.

A, P

L LAA ST, P

C R, IR

HR Not Significant

Change in the Quantity and Quality of Land and Resource Use

5(2)(b) • Loss of agricultural land 31 ha or 0.1% of the total agricultural land within the RAA).

• Presence of the Project, including associated acoustic and atmospheric emissions may: o reduce the quality of land use for

users within the LAA;

• CN will work with the Halton Region and agricultural operators with leases to farm lands on CN property to mitigate the loss of agricultural areas. Mitigation measures may include rehabilitation or improvement of adjacent lands or providing a contribution to agricultural research in the area.

• As per Project design, berms will be

• Loss of agricultural land is 31ha, land use is of appropriate designation, therefore the magnitude of this interaction is low

• Acceptable levels of acoustic and atmospheric emissions and light for recreational use.

A L LAA P C IR D Not Significant

File No. 160960844 317




VC Affected

Area of Federal


2012

Project Phase


Dire

ctio

n

Mag

nitu

de

Geo

grap

hic

Exte

nt

Dura

tion

Freq

uenc

y

Reve

rsib

ility

Ecol

ogic

al a

nd S

ocio

-ec

onom

ic C

onte

xt


Adverse Effect

Con

stru

ctio

n

Ope

ratio

n o change the views of the

landscape; and, o reduce the quality of experience

for cyclists in the region.

constructed in key locations around the PDA and planted with trees and shrubs consistent with the existing environment to provide barriers to noise emissions and viewscapes of the site.

Archaeological and Heritage Resources Unauthorized disturbance or destruction of part or all of an archaeological site or sites

5(1)(c) and 5(2)(b)

• Site preparation and grading activities of trees, brush and other ground cover may cause disturbances to archaeological resources as the roots pull up soil and can cause displacement of artifacts and destroy features in archaeological sites

• Removal of vegetation can result in unstable soil conditions and could result in movement of artifacts and the soil matrix.

• Root disturbance during watercourse realignment, restoration and naturalization could displace artifacts or destroy features in archaeological sites

• Grading, excavation and removal of soils associated with the construction of roads, berms, yard tracks, storm water management facilities and buildings could cause disturbance and/ or removal of archaeological resources.

• Disturbance to soil from grade separation construction (involves temporary relocation of tracks) and utility installation/relocation could lead to unstable soil conditions and movement of artifacts and/or destruction of archaeological resources.

• Complete a Stage 3 archaeological assessment on the 14 sites recommended prior to Project development. This assessment will be completed to delineate the extent of an archaeological site and, if possible, further refine understanding of the age and/or cultural affiliation and will establish mitigation measures for each site.

• Avoid and protect the resource(s) wherever possible by excluding the archaeological site from the Project, or incorporating the area into the Project (but without alteration) and install a protective barrier around the site and buffer zone

• If avoidance and protection of archaeological resources is not feasible then controlled salvage excavations of the archaeological resources, or parts thereof as applicable, will be required following the requirements as outlined in the MTCS Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologist

• Implement an Archaeological Resources Protection Plan.

• Conduct construction monitoring in areas in proximity to known archaeological resources.

• Implement a worker education program about appropriate protocols in case of accidental discoveries.

• Conduct further assessment of changes to the PDA.

• If an archaeological resource is discovered during the construction phase, all construction

• Project specific environmental effects on archaeological resources are continually mitigated to the standards established by the province. After implementation of the required mitigation measures issued by the regulatory agency, there will be no residual environmental effects.

• With the accumulation of new knowledge from the archaeological assessment and follow-up work, the residual effect of the project on archaeological resources could be considered as Positive

N, P

N PDA P S I D, U, NR

Not Significant

318 File No. 160960844




VC Affected

Area of Federal


2012

Project Phase


Dire

ctio

n

Mag

nitu

de

Geo

grap

hic

Exte

nt

Dura

tion

Freq

uenc

y

Reve

rsib

ility

Ecol

ogic

al a

nd S

ocio

-ec

onom

ic C

onte

xt


Adverse Effect

Con

stru

ctio

n

Ope

ratio

n will cease within a 20 m radius of the archaeological resource. In the event of a chance find, CN will stop work immediately and contact MTCS prior to the implementation of procedures and mitigation as required under the Ontario Heritage Act and the 2011 Standards and Guidelines (Government of Ontario 2011). A licensed archaeologist will be retained by CN and a Stage 2 Archaeological Assessment will be conducted with the participation of any interested Aboriginal groups. Follow-up Stage 3 or Stage 4 archaeological investigations will be conducted as required.

• Train key construction staff in the recognition of basic archaeological artifacts such as Aboriginal material culture (e.g., clay ceramics, lithic artifacts, and faunal remains), and Euro-Canadian material culture (e.g., refined ceramics, glassware, construction debris, and personal effects).

• If human remains are encountered, CN will stop work immediately and contact the police or coroner, registrar or Deputy Registrar of the Cemeteries Regulation Section of the Ontario Ministry of Government and Consumer Services, as well as the Archaeology Programs Unit.

Unauthorized disturbance or destruction of part or all of a heritage resource

5(2)(b) • Land disturbances during the construction phase of the project (site preparation and grading activities, grade separations, utilities, watercourse realignment, restoration and naturalization, and construction equipment and operation) may result in the removal of resources of cultural heritage value and interest.

• Construction activities may cause vibration effects on cultural heritage

• Follow MTCS suggested methods to minimize or avoid negative direct or indirect effects including (Government of Ontario 2006), but not limited to: o Alternative development approaches; o Isolating development and site alteration

from significant built and natural features and vistas;

o Design guidelines that harmonize mass, setback, setting, and materials;

o Limiting height and density;

• With the mitigation measure of a 50 m buffer around the resource, the effects from indirect vibration will be negligible.

• Areas where a structure will be removed (e.g., 5269 Tremaine Road (CHR-4)), mitigation measures will document and salvage the resource

• As project specific environmental effects on heritage resources are

N N PDA P S I D, U, NR

Not Significant

File No. 160960844 319




VC Affected

Area of Federal


2012

Project Phase


Dire

ctio

n

Mag

nitu

de

Geo

grap

hic

Exte

nt

Dura

tion

Freq

uenc

y

Reve

rsib

ility

Ecol

ogic

al a

nd S

ocio

-ec

onom

ic C

onte

xt


Adverse Effect

Con

stru

ctio

n

Ope

ratio

n resources within 50 m of the construction activities in the PDA.

o Allowing only compatible infill and additions;

o Reversible alterations; and, o Buffer zones, resource protection

measures, and other planning mechanisms.

• Avoid interactions with indirect effects from vibration through the use barriers around a 50 m protective buffer zone.

• For direct effects, mitigation should take the form of relocation or documentation and salvage.

continually mitigated to the standards established by the province, after implementation of the required mitigation measures issued by the regulatory agency, there will be no residual environmental effects, from the Project

KEY See Chapter 6 for detailed definitions Project Phase C: Construction O: Operation Direction: P: Positive A: Adverse N: Neutral Magnitude: N: Negligible L: Low M: Moderate H: High


Frequency: S: Single event IR: Irregular event R: Regular event C: Continuous Reversibility: R: Reversible I: Irreversible Socio-Economic Context: D: Disturbed U: Undisturbed LR: Low resiliency MR: Moderate resiliency HR: High resiliency

320 File No. 160960844


Benefits of the Project December 7, 2015

8.0 BENEFITS OF THE PROJECT

The purpose of this chapter is to provide a description of environmental, economic and social benefits of the Project.

8.1 BENEFITS OF PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS

The EA process is used to support and better define Project development through early consideration of potential effects as well as mitigation measures. The EIS reviews and assesses the changes in the environment that are anticipated due to the Project. As a result, improvements to the Project design and layout have been made since initially proposed. These revisions were made to enhance the benefits of the Project and reduce potential adverse environmental and social effects of the Project.

The EA process encourages assessment and review of project components early in the project planning phases, enhancing project design and environmental benefits, such as:

• avoidance or minimization of adverse environmental effects;

• opportunities for public participation and Aboriginal engagement;

• greater access to environmental information, facilitating the incorporation of management measures into the design of the Project to address human health considerations;

• reduced project costs and delays;

• reduced risk of environmental concerns through environmental management programs;

• increased government accountability and harmonization as several levels of government will be involved in one approvals process; and,

• informed decisions that contribute to the responsible and sustainable development of natural resources.

Technical studies that have been completed in support of the EIS contribute to good planning practices and infrastructure improvement and development for all future growth opportunities as this data is publicly available. Technical disciplines have reviewed available information and conducted additional field investigations within the PDA. These technical studies include:

• air quality;

• aquatics;

• archaeological;

• geotechnical;

• heritage;

File No. 160960844 321



• hydrogeological;

• hydrological;

• noise; and,

• terrestrial.

The following sections focus on key aspects of the Project that provide benefits to the environment, Aboriginal communities and the public.

8.2 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS

Environmental benefits as a result of the Project are apparent at a larger national scale, across the GTHA as well as at the regional and local levels.

8.2.1 National and GTHA Benefits

At the national and GTHA level, the Terminal will facilitate the efficient movement of consumer and manufacturing goods to market. This will enable goods distribution from international ports throughout North America in the context of globalization and international trade agreements, such as the North American Free Trade Agreement, Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement and the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

On average, intermodal trains reduce the need for long haul trucks. A long haul truck movement consists of transporting goods greater than 200 km. The modal shift from truck to rail will ease traffic congestions across the country and within the GTHA.

The environmental benefit of moving goods by rail versus long haul trucks is substantial. As intermodal continues to grow and BIT approaches its capacity, an increase in long haul trucks will be required to accommodate the demand, putting additional strain on the highway network. By providing the option of using more energy efficient intermodal service, GHG emissions will be reduced, as one intermodal train removes as many as 280 heavy long distance trucks from highways. As compared to heavy trucks, rail is four times more fuel efficient and produces 75% less GHG emissions.

At the national and GTHA level, the Terminal will facilitate the efficient movement of consumer and manufacturing goods to market. This will enable goods distribution from international ports throughout North America in the context of globalization and international trade agreements, such as the North American Free Trade Agreement, Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement and the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

On average, intermodal trains reduce the need for long haul trucks. A long haul truck movement consists of transporting goods greater than 200 km. The modal shift from truck to rail will ease traffic congestions across the country and within the GTHA.

322 File No. 160960844



The environmental benefit of moving goods by rail versus long haul trucks is substantial. As intermodal continues to grow and BIT approaches its capacity, an increase in long haul trucks will be required to accommodate the demand, putting additional strain on the highway network. By providing the option of using more energy efficient intermodal service, GHG emissions will be reduced, as one intermodal train removes as many as 280 heavy long distance trucks from highways. As compared to heavy trucks, rail is four times more fuel efficient and produces 75% less GHG emissions.

8.2.2 Regional and Local Benefits

An effective project plan and design produces regional and local benefits through the identification and reduction of potential adverse environmental effects. Terminal components have been designed to avoid on-site environmental features to the extent possible (as described in Chapter 3 and Section 6.5). Details regarding the location of key project components and how these components address potential adverse environmental effects are outlined in Chapter 2. These include, but are not limited to:

• underpass at Lower Base Line to avoid a road re-alignment alternative to the south towards the Greenbelt Plan Area, Trafalgar Moraine Candidate Earth Science ANSI and wetlands;

• location of swales to maintain surface water conveyance and improve flood control for SWM; and,

• identifying opportunities for environmental restoration and enhancement along Indian Creek and Tributary A.

The incorporation of the following components into administration building design will allow for the use of passive energy to offset the demand on energy requirements in a sustainable manner:

• solar specific elevation treatments (solar energy technology such as window design, HVAC (cooling and control), solar domestic water heating, etc.);

• natural daylight rooftop light monitors;

• rooftop solar panels; and,

• rainwater catchment system.

In addition, the Project will also provide benefits to the local natural environment by increasing the knowledge base of the area for planning purposes. Data on the existing environment within the PDA and LAA has been collected since 2013 through desktop reviews, requests for information and numerous environmental field studies conducted in support of the EIS. Examples of this additional information include the following:

• data collection in support of the completion of TDRs (Appendix E);

File No. 160960844 323



• meeting with local residents that expressed interest in environmental management, including providing opportunities to assist with environmental enhancements and monitoring;

• site investigations completed in collaboration with Aboriginal representatives from MNCFN; and,

• providing support to Aboriginal communities for training opportunities and collection of traditional information.

Historic agricultural activities and alteration to the local streams have contributed to the existing poor water quality, limited riparian habitat and sediment loading within the Bronte Creek Watershed (Conservation Halton 2002). The Bronte Creek Watershed Study indicates that much of Indian Creek and its tributaries suffer from a lack of shade cover to the watercourse, loss of channel grade control features like riffle, pool, run sequences and excess nutrient loading (Conservation Halton 2002). The portion of Indian Creek to be realigned has been designed to incorporate natural channel design principles and habitat features to enhance fish and riparian habitat and provides foundation support for naturally existing slumping slopes/erosion areas to increase channel stability (Appendix E.15).

On CN-owned lands, Tributary A is a small headwater stream that is currently moderately well defined, lacking in defined pool, riffle sequencing and shade cover. Tributary A is also associated with an on-line agricultural pond. The Bronte Creek Watershed Study recommends that on-line agricultural ponds within watercourses in the Indian Creek subwatershed be taken off-line or eliminated altogether (Conservation Halton 2002). As part of the Project, the existing on-line agricultural pond will be taken off-line to improve drainage and fish passage in Tributary A. Removal of the on-line agricultural pond will also reduce the risk of failure during flood events (Appendix E.2). Further improvements will be made by constructing riparian wetlands within the former on-line agricultural pond bed to provide wetland and fish spawning habitat as well as seasonal foraging and resting habitat.

The planting of vegetation along areas of the Indian Creek and Tributary A realignments will increase vegetation diversity, shade to the watercourses and provide bank stability through the growth of dense roots in the near bank areas. (Appendix E.2). Improvements to water quality and fish habitat in Indian Creek and Tributary A, particularly for coolwater species, due to increased oxygen concentrations and decreased water temperatures as a result of shading provided by bank and riparian vegetation plantings (Appendix E.2).

The SWM system and changes in land use will reduce existing contaminant loading into Indian Creek and Tributary A. The SWM ponds will be designed to remove 70% and 80% of the phosphorus and sediment, respectively, for all the runoff from the 100 ha SWM pond drainage area. Further reductions will also be achieved from the change in land use from agricultural row crops to pavement, buildings and railway tracks within the PDA, which will reduce soil erosion and subsequently sediment and phosphorus attached to soil particle loads. The changes in contaminant loads to local receiving watercourses will result in estimated reductions in current annual sediment and phosphorus loads of 44% and 40.5%, respectively (Appendix E.15).

324 File No. 160960844



Loadings of other contaminants, such as metals, that adsorb to sediment particles will also be reduced indirectly by sediment treatment within the SWM ponds.

CN will work with a non-profit organization to identify opportunities for the creation, securement and long-term management of grassland habitat for species potentially affected by the Project, such as Bobolink and Eastern Meadowlark. The goal will be to create habitat within the same general ecoregion as the Project in an area where these species can thrive. Discussions with a reputable organization with experience in this area are ongoing and will be finalized and confirmed through project design and implementation.

Further, CN is considering the establishment of a temporary Monarch butterfly habitat study area on CN property.

8.3 SUMMARY OF ECONOMIC BENEFITS

Economic benefits of the Project will occur at a national, regional and local level.

8.3.1 National Benefits

Between 1988 and 2012, goods distribution, including the transportation of goods, warehousing, wholesale trade and retail trade, grew faster than any other components of the Canadian economy, more than doubling over that time period. This growth represents a number of economic trends, including the importance of international trade and the emergence of logistics infrastructure, such as intermodal transport, as an important component of the economy. Additionally, intermodal transport is less vulnerable to variances in individual industries and can offset job losses in the manufacturing sector because of the variety of industries that it services (Strategic Projections Inc. 2013).

Intermodal is the fastest growing mode of freight transportation and offers savings and solutions to shippers (Strategic Projections Inc. 2013). The Terminal will target economic clusters that can become an engine of economic growth (Strategic Projections Inc. 2013). Intermodal transport allows for the efficient transportation of commercial goods within North America and from marine terminals on each coast of Canada to one of the largest markets in Canada and the U.S. reducing the requirement for long haul trucking and traffic congestion on highways across Canada.

The construction and operation of the Project will allow CN to continue to efficiently access over 75% of the North American population. This will benefit customers and the economy by improving central Canada’s access to key domestic and trans-border markets as well as the Pacific, Atlantic and Gulf coast trade gateways and generate new supply chain efficiencies within Canada, Ontario and the GTHA. An additional intermodal terminal location will increase options available to surpass and increase the fluidity of the logistics system across North America.

File No. 160960844 325




An additional intermodal terminal in western GTHA will assist the efficient flow of goods across the country by increasing the capacity of the intermodal rail network in and around the GTHA. Locating the intermodal terminal in the west GTHA is based on growth opportunities in the consumer market and population (Strategic Projections 2013). Given that consumer goods are typically transported in intermodal containers, terminals are generally located in parts of the region where this type of growth exists.

At a wider regional scale, the Project would serve to address potential logistics capacity constraints. The population of the GTHA is projected to grow by 49% between 2013 and 2041, with employment growing by 39%. This population and employment growth will double demand for goods and intermodal activities (Strategic Projections 2013). It is estimated that the BIT, which services the region, will reach capacity by 2018 (Strategic Projections 2013). The Project will benefit the regional economy by addressing short-term capacity issues and preparing for medium and long-term growth.

CN proposes to invest $250 million to construct and operate the Project. The economic benefits of constructing and operating the Project for the region will include:

• Project employment: The Project will create more than 1,000 opportunities for employment (including 130 direct jobs and indirect and induced effects) locally during operation (Cushman & Wakefield 2014). Employment during construction is estimated at 150 to 200 jobs;

• Project contributions to the region: The Project will allow Halton Region to benefit from the recently signed Canada-European Union trade agreement and the strengthening the U.S. economy. The western GTHA is becoming known as a key logistics hub as the gross domestic product increases in the GTHA. The Town of Milton and Halton Region can benefit from this growth. There is a preference for these users to avoid the GTHA to access markets in southwestern Ontario (Cushman & Wakefield 2014); and,

• Project contributions to government revenues: Over the next 20 years, it is anticipated that the Project has the potential to generate up to $230 million in municipal revenues to Halton Region and the Town of Milton through intermodal oriented development (IOD) (Cushman & Wakefield 2014). These revenues can then be used to support public services, such as health care, education and infrastructure.

The Project will interact with both the local and regional economies primarily through spending on labour, goods and services. Local and regional businesses stand to benefit from both direct and indirect Project spending. Project expenditures on labour, goods and services during construction and operation will result in a positive effect on the economy by supporting local and regional businesses and allowing them to build capacity and experience in the intermodal services sector (Strategic Projections Inc. 2013).

326 File No. 160960844



The Project will act as a driver for economic growth, serving as an anchor to a wide range of industries requiring logistics capabilities. The Project represents a much needed infrastructure investment for a wide range of sectors dependent on logistic services including warehousing, wholesale trade and retail trade (Strategic Projections Inc. 2013). Intermodal oriented development (IOD) could be generated in lands identified in Halton Region and the Town of Milton Official Plans as employment areas. This would assist the municipalities with accommodating growth and infrastructure expansion as currently planned. These lands were identified in the Planning Rationale Report prepared by Bousfields (2008) as land for railway activity in 2001, and further supported in 2008 through ROPA 38 and OPA 31. The potential benefits of IOD to Milton include:

• employment opportunities (more than 1,000 direct and indirect jobs);

• property taxes ($291 to $485 million estimated land value would produce $7.7 to $12.9 million in annual property tax); and,

• development charges ($42.2 to $85.9 million) (Cushman & Wakefield 2014).

Milton’s vacancy rates and rental rates are supportive of this development (Cushman & Wakefield 2014). IOD opportunities could also include developing ancillary services that could support existing rail-based activities in Halton Region (e.g., Metrolinx). Based on these spending estimates and their effects, the Project is expected to have a positive benefit on the economies of the local community, Halton Region, the Province of Ontario and Canada.

The 2015 Ontario Budget Speech highlights that gridlock costs the economy up to $11 billion per year in the GTHA and that every dollar going into infrastructure spending generated $1.60 in economic activity (Ministry of Finance 2015). This is based on a study by the C.D. Howe Institute (2013) and has increased in comparison to the Toronto Region Board of Trade estimate in 2011 indicating that Toronto Region loses approximately $6 billion per year in lost productivity due to traffic congestion. During a press conference held by the Toronto Region Board of Trade (March 18, 2013), the president of the board warned that the cost of lost productivity due to traffic congestion could increase to $15 billion by 2031. The Project will assist with reducing congestion on regional highways and support the provinces plan for improving transportation infrastructure and reducing congestion providing economic benefit within the GTHA.

8.4 SUMMARY OF SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY BENEFITS

8.4.1 National and GTHA Benefits

The Project will result in reduced regional traffic congestion. The use of trains to transport goods will reduce congestion and gridlock by removing up to 280 heavy, long-distance trucks with every intermodal train. In 2014, this removed approximately 2 million trucks from the 400-series highways. In addition, CN will continue to consult with Halton Region to review and provide input into the municipal transportation planning objectives. The percentage of heavy-truck use experienced at existing intersections of arterial roads in Milton is currently between 1.5% and 7%.

File No. 160960844 327



The anticipated volume at typical intersections along Britannia as this road evolves from a rural road into a typical arterial road is estimated between 2.9% and 4.3% (BA Group 2015). This is within the current range of heavy-truck volumes Milton currently experiences on similar arterial roads (BA Group 2015).


CN is dedicated to establishing local partnerships that contribute to achieving development goals identified by the community, to address local priorities and concerns and to have communities derive benefits from the Project. The following social benefits are anticipated as a result of the Project:

• Reduced congestion at the rail crossings at Lower Base Line: Doubling the existing mainline and creating grade separations at Lower Base Line will improve train movements and remove delays that can temporarily block vehicle movement. Specifically, improve traffic flow and remove an at-grade crossing, and to preserve the east-west movement of traffic along Lower Base Line. This will also be a benefit for emergency services response time and ease congestion;

• Increased flood control along Tremaine Road: There are currently no flood controls on-site for Indian Creek. Floodplain design will increase flood control on Tremaine Road which will benefit the community in terms of transportation and use of land;

• Increased income for regional businesses: Project purchases of goods and services will provide expansion and diversification opportunities for businesses in the Town of Milton and Halton Region;

• Creation of development opportunities: Opportunity for supporting services to be built on employment lands near the Terminal including but not limited to warehouses, truck stops and restaurants/food services. The Project will also provide increased opportunities for employment closer to home for local residents, reducing commute times, eliminating potential stressors and increasing valuable time spent with family and friends;

• Creation of community outreach and partnership programs by CN: It is normal practice for CN to contribute and partner on activities, events and causes that are important to the community as a good corporate citizen;

• In-flux of educated human resources: The Town of Milton and Halton Region have a higher attainment of education compared with the provincial average (Appendix E.12). Access to these human resources locally would benefit from the variety of IOD job opportunities as a result of this Project; and,

• New education business opportunities: CN is partnering with Wilfrid Laurier University to provide education hands-on training opportunities in Supply Chain Management, an in-demand skill in Halton Region’s fast-growing economy through:

− support for the University’s Centre for Supply Chain Management;

328 File No. 160960844



− co-op and summer jobs programs for students at the existing BIT and the future Milton Logistics Hub;

− hosting an annual conference in Milton to bring together experts from around the world to share best practices; and,

− recruitment of Wilfrid Laurier University graduates of logistics for positions at CN.

File No. 160960844 329




330 File No. 160960844


Follow-up and Monitoring Programs December 7, 2015

9.0 FOLLOW-UP AND MONITORING PROGRAMS

Follow-up and monitoring programs have been proposed for the Project to verify the accuracy of predicted effects and effectiveness of proposed mitigation measures.

Under CEAA, 2012, an EIS must consider the requirements of a follow-up program, designed to:

• verify the accuracy of the EA of a designated project; and,

• determine the effectiveness of any mitigation measures taken to eliminate, reduce or control the adverse environmental effects of a designated project.

According to the EIS Guidelines issued for the Project, the goal of a monitoring program is to ensure that proper measures and controls are in place in order to decrease the potential for environmental degradation during all phases of project development, and to provide clearly defined action plans and emergency response procedures to account for human and environmental health and safety.

9.1 OBJECTIVES

The objectives of the follow-up and monitoring program are to:

• verify the accuracy of predicted environmental effects identified in the EA;

• confirm that, where identified, appropriate mitigation or compensation measures provided to minimize the environmental effects have been effectively implemented;

• determine the effectiveness of mitigation measures and need for modification or implementation of alternate measures, if required;

• ensure that the conditions set at the time of the project's authorization and the requirements pertaining to the relevant laws and regulations are met;

• provide for adaptive management measures and contingency planning should environmental effects differ from that predicted, or as a result of new information; and,

• support the management of environmental effects of the Project.

Two distinct but related aspects of this program include:

• a follow-up program, consisting of:

− supplemental technical studies designed to add to the technical data collected as part of the EIS; and

File No. 160960844 331



− post-construction studies which assist in evaluating the accuracy of the conclusions of the EA and the effectiveness of the mitigation measures; and,

• a monitoring program, consisting of:

− compliance monitoring to verify whether required mitigation measures and commitments made through the regulatory approvals process were implemented; and,

− construction monitoring to assess the effectiveness of construction mitigation measures and whether these measures were revised during construction.

The overall program has a specific focus on issues of relevance to the EA, with a range and variety of monitoring programs each with their own scope and objective.

The objectives of the various programs will be complementary and will produce data to inform adaptive management strategies.

9.2 FINALIZING THE FOLLOW-UP AND MONITORING PROGRAM

The preliminary follow-up and monitoring program includes measures related to compliance and monitoring. In addition to being required as part of the EA process, the program is intended to demonstrate CN’s commitment to an appropriate and thorough process of verifying changes to the environment as a result of the Project are as predicted and that adverse effects are managed.

Through the course of the EA process, this follow-up program will be refined. This consultative process, already underway, includes comments received during public engagement activities. These comments, together with those still to come through on-going consultation, independent review panel and appropriate permitting processes will serve to finalize the follow-up program.

While the follow-up program will be developed considering collective input as noted above, the program will also remain dynamic and flexible throughout its implementation period to enable adaptation to changing circumstances/requirements. The details of the program will be refined, as necessary, through the EA process applying the following methodology:

• where required, follow-up programs will be refined by CN in the context of regulatory, Aboriginal and stakeholder input received during review of the EIS and panel review process;

• the scope of each program element will be refined to consider the specific aspects of monitoring/sampling locations and frequency, parameters, and duration;

• existing field data will be evaluated as appropriate, to confirm its adequacy as a baseline; and,

• an appropriate method of communicating follow-up results to the public will be developed in consultation with the federal agencies.

332 File No. 160960844



9.3 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT

Adaptive management is a planned and systematic process for continuously improving environmental management practices by learning from their outcomes. It provides the flexibility to address/accommodate new circumstances, to identify and implement new mitigation measures or to modify existing measures throughout all phases of the Project.

Adaptive management will be inherent in the design of the EIS follow-up programs. Adaptive management will subsequently become a fundamental aspect in the implementation of the follow-up program. The purpose of the program is to ensure that the monitoring elements remain valid, meet regulatory requirements and responsive to evolving objectives.

9.4 FOLLOW-UP PROGRAMS

As described above, a follow-up program is designed to provide supplemental technical studies designed to add to the technical data collected as part of the EIS as well as to verify the accuracy of the effects assessment and determine the effectiveness of the measures implemented to mitigate the adverse effects of the Project. Follow-up programs are proposed in particular for areas where scientific uncertainty exists in the prediction of effects

The follow-up program has been designed to incorporate field data as it may be applicable and as it becomes available through on-going data collection initiatives. These initiatives include (a) supplementing existing data sources to confirm or augment the understanding of existing conditions or predictions, and (b) post-construction studies which assist in evaluating the accuracy of the conclusions of the EA and the effectiveness of the mitigation measures.

Preliminary follow-up programs for each technical discipline are set out below.

9.4.1 Air Quality

Results of the air quality study were based on existing available information, which indicate that during the Terminal construction and operation phases the measured parameters will not exceed the regulatory limits or objectives at off-site receptors referenced in the study except for Benzene and B(a)P. The background limits of Benzene and B(a)P are already above the air quality objectives, before considering the cumulative contribution of the Project.

To supplement existing background information, site specific ambient baseline air quality monitoring began in August 2015 and will continue until July 2016 to capture local measurements and seasonal fluctuations in air quality parameters. The results of this supplemental data collection will be compared with the assumptions made in the EIS to confirm the accuracy of the predictions made in the assessment.

File No. 160960844 333



In addition, a follow-up monitoring program will be implemented to monitor dust (PM2.5) levels at selected off-site locations during the construction phase. This will confirm the modeling and the effectiveness of mitigation measures.

The type of ambient monitoring equipment, selection of monitoring stations, frequency of sample collection, and duration of the monitoring program will be based on appropriate guidelines and in consultation with government regulators. The monitoring program is expected to include the following elements:

• ambient air quality in the LAA will be assessed to determine the effectiveness of dust control practices using dust fall canisters and high volume samplers for PM and/or PM2.5;

• monitoring stations will be located based on predicted dispersion modeling for parameters of potential concern (and subject to power availability and siting constraints); and,

• equipment siting, operations, auditing, and reporting will follow applicable requirements.

EIS follow-up monitoring results will be compared with predictions presented in the EIS report, the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Air Quality (Appendix E.1).

9.4.2 Acoustic Environment

Results of acoustic modeling predict that noise from construction and operation activities are acceptable at the off-site receptors.

CN will develop a follow-up program that includes an acoustic audit to verify compliance with predicted effects outlined within the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report - Noise Effects Assessment (Appendix E.10). In addition, audit results will be used to assess the effectiveness of noise mitigation measures.

The type of ambient monitoring equipment, selection of monitoring stations, frequency of sample collection, and duration of the program will be consistent with Canadian Transportation Agency methodologies. However, the monitoring program is expected to include the following elements:

• ambient noise monitoring during the first four weeks of the construction phase; and,

• equipment siting, operations, auditing, and reporting consistent with Canadian Transportation Agency methodologies.

EA follow-up monitoring results will be compared with predictions presented in the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Noise Effects Assessment (Appendix E.10) and with applicable U.S. Federal Transit Administration and Health Canada guidelines.

If a concern of an exceedance is established, additional monitoring may be considered.

334 File No. 160960844



9.4.3 Groundwater

Groundwater quality and quantity effects relate to the potential lowering of the groundwater table due to anticipated construction dewatering from excavations.

As part of the baseline measurements, monitoring is being conducted for an overall period of one year (June 2015 to June 2016) so as to capture seasonal fluctuations in groundwater levels and quality. The results of this technical study will seek to confirm the assumptions used for the baseline conditions in the EIS. Given that Project effects on groundwater are expected to be low due to the soil permeability and limited excavation, CN feels a follow-up program to monitor groundwater water levels and water quality in the PDA is not warranted.

9.4.4 Surface Water

The program covers water quality and quantity and channel stabilization and restoration. The objectives of the water quantity and quality follow-up program are to assess the ability of the SWM strategy to function as designed and predicted to ensure appropriate flows and quality of water discharge. Channel alignment stabilization and restoration programs are intended to primarily meet regulatory compliance for post-construction monitoring of the new channel bed and streambanks to indicate stability and projected long term function.

To further establish baseline conditions, additional in-situ water level and stream velocity measurements were completed on a monthly basis to November 2015. The results of this technical study will confirm the assumptions used for the baseline conditions in the EIS.

During operations, two types of monitoring will occur:

• Water quantity and quality; and,

• Channel Stabilization.

9.4.4.1 Water Quantity and Quality

Water quantity and quality monitoring programs are planned for the discharge and receiving water locations. Measurements will be compared to the baseline conditions on a quarterly basis at these locations.

Quarterly water level recording and collection of water quality samples are planned at Tributary A and Indian Creek. Data will be used to determine effluent discharge from SWM Pond 1 and SWM Pond 2 against applicable regulatory standards, including compliance with the Canadian Council of the Ministers of the Environment (CCME), Canadian Water Quality Guidelines for Freshwater Aquatic Life (CWQG-FAL) and the Ontario Provincial Water Quality Objectives (PWQOs), as applicable. Monitoring will occur during construction (see Section 9.5.1) and

File No. 160960844 335



operations or in accordance with applicable permits and approvals. A three year post-construction monitoring period is suggested.

EIS follow-up monitoring results will be compared with predictions presented in the EIS report, the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Channel Realignment (Appendix E.2), the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Hydrology and Surface Water Quality Baseline Study and Effects Assessment (Appendix E.15) and with applicable CCME, CWQG-FAL and with PWQO guidelines.

The type of monitoring equipment, selection of monitoring stations, frequency of sample collection, and duration of the program will be based on applicable guidelines.

9.4.4.2 Channel Stabilization and Restoration

The channel realignments and enhancements are designed to last for decades. This is largely because the instream structures are installed in a way that allows for the stream bank and floodplain vegetation to mature and provide stability for the channel. The realignment and enhancements will become stronger over time as the vegetation establishes. In the first few years following construction, the new watercourses will naturally adjust. These adjustments could produce minor erosion and therefore it is important that the stream be inspected several times per year following construction.

A three year post construction monitoring period is planned. This follow-up program will consist of the following tasks:

• Confirm that installed channel features are stable and that no excessive erosion is occurring throughout the Project reach; and

• Assess vegetation establishment and propagation of native species.

The post-construction monitoring program for surface water is outlined in Table 9.1.

Table 9.1: Proposed Surface Water Post-Construction Follow-Up Studies

Monitoring Year

Component Details

Year 0 Immediately following construction

Geomorphic Assessment baseline

Establish monitoring locations and photo points. Establish monitoring baseline through ‘as-constructed’ geomorphic assessment.

Fisheries Assessment Visual assessment of the quality of fish and overall aquatic habitat. Verify the installation of fish and aquatic habitat structures.

Vegetation Assessment

Verify installation of plant materials as per planting plan.

336 File No. 160960844



Table 9.1: Proposed Surface Water Post-Construction Follow-Up Studies

Monitoring Year

Component Details

Years 1, 2, 3 Post-construction

Spring Assessment Visual Assessment of Project conditions. Photos at photo points (including instream structures for both geomorphic and aquatic conditions). Fisheries Assessment per DFO and CEAA monitoring requirements.

Fall Assessment Geomorphic Assessment of stream characteristics, including profile, pattern, dimensions and pebble count. Yearly visual assessments of the quality of fish and overall aquatic habitat. Yearly assessment of quantity and diversity of fish species. Vegetation Assessment.


The EIS concludes that through mitigation and the implementation of an offsetting plan, no residual effects on fish and fish habitat will occur following the implementation of an enhanced stream diversion with habitat features constructed for increased fisheries values.

Supplemental fisheries data has been collected from Indian Creek and Tributary A. Analysis of this data, combined with the baseline study, will inform fisheries productivity assessments that are completed as part of the Fisheries Act approval process. The results of this technical study will confirm the previous studies used for the baseline conditions in the EIS. The results of the baseline fish community and habitat usage data (including supplemental fish community and habitat data) will also be used as a basis for comparison with fish community and habitat usage data collected as part of fisheries productivity assessments conducted post-construction.

CN will implement a follow-up program to confirm that fisheries offsetting measures meet their intended objectives. This program will consist of two components:

• compliance reporting for offsetting works; and,

• habitat effectiveness monitoring.

Compliance reporting will confirm that planned habitat offsets are constructed in accordance with the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report - Channel Realignment (Appendix E.2) and that conditions of the Fisheries Act authorization are met. Habitat effectiveness monitoring will confirm that habitat offsets are functioning as intended after construction.

The requirements and frequency of monitoring will consider comments received during the panel review process and in consultation with DFO. It is expected that the monitoring program will be comprised of the following key elements:

File No. 160960844 337



• conduct fisheries monitoring for three years following the completion of channel construction. Data will be used to demonstrate that offsetting measures are functioning and that productivity has been maintained or enhanced; and,

• fish collection employing similar methods used during the EIS baseline study and supplemental fisheries productivity assessments, which would be used to determine habitat usage and productivity.

The monitoring will occur post-construction once per year (in the late spring/early summer) and will be performed by qualified fisheries biologists.

EIS follow-up monitoring results will be compared with predictions presented in the EIS report, the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Fish and Fish Habitat (Appendix E.4) and applicable guidelines.

9.4.6 Migratory Birds and their Habitat

CN will work with a non-profit organization to identify opportunities for the creation, securement and long-term management of grassland habitat for Bobolink and Eastern Meadowlark potentially affected by the Project. The goal will be to create habitat within the same general ecoregion as the Project in an area where these species can thrive. CN will support the organization(s) selected for this component with technical studies proposed to document habitat conditions and use by target species as described in the Milton Logistics Hub Technical Data Report – Terrestrial (Appendix E.16). This program is planned to occur post-construction for a term agreed upon with this organization.


Monitoring program associated with migratory birds considered to be SAR are addressed in Section 9.4.6. No other follow-up and monitoring program is required for SAR.

9.4.8 Aboriginal Peoples

CN is committed to continued engagement with Aboriginal communities in order to understand potential effects to lands and resources used for traditional purposes by Aboriginal persons and how these may be most effectively addressed. Commitments to future Aboriginal engagement are summarized in Section 5.7.

CN has offered to each Aboriginal community the opportunity to participate in the Stage 3 and 4 archaeological site investigations as monitors for their respective communities. In addition, all Aboriginal communities have been provided the opportunity to review and provide input into the reporting of the field programs and mitigation measures through receipt of the Stage 1 and 2 AAs and the subsequent reports for stage 3 and 4 work, when available.

338 File No. 160960844



CN has also offered each Aboriginal community the opportunity to undertake a Project-specific traditional knowledge study the results of which may include recommendations for follow up and monitoring programs involving Aboriginal peoples. CN will collaborate with Aboriginal communities on the implementation of such programs where feasible and appropriate.

9.4.9 Economy and Employment

Follow-up and monitoring for economy and employment will not be required as effects will largely be positive.

9.4.10 Community Services and Infrastructure

Government departments, public agencies and private sector companies that provide community services and infrastructure will monitor the ongoing demand for community services as part of their normal planning practices. CN will liaise with local and regional service providers throughout the life of the Project to identify and address issues pertaining to the Project’s effects on demand for community services and infrastructure, if any, as they arise. This includes keeping service providers aware of Project activities and changes in schedule to help manage Project interactions with the capacity of community services and infrastructure.

No follow-up and monitoring program is required.

9.4.11 Land and Resource Use

CN will maintain open communication with local and regional authorities and interest groups throughout the life of the Project to identify and address issues pertaining to the Project’s influence on land and resource use, if any, as they arise. Follow-up and monitoring programs developed for emissions related to Air Quality (Section 9.4.1), Acoustic Environment (Section 9.4.2) and Surface Water (Section 9.4.4) will be applied to help manage Project effects on Land and Resource Use.

9.4.12 Heritage Resources

Potential effects on heritage resources relate to removal in advance of construction and vibration during construction.

Removal effects to the shed situated at 5269 Tremaine Road will be mitigated through either relocation or documentation and salvage activities. Relocation will be executed where a technically and economically feasible option, as identified within a relocation plan, is submitted to CN within 90 days of request. In the event that a relocation plan cannot be developed by the community, documentation and salvage will be executed. This will include photographic documentation of the shed, basic floor plans and a site specific history. Salvage will be made available to a reputable salvage company, charity or community members.

File No. 160960844 339



Potential vibration effects will be mitigated through the establishment of 50 m buffer zones during construction. These buffer zones will be monitored throughout construction, particularly where activities are adjacent to these heritage features. This monitoring will be part of the overall environmental construction monitoring scheduled to occur during the construction phase. No further follow-up and monitoring program is recommended.

9.4.13 Archaeological Resources

Follow-up technical studies are recommended for Stage 3 AA at certain locations on the Project site. As mentioned in Section 9.4.8 and Chapter 5, Aboriginal communities will be provided an opportunity to participate in the studies. The results of these studies will be shared with all Aboriginal communities as was done for the Stage 1 and 2 work. This Stage 3 work is planned to be completed in 2016, prior to construction.

Upon completion of the recommended Stage 3 AA, and, if required, Stage 4 AA, archaeological resources will be removed from within the PDA and documented accordingly. As such, adverse effects on archaeological resources are not anticipated.

During ground disturbance, monitoring for previously undocumented archaeological resources will occur and, if encountered, appropriate mitigation determined by a qualified archaeologist. No further follow-up monitoring is deemed necessary.

9.5 MONITORING PROGRAM

The monitoring program will consist of compliance and construction monitoring to confirm implementation and verify the effectiveness of mitigation measures and commitments.

9.5.1 Construction Monitoring

Details of construction monitoring will be documented as a component of the EPP, as discussed in Section 9.8, and will generally include, but not be limited to:

• inspection of erosion and sediment controls to ensure proper installation and maintenance;

• monitoring for TSS and turbidity for any discharges from the construction site (i.e., SWM pond, channel realignment);

• monitoring to confirm compliance with detailed design plans during channel realignment plans;

• monitoring of maximum acceptable vibration, or peak particle velocity (PPV), levels for any construction within 50 m of identified heritage resources; and,

• visual observations for any additional archaeological resources potentially encountered during ground disturbance.

340 File No. 160960844



A qualified Environmental Monitor will oversee general construction activities, conduct regular assessments of protection measures and verify compliance with environmental requirements. The Environmental Monitor will also provide guidance on compliance should issues arise during construction, documenting any revisions that are made to design and mitigation plans and documenting the results. The roles and responsibilities of the Environmental Monitor will be included in the EPP.

9.5.2 Compliance Monitoring

Compliance with all environmental approvals, permits and authorizations will be tracked by CN and communicated to appropriate agencies, identifying whether required mitigation measures and commitments were implemented. Deviations or revisions to the mitigation measures resulting from follow-up and monitoring programs will be identified.

9.6 REPORTING

Although the form and frequency of follow-up reporting will be determined as the program is finalized, it is anticipated that those elements relevant to the EIS follow-up and monitoring program will be formally documented in a report or reports on an annual basis, as required by each component of the program, as described in the following sections.

9.6.1 Follow-up Program Reporting

Follow-up program reporting includes:

• Supplemental Data Collection: Results from the supplemental data collection will be assessed against the results of the corresponding TDR and updated in standalone reports as addendums to the corresponding TDR. These reports will be submitted to CEAA within three months of completion of the supplemental data collection; and

• Post-Construction Monitoring: An annual post-construction monitoring report will be prepared each year of the program by qualified practitioners and in conjunction with input from the Environmental Monitor to document and evaluate the accuracy of the conclusions of the EA and the effectiveness of the mitigation measures. In the event that discrepancies or non-conformance to predicted effects are identified, recommendations for additional monitoring or mitigation measures will be identified for implementation as part of the adaptive management approach. This report will be submitted to CEAA and other applicable agencies on an annual basis.

Depending on the results and considering the frequency of sampling events over the long-term, it may be that through agreement with stakeholders, the reporting frequency would be adjusted. Any modification to reporting frequency will be confirmed in discussion with regulators.

File No. 160960844 341



9.6.2 Monitoring Program Reporting

Monitoring program reporting includes:

• Construction Monitoring: Construction monitoring reports will be prepared by the Environmental Monitor and will document the results of the construction monitoring program. Copies of reports will be submitted to regulators as required by permit conditions during construction.

• Compliance Monitoring: As required by regulators, CN will prepare a report documenting compliance with all environmental approvals, permits and authorizations for dissemination to appropriate agencies. Deviations or revisions to the mitigation measures resulting from follow-up and monitoring programs will be identified.

9.7 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

9.7.1 Policies

CN is committed to effective environmental management of all its activities including compliance with applicable environmental regulatory requirements. CN is committed to the concept of sustainable development as a key tenet of corporate responsibility and strives to continuously improve environmental performance.

9.7.2 Guidelines

CN has also developed internal guidelines, plans and other documents intended to guide construction, manage environmental effects and ensure the safety of employees, the public and property, including:

• CN Environmental Guidelines for Railway Construction and Maintenance (CN 2002); and,

• CN Emergency Response Plan (2013).

These policies and internal guidelines determine and inform the implementation of the commitments, mitigation, monitoring and design components and activities associated with the Project.

9.7.3 Design Standards

All Project equipment will meet the requirements for industry standards, and be certified as being safe and fit for its intended use. Current versions of the following codes and standards will be referenced where appropriate and applicable for design and specifications, as follows:

• National Building Code of Canada;

342 File No. 160960844



• Ontario Building Code;

• Canadian Electrical Code;

• National Plumbing Code of Canada;

• National Fire Code of Canada;

• Illuminating Engineering Society;

• International Electrical Testing Association;

• Technical Standard & Safety Authority;

• American Railway Engineering and Maintenance-of-Way Association, Manual for Railway Engineering;

• TAC Geometric Design for Canadian Roads; and,

• CN Engineering – Specification for Industrial Tracks and Standard Practice Circulars.

Additional design standards will be followed and will be confirmed through detailed design.

9.8 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN

As noted in Section 1.5.3, this Project specific EPP will be developed to outline the proposed environmental protection measures, mitigation measures and commitments to be undertaken by CN, its contractors and subcontractors, during construction and operation to avoid or reduce potential adverse environmental effects. The EPP will form part of the contract document with the successful construction contractor. The EPP will include BMPs and specific mitigation measures and commitments made by CN through the regulatory approval process and will form a key component of the Project’s EMP.

Table 9.2 describes components of the EMP that are anticipated for the Project. The specific requirements for each plan will be refined as the Project progresses through the EA Process and permitting phase.

Table 9.2: Environmental Management Plan Components

EMP Description

Environmental Protection Plan (EPP)

An EPP outlines the proposed environmental protection measures and commitments to be carried out by CN, their contractor and subcontractors, during construction and operation to avoid or reduce potential effects. Specific auditing and enforcement programs will also be included.

Emergency Response Plan(ERP)

A site-specific ERP will be developed for construction to establish emergency response procedures that protect human health, the environment, and the Project. CN’s existing operations ERP will be updated as necessary to include the Milton Logistics Hub.

Soil Management Plan This plan will outline soil management within the PDA, including topsoil

File No. 160960844 343



Table 9.2: Environmental Management Plan Components

EMP Description salvage, sampling protocols, mitigation measures to be applied at any area of temporary soil storage; requirements for acceptable receiving sites for excavated soil; and, requirements for documenting soil management activities.

Stormwater Management Plan

A site specific, stormwater quantity and quality management plan will be developed upon project completion. This plan will include a facility layout with descriptions of storage, treatment, discharge, and water quantity and quality control.

Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan

Plan to describe procedures and erosion and sedimentation control measures during construction in order to minimize deposition of sediment in creeks, wetlands, roadways etc. Measures may include location of soil stockpiles, temporary stabilization methods, construction phasing and restricting/containing work areas within perimeter fencing, revegetation and general mitigation measures.

Planting Plan A Plan will be developed that outlines the revegetation efforts for the long term establishment of vegetation within the Project, specifically for restoration and naturalization areas, SWM ponds and other areas to be naturally vegetated. Species selected will include native Ontario species and non-invasive grass species for the seed mixes.

Preliminary plans have been prepared in support of the EIS (Appendix E) and will be developed and revised as necessary as the Project moves through the phases of design, construction and operation. Inherent in this management system is the provision for continual environmental improvement, ongoing periodic monitoring, consideration of stakeholders, and adaptability of these documents to respond to environmental concerns.

An Environmental Monitor will monitor compliance with the EMP and EPP during the construction phase of the Project and ensure that follow-up monitoring is conducted.

The EMP’s maintenance and effectiveness will be monitored through formal and informal audits, environmental monitoring, documentation of non-conformance incidents and implementation of corrective actions.

344 File No. 160960844


Summary and Conclusions December 7, 2015

10.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

This chapter provides a summary of the EIS, including potential effects, mitigation measures, and residual and cumulative effects and their significance, and concludes that based on these findings, the residual environmental effects of the Project are considered not significant.

10.1 SUMMARY OF THE POTENTIAL EFFECTS, ADVERSE RESIDUAL EFFECTS AND THEIR SIGNIFICANCE

10.1.1 Scope of the EIS and Project Interactions

The assessment methods used in the preparation of this EIS included an evaluation of the potential environmental effects for each VC that may arise during the construction and operation of the Project, as well as from potential accidental events. The evaluation of potential cumulative effects considers whether there is potential for the residual environmental effects of the Project to interact cumulatively with the residual environmental effects of other past, present, or future (i.e., certain or reasonably foreseeable) physical activities in the vicinity of the Project.

The scope of the Project is focused on matters that are under the jurisdiction of CEAA as described in section 5 of CEAA, 2012 and within the care and control of CN. The Project includes construction, operation and maintenance of the following primary components:

• yard tracks;

• work pads and temporary container storage;



• truck entrance/gate and access road (including overpass);


• SWM system;

• vegetation clearing, grading and berms






File No. 160960844 345




These components, and activities associated with their construction and operation reflect the scope of the Project for this EIS and represent physical activities that would occur throughout the life of the Project forming the basis of the effects assessment.

VCs considered to facilitate a focused and effective EA process that complies with government requirements and addresses public comments are presented in Table 6.21, along with the potential interactions and effects, which formed the basis for the effects analysis.

346 File No. 160960844



Table 10.1: Project Interactions with VCs

Project Components and Physical

Activities

Fish and Fish Habitat Migratory Birds Species at Risk (SAR)

Human Health




Change in Fish M

ovement,


Change in Fish M

ortality

Change in W

ater Quality

Change in M

igratory Bird M

ortality

Change in M



igratory Birds

Changes in direct m

ortality to SAR

Change to critical habitat

of SAR

Change in Hum

an Health

Change in Dem

and for C

omm

unity Services and Infrastructure

Change in the Q

uantity and Q

uality of Land and Resource Use

Unauthorized disturbance or destruction of part or all of an archaeological site

or sites

Unauthorized loss of, or alteration to, the cultural heritage value or interest

of a Cultural Heritage

resource, or an element

thereof

Construction


– – – – –

Track Construction and Signals Installation

– – – – – – – – – – –

Terminal Infrastructure

– – – – – – – –

Grade Separations – – – – – – – – –

Utilities – – – – – – – – - -

File No. 160960844 347





Activities


Human Health




Change in Fish M

ovement,


Change in Fish M

ortality

Change in W

ater Quality

Change in M

igratory Bird M

ortality

Change in M



igratory Birds

Changes in direct m

ortality to SAR


of SAR

Change in Hum

an Health

Change in Dem

and for C

omm


Change in the Q

uantity and Q



or sites




thereof

Watercourse Realignments, Restoration and Naturalization

– – – – –


– – – – –


– – – – – – – – – – – –

Acoustic Emissions – – – – – – – – – –

Solid Waste Management and Recycling

– – – – – – – – – – – – – –

348 File No. 160960844





Activities


Human Health




Change in Fish M

ovement,


Change in Fish M

ortality

Change in W

ater Quality

Change in M

igratory Bird M

ortality

Change in M



igratory Birds

Changes in direct m

ortality to SAR


of SAR

Change in Hum

an Health

Change in Dem

and for C

omm


Change in the Q

uantity and Q



or sites




thereof

Operations Truck Entrance/Exit (Gate)

– – – – – – – – – – –

Train Operations – – – – – – – –

Lift Operations – – – – – – – – – – – –

Equipment Maintenance – – – – – – – – – – – –

Water Management – – – – – – – – – – –

Site Buildings, Linear Facilities and Associated Infrastructure

– – – – – – – – – –

File No. 160960844 349





Activities


Human Health




Change in Fish M

ovement,


Change in Fish M

ortality

Change in W

ater Quality

Change in M

igratory Bird M

ortality

Change in M



igratory Birds

Changes in direct m

ortality to SAR


of SAR

Change in Hum

an Health

Change in Dem

and for C

omm


Change in the Q

uantity and Q



or sites




thereof

Operation Labour Requirements

– – – – – – – – – – –


– – – – – – – – – – – –

Acoustic Emissions – – – – – – – – – –

Solid Waste Management and Recycling

– – – – – – – – – – – – –

350 File No. 160960844





Activities


Human Health




Change in Fish M

ovement,


Change in Fish M

ortality

Change in W

ater Quality

Change in M

igratory Bird M

ortality

Change in M



igratory Birds

Changes in direct m

ortality to SAR


of SAR

Change in Hum

an Health

Change in Dem

and for C

omm


Change in the Q

uantity and Q



or sites




thereof

Accidents and Malfunctions Hazardous materials spill (including fuel, oil, glycol, lubricants and hydraulic fluid) or ignition of spilled fuel

– –

Intermodal container spill on land

– – –

Traffic accidents at the entry points to the Terminal

– – – – –

File No. 160960844 351





Activities


Human Health




Change in Fish M

ovement,


Change in Fish M

ortality

Change in W

ater Quality

Change in M

igratory Bird M

ortality

Change in M



igratory Birds

Changes in direct m

ortality to SAR


of SAR

Change in Hum

an Health

Change in Dem

and for C

omm


Change in the Q

uantity and Q



or sites




thereof

Derailment involving a release of fuel from a locomotive

– – – –

NOTES: = Potential interactions that might cause an effect. - = Actions between the Project and the VC are not expected.

352 File No. 160960844



10.1.2 Residual, Accidental and Cumulative Environmental Effects

Chapter 6 of this EIS presents the residual, accidental and cumulative effects evaluation for each VC. Effect predictions including potential environmental effects, mitigation and residual effects are summarized for each VC in the respective VC sections. With the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, adverse residual environmental effects of routine Project activities are predicted to be not significant for all VCs.

Accidents and malfunctions that could occur during the construction and operation of the Project, which could potentially result in adverse environmental effects, include hazardous materials spill (including fuel, glycol, lubricants and hydraulic fluid) on land or water, spill of an intermodal container on land, traffic accidents at entry points to the Terminal and derailment. Given the precautionary safety measures in place and the emergency planning and mitigation measures for the Project, the potential environmental effects to the VCs assessed in this EA resulting from an accident or malfunction are considered not significant.

Environmental factors which could potentially affect the Project include:

• extreme weather conditions (i.e., winds, extreme temperatures, severe precipitation, ice storms, tornadoes and lightning);

• climate change; and,

• geophysical and geotechnical hazards.

CN has Emergency Management Systems with response procedures to address extreme weather and climate conditions. While extreme weather may result in a disruption of operations at the Terminal site, the frequency of extreme weather events are anticipated to be low, effects to the Project are considered to be not significant. The effects of climate change, including warmer temperatures, increased frequency / intensity of storm events, and flooding, have been accommodated in the design of the Terminal. Bank instability and potential long term creep along Indian Creek will be addressed through channel realignment and restoration opportunities proposed along Indian Creek, with other sediment stability concerns to be mitigated through appropriate construction procedures. As a result, potential effects of the environment on the Project are considered to be not significant.

Potential cumulative environmental effects are identified in consideration of potential interactions with other physical activities that have been or will be carried out in the vicinity of the Project, based on certain or reasonably foreseeable future undertakings. The assessment of cumulative environmental effects is carried out with respect to any Project-related residual environmental effect that is considered likely to overlap with the residual environmental effect of another past, present, or future physical activity.

Cumulative effects were predicted to be low in magnitude, and with the implementation of mitigation measures, including restoration and enhancement measures proposed to offset

File No. 160960844 353



potential effects, the Project’s contribution to cumulative effects is predicted to be not significant (refer to Chapter 6).

Table 10.2 summarizes the significance of residual effects findings for each VC, and where applicable, the likelihood of significant residual adverse environmental effects occurring.

Table 10.2: Summary of Environmental Effects

Valued Component

Construction Operation Accidents and Malfunctions Cumulative Effects


Environmental Effect





Likelihood of Occurrence



Fish and Fish Habitat N N N L N

Migratory Birds N N N L N

Species at Risk N N N L N

Human Health N N N L N

Other Socio-Economic Conditions and Heritage Resources

N N N L N


N N N L N

Key: N = Not Significant residual environmental effect S = Significant residual environmental effect L = Low likelihood As outlined in Chapter 6, CN has numerous design measures, operational procedures and BMPs to prevent accidents and malfunctions, thereby reducing the risk of an occurrence. With the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, which includes on-site restoration and enhancement measures and off-site habitat creation, adverse residual environmental effects of routine Project activities are predicted to be not significant for all VCs.

10.2 SUMMARY OF MITIGATION, MONITORING AND FOLLOW-UP COMMITMENTS

Mitigation is proposed to reduce or eliminate adverse environmental effects. Most potential Project and cumulative environmental effects will be addressed by mitigation measures for each VC. Design features and mitigation measures have been incorporated into the Project to

354 File No. 160960844



prevent or reduce potential environmental effects. Additional mitigation measures include BMPs, general operational procedures to be employed during construction and operation of the Project and worker education. A complete list of mitigation, monitoring, and follow-up commitments is provided in Appendix G.

A follow-up and monitoring program will be implemented to:

• provide supplemental technical studies designed to add to the technical data collected as part of the EIS;

• verify the accuracy of the effects assessment and determine the effectiveness of the measures implemented to mitigate the adverse effects of the Project;

• verify the effectiveness of mitigation measures and commitments during construction; and,

• confirm implementation of proposed mitigation measures.

Adaptive management will subsequently become a fundamental aspect in the implementation of the follow-up program intended to ensure that the monitoring elements remain valid, meet regulatory requirements and are responsive to evolving objectives. The results of this program will be formally documented for submission to CEAA and other applicable agencies, as required.

10.3 SUMMARY OF PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT

CN initiated the formal consultation process for the Project through their public announcement of the Project on March 19, 2015 and the official opening of the Public Information Centre on March 28, 2015. From the initial stages and throughout the federal EA process, consultation with Aboriginal communities, community organizations, area residents, elected officials and staff and government agencies has been a focus for CN. Chapter 4 of this EIS describes the consultation and engagement activities conducted to date on the Project.

Meetings with stakeholders, agencies and municipal representatives have been held since 2014 regarding the Project, as detailed in Appendix D. An overview of the issues identified through public and agency engagement completed prior to submission of the EIS and responses to address these concerns are provided in Chapter 4.

CN remains committed to continuing and expanding its outreach activities to ensure stakeholders are aware of and understand the Project, are provided with opportunities to discuss the EA results, and are able to provide feedback. These activities will serve to inform stakeholders about the EIS and its results, and assist them in reviewing the EIS Report and engaging in the EIS review process. They will also assist CN in addressing any outstanding issues and strengthening relationships with stakeholders.

File No. 160960844 355



10.4 SUMMARY OF ABORIGINAL ENGAGEMENT

CN recognizes the importance of consultation with Aboriginal communities as an integral aspect of the EA process. The goal of CN’s Aboriginal engagement is to inform Aboriginal communities of the Project and nature of proposed works, to explain the purpose of the EIS and how the assessment is conducted, to identify Aboriginal interests, issues and concerns related to the Project and to consider such interests, issues and concerns, where feasible, within the context of Project planning, assessment and design.

In the EIS Guidelines, CEAA provided direction that CN should consult with the MNCFN, Six Nations, Huron Wendat and MNO as part of the EA. Engagement with these Aboriginal communities has primarily focused on the dissemination of information about the Project, establishing community relationships and contacts, coordination with environmental monitors at the Project site, initiation of a TLU study with MNCFN and committing to future engagement.

Based on the information received, TLRU by Aboriginal peoples identified in the vicinity of the Project will not be affected by Project-related activities because it occurs outside of the PDA and LAA. As a result, this has not been carried forward as a VC.

Questions and comments raised during engagement activities have been tracked and managed for the Project and have been considered in the preparation of the EIS. Section 5.6 provides an overview of the issues identified through Aboriginal engagement completed prior to submission of the EIS.

CN will continue with many of the initiatives carried out or initiated to date through to the commencement of operations, including the Project website, Public Information Centre, and completion of TLU studies, where requested. Participation by Aboriginal monitors during the follow-up and monitoring programs will be extended to all communities.

During the EA process, these on-going activities will serve to inform Aboriginal communities about the EIS, specifically technical data reports and effects assessment, and to assist them in their review of the findings. Opportunities to review and discuss the various technical reports with CN and technical leads will be offered.

10.5 CONCLUSIONS

To meet the requirements of CEAA, 2012, the EIS describes the components of the Project and the associated activities that will be carried out, and describes the potential environmental effects of the Project (including cumulative environmental effects).

Six VCs were identified as relevant and important to the EIS of the Project. They were:

• fish and fish habitat;

356 File No. 160960844



• migratory birds;

• species at risk;

• human health;

• socio-economic conditions; and,

• archaeological and cultural heritage resources.

Project interactions with all VCs were analyzed to determine potential environmental effects associated with Project. The environmental effects assessment for each VC was carried out for all Project phases as well as for potential accidents and malfunctions and the effects of the environment on the Project. The analysis used qualitative and, where possible, quantitative information available from existing knowledge and appropriate analytical tools, as well as the consideration of identified mitigation measures. To eliminate or reduce anticipated environmental effects, mitigation measures were incorporated into the Project design.

Residual environmental effects were predicted for VCs following the application of planned mitigation measures. The residual environmental effects of each Project phase were evaluated as either significant or not significant (with likelihood of occurrence identified in such cases).

The EIS determined that there would be no significant adverse residual environmental effects during all phases of the Project. Effects of the environment on the Project were predicted to be not significant due to the low likelihood of occurrence and incorporation of appropriate mitigation measures into the design, construction and operation of the Project. The potential residual environmental effects of accidents and malfunctions were also found to be not significant.

Cumulative environmental effects of the Project in combination with other past, present or reasonably foreseeable future projects or activities were also assessed. Project management and mitigation measures will be applied as part of the Project, such that the potential environmental effects of the Project in combination with other projects or activities that have been or will be carried out are not significant.

An appropriate follow-up program has been developed to verify the predictions of this EIS and to verify the effectiveness of mitigation. As well, monitoring measures have been developed to measure compliance with regulatory requirements, and to assist in the identification of adaptive management measures as necessary to avoid or minimize any potentially significant adverse environmental effects if they occurred.

Overall, based on the results of this EIS, it is concluded that with planned mitigation and the implementation of best practices, the residual environmental effects of the Project, including cumulative effects and the effects of the environment on the Project, during all phases are considered not significant.

File No. 160960844 357




358 File No. 160960844


References December 7, 2015

11.0 REFERENCES

Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC). 2011. Discussion Table with the Huron Wendat Nation: Signing of a Memorandum of Understanding and Appointment of Benoît Pelletier. Retrieved 2015, Available online at: https://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/eng/1314724586483/1314724642642.

Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC). 2014a. First Nations Detail Six Nations. Retrieved 2015. Available online at: http://pse5-esd5.ainc-inac.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/FNMain.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=121&lang=eng.

Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC). 2014b. First Nations Profile Bay of Quinte Mohawk. Retrieved 2015. Available online at: http://pse5-esd5.ainc-inac.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/FNMain.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=244&lang=eng.

Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC). 2014c. First Nations Profile Upper Mohawk. Retrieved 2015. Available online at: http://pse5-esd5.ainc-inac.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/FNMain.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=257&lang=eng.

Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC). 2014d. First Nations Profile Bearfoot Onondaga. Retrieved 2015. Available online at: http://pse5-esd5.ainc-inac.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/FNMain.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=248&lang=eng.

Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC). 2014e. Delaware. Retrieved 2015. Available online at: http://pse5-esd5.ainc-inac.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/FNMain.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=253&lang=eng.

Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC). 2014f. First Nations Profile Konadaha Seneca. Retrieved 2015. Available online at: http://pse5-esd5.ainc-inac.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/FNMain.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=251&lang=eng.

Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC). 2014g. First Nations Profile Onondaga Clear Sky. Retrieved 2015. Available online at: http://pse5-esd5.ainc-inac.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/FNMain.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=247&lang=eng.

Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC). 2014h. First Nations Profile Lower Mohawk. Retrieved 2015. Available online at: http://pse5-esd5.ainc-inac.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/FNMain.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=250&lang=eng.

Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC). 2014i. First Nations Profile Tuscarora. Retrieved 2015. Available online at: http://pse5-esd5.ainc-inac.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/FNMain.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=245&lang=eng.

File No. 160960844 359



Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC). 2014j. First Nations Profile Upper Mohawk. Retrieved 2015. Available online at: http://pse5-esd5.ainc-inac.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/FNMain.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=257&lang=eng.

Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC). 2014k. First Nations Profile Walker Mohawk. Retrieved 2015. Available online at: http://pse5-esd5.ainc-inac.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/FNMain.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=255&lang=eng.

Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC). 2014l. First Nations Profile Upper Cayuga. Retrieved 2015. Available online at: http://pse5-esd5.ainc-inac.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/FNMain.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=249&lang=eng.

Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC). 2014m. First Nations Profile Oneida. Retrieved 2015. Available online at: http://pse5-esd5.ainc-inac.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/FNMain.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=246&lang=eng.

Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC). 2014n. First Nations Profile. Retrieved 2015. Available online at: http://pse5-esd5.ainc-inac.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/FNMain.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=50&lang=eng.

Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC). 2014o. First Nations Profile Lower Cayuga. Retrieved 2015. Available online at: http://pse5-esd5.ainc-inac.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/FNMain.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=250&lang=eng.

Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC). 2014p. First Nations Detail Mississaugas of the Credit. Retrieved 2015. Available online at: from: http://pse5-esd5.ainc-inac.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/FNMain.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=120&lang=eng

Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC). 2015a. Status Report on Specific Claims Six Nations. Retrieved 2015. Available online at: http://services.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/SCBRI_E/Main/ReportingCentre/PreviewReport.aspx?output=PDF.

Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC). 2015b. Status Report on Specific Claims. Retrieved 2015. Available online at: http://services.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/SCBRI_E/Main/ReportingCentre/PreviewReport.aspx?output=HTML.

AECOM. 2013. Toronto West Terminal Environmental Investigation/Reconnaissance Study. Prepared for Canadian National Railway Company.

AECOM. 2015. Milton Logistics Hub Stormwater Management Strategy. Prepared for the Canadian National Railway Company. June 2015.

Alberta Environment (AENV). 2001a. Alberta Soil and Water Quality Guidelines for Hydrocarbons at Upstream and Oil and Gas Facilities, Vol 1, 2 and 3.

360 File No. 160960844



Alberta Environment (AENV). 2001b. Risk Management Guidelines for Petroleum Storage Tank Sites.

Alberta Transportation. 2009. Fish Habitat Manual: Guidelines and Procedures for Watercourse Crossings in Alberta. Edmonton, Alberta.

AMEC. 2013a. Sixteen Mile Creek, Areas 2 and 7 Subwatershed Update Study (SUS) – Town of Milton, Final Draft (March 2013).

AMEC. 2013b. Milton Urban Expansion Conceptual Fisheries Compensation Plan, Boyne Survey Area “Milton Phase 3”, Final Draft (March 2013).

BA Consulting Group Ltd. (BA Group). 2015. Review of Terminal-Generated Truck Traffic. Memorandum prepared for the Canadian National Railway Company.

Baker and Richardson. 2006. The effect of artificial light on male breeding-season behavior in green frogs, Rana clamitans melanota. Canadian Journal of Zoology. 84: 1528-1532.

Barber J.R., Crooks C., and Fristrup K. 2010. The costs of chronic noise exposure for terrestrial organisms. Trends in Ecology and Evolution. 25:180–189.

Baxter, A. 2000. Use of distress calls to deter birds from landfill sites near airports. IBSC25/WP-AV9. International Bird Strike Committee. 401-409 pp.

Baxter, R.M. 1977. Environmental effects of ponds and impoundments. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics. 8: 255-283.

Boer, G.J. and S.J. Lambert. 2008. Multi-model decadal potential predictability of precipitation and temperature. Geophysical Research Letters. Volume 35, Issue 5. Published March 2008.

Bousfields Inc. (Bousfields). 2008. A Planning Rationale in Support of Development of a Direct Rail Serviced Industrial Park Canadian National Railways in Lots 1-5 Con 1 Town of Milton. Prepared for the Canadian National Railway Company.

Bousfields Inc. (Bousfields). 2015. Planning Justification Report regarding the Milton Logistics Hub proposed by the Canadian National Railway Co. Prepared for the Canadian National Railway Company.

British Columbia Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection (BCWLAP). 2004. Standards and Best Practices for Instream Works. Ecosystem Standards and Planning Biodiversity Branch. Victoria, B.C. Available online at: http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wld/documents/bmp/iswstdsdpsmarch2004.pdf.

File No. 160960844 361

http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wld/documents/bmp/iswstdsdpsmarch2004.pdf



Buchanan, B.W. 1993. Effects of enhanced lighting on the behaviour of nocturnal frogs. Animal Behavior. 45: 893-899.

C.D. Howe Institute. 2013. Cars Congestion and Costs: A New Approach to Evaluating Government Infrastructure Investment. Last accessed on November 12, 2015. Available online at: https://www.cdhowe.org/pdf/Commentary_385.pdf.

Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME). 2002. Canadian Water Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life. Dissolved Oxygen (Freshwater). Canadian Environmental Quality Guidelines. Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment.

Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA). 2008. Public Participation Guide: A Guide to Meaningful Public Participation in Environmental Assessments Under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act.

Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA). 2011. Operational Policy Statement: Follow-up Programs under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act.

Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA). 2013a. Operational Policy Statement: Addressing “Purpose of” and “Alternative Means” under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012.

Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA). 2013b. Practitioners Glossary for the Environmental Assessment of Designated Projects Under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012. Version 1.0 September 2013.

Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA). 2015a. Draft Guidelines for the Preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement pursuant to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 – Milton Logistics Hub Project, Canadian National Railway Company. May 2015.

Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA). 2015b. Guidelines for the Preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement pursuant to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 – Milton Logistics Hub Project, Canadian National Railway Company. July 2015.

Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA). 2015c. Guide to Preparing a Description of a Designated Project Under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012.

Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA). 2015d. Operational Policy Statement: Addressing “Purpose of” and “Alternative Means” Under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012.

362 File No. 160960844



Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA). 2015e. Operational Policy Statement: Assessing Cumulative Environmental Effects Under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012.

Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA). 2015f. Reference Guide Considering Aboriginal Traditional Knowledge in Environmental Assessments Conducted under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012.

Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA). 2015g. Practitioners Glossary for the Environmental Assessment of Designated Projects Under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012.

Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA). 2015h. Technical Guidance for Assessing Physical and Cultural Heritage or any Structure, Site or Thing that is of Historical, Archeological, Paleontological or Architectural Significance under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012.

Chapman, L. J. and D. F. Putnam. 1984. The Physiography of Southern Ontario. 3rd ed. Ontario Geological Survey Special Volume 2. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. Toronto, Ontario.

Cheng, C.S., H. Auld, G. Li, J. Klaassen, and Q. Li. 2007. Possible impacts of climate change on freezing rain in south-central Canada using downscaled future climate scenarios. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences 7, 71-87.

City of Toronto. 2007. Bird Friendly Development Guidelines. March 2007.

Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC). 2008. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Snapping Turtle Chelydra serpentina in Canada. Committee on the status of endangered wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. vii + 47 pp. Available at: www.sararegistry.gc.ca/status/status_e.cfm.

Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC). 2011. COSEWIC Assessment and Status Report on the Silver Shiner (Notropis photogenis) in Canada. Ottawa, Ontario. Last accessed on July, 2015. Available online at: http://www.registrelepsararegistry.gc.ca/virtual_sara/files/cosewic/sr_silver_shiner_0911_eng.pdf.

Committee on the Status of Species at Risk in Ontario (COSSARO). 2012. Silver Shiner (Notropis photogenis). Last accessed on July, 2015. Available online at: http://www.ontario.ca/environment-and-energy/silver-shiner.

Conservation Halton and Hamilton Conservation Authority. n.d. What You Should Know About On-line Ponds. Available online at:

File No. 160960844 363

http://www.sararegistry.gc.ca/status/status_e.cfm



https://www.conservationhamilton.ca/images/PDFs/Planning/Stewardship%20Resources/Pond_factsheet.pdf. Accessed: October 21, 2015.

Conservation Halton. 2002. Bronte Creek Watershed Study. Conservation Halton. 89 pp.

Conservation Halton. 2009. Bronte Creek and Supplemental Monitoring Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program.

Conservation Ontario. 2013. Conservation Ontario Homepage. Available online at: http://www.conservation-ontario.on.ca/. Accessed: December 2, 2015.

Corporation of the Town of Milton. 2008. Report to: Chair & Members of the Community Services Standing Committee on Proposed No Heavy Traffic Regulations. Last accessed July 22, 2015. Available online at: https://www.milton.ca/MeetingDocuments/Council/agendas2008/rpts2008/ENG-008-08%20Heavy%20Truck%20Prohibitions.pdf.

Crispino, M. and M. D’Apuzzo. 2001. Measurement and Prediction of Traffic-induced Vibrations in a Heritage Building. Journal of Sound and Vibration 246(2): 319-335.

Cushman & Wakefield. 2014. Economic and Financial Impact of an Intermodal Terminal in Milton. Prepared for Canadian National Railway Company. 101pp.

Cushman & Wakefield. 2015. Land Availability Review for Satellite Intermodal Terminal Facility. Prepared for the Canadian National Railway Company.

Dafour, P. A. 1980. Effects of noise on wildlife and other animals. Review of research since 1971. EPA 550/9.80.100. U.S. Environmental Protection.

Dillon Consulting Limited in Association with GHD Inc. and Aecom. 2011a. The Road to Change; Halton Region Transportation Master Plan 2031. Produced for Halton Region. Accessed July 6, 2015. Available online at: http://www.halton.ca/common/pages/UserFile.aspx?fileId=68566.

Dillon Consulting Limited in Association with GHD Inc. and Aecom. 2011b. The Road to Change: Halton Region Transportation Master Plan 2031 – Appendix F4: Goods Movement. Prepared for Halton Region. Last accessed July 22, 2015. Available online at: http://www.halton.ca/common/pages/UserFile.aspx?fileId=68540.

Dillon Consulting Limited in Association with GHD Inc. and Aecom. 2011c. The Road to Change: Halton Region Transportation Master Plan 2031 – Appendix F5: Level of Service. Prepared for Halton Region. Last accessed July 6, 2015. Available online at: http://www.halton.ca/common/pages/UserFile.aspx?fileId=68542.

364 File No. 160960844

https://www.conservationhamilton.ca/images/PDFs/Planning/Stewardship%20Resources/Pond_factsheet.pdf

https://www.conservationhamilton.ca/images/PDFs/Planning/Stewardship%20Resources/Pond_factsheet.pdf

https://www.milton.ca/MeetingDocuments/Council/agendas2008/rpts2008/ENG-008-08%20Heavy%20Truck%20Prohibitions.pdf

https://www.milton.ca/MeetingDocuments/Council/agendas2008/rpts2008/ENG-008-08%20Heavy%20Truck%20Prohibitions.pdf

http://www.halton.ca/common/pages/UserFile.aspx?fileId=68566




Ellis, P. 1987. Effects of Traffic Vibration on Historic Buildings. The Science of the Total Environment. 59: 37-45.

Environment Canada. 1981-2010 Climate Normals. Available at: http://climate.weather.gc.ca/climate_normals/index_e.html.

Environment Canada. 2014. Recovery Strategy for the Western Chorus Frog (Pseudacris triseriata), Great Lakes / St. Lawrence – Canadian Shield Population, in Canada [Proposed], Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Series, Environment Canada, Ottawa, v + 46 pp.

Escarpment Country™ and the Milton Chamber of Commerce. 2015. Explore Escarpment Country Milton and Area 2015-2016 Visitor’s Guide. Last accessed July 26, 2015. Available online at: http://issuu.com/miltonchamber.

Evans Ogden, L. J. 1996. Collision course: the hazards of lighted structures and windows to migrating birds. 46 pp.

Facility for Intelligent Decision Support. 2014. Computerized Tool for the Development of Intensity-Duration-Frequency-Curves under Climate Change. Last accessed December 4, 2015. Available online at: http://www.eng.uwo.ca/research/iclr/fids/CWNP-idf.html.

Federal Environmental Assessment Review Office. 1994. A Reference Guide for the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act: Determining whether a Project is Likely to Cause Significant Environmental Effects. Federal Environmental Assessment Review Office, Quebec.

Federal-Provincial-Territorial Committee on Climate Change and Environmental Assessment. 2003. Incorporating Climate Change Considerations in Environmental Assessment: General Guidance for Practitioners.

Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO). 1995. Freshwater Intake End-of-Pipe Guideline. Communications Directorate, Fisheries and Oceans Canada. 28pp.

Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO). 2013a. Fisheries Protection Policy Statement. Available at: http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/pnw-ppe/pol/index-eng.html. Accessed: October 21, 2015.

Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO). 2013b. Measures to Avoid Causing Harm to Fish and Fish Habitat. Available online at: http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/pnw-ppe/measures-mesures/index-eng.html. Accessed: October 21, 2015.

Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO). 2013c. Fish Habitat and the Effects of Silt and Sediment. Available at: http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/regions/central/pub/factsheets-feuilletsinfos-on/t1-eng.htm. Accessed: October 21, 2015.

File No. 160960844 365

http://climate.weather.gc.ca/climate_normals/index_e.html

http://issuu.com/miltonchamber

http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/pnw-ppe/pol/index-eng.html

http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/pnw-ppe/measures-mesures/index-eng.html

http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/pnw-ppe/measures-mesures/index-eng.html



Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO). 2015. Aquatic Species at Risk Digital Mapping. Distributed by Conservation Ontario. Last accessed August 2015.

FitzGibbon, M. 2009. The Mississaugas Part 1: Treaties. Retrieved 2015, from Heritage Mississauga: http://www.heritagemississauga.com/page/Mississaugas-Part-1.

Gauthreaux, S. A., and C. G. Belser. 2006. Effects of artificial night lighting on migrating birds. Pages 67–93 in C. Rich and T. Longcore, editors. Ecological consequences of artificial night lighting. Island Press, Washington, D.C., USA.

Government of Canada. 2015. Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 (S.C. 2012, c.19, s52). Last accessed December 3, 2015. Available online at: http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-15.21/index.html.

Government of Ontario. 2006. InfoSheet #5 in Heritage Resources in the Land Use Planning Process, Cultural Heritage and Archaeology Policies of the Ontario Provincial Policy Statement, 2005. Ministry of Tourism, Culture, and Sport (formerly Ministry of Tourism and Culture). Queen’s Printer for Ontario, Toronto, Ontario.

Government of Ontario. 2011. Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists. Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport, Toronto.

Government of Ontario. 2015. 2015 Fishing Ontario Recreational Fishing Regulations Summary. Last accessed July 27, 2015. Available online at: https://dr6j45jk9xcmk.cloudfront.net/documents/4642/mnr-fishing-eng-rev-tagged-working-2.pdf.

Hagedorn, R.,Doblas-Reyes,F.J.,Palmer, T.N. 2005. The rationale behind the success of multi-model ensembles in seasonal forecasting–I. Basic concept. TellusA57, 219–233. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0870.2005.00103.x.

Halton Region. 2014a. Regional Official Plan (ROP) Documents. Last accessed July 8, 2015. Available online at: http://www.halton.ca/cms/One.aspx?portalId=8310&pageId=115808.

Halton Region. 2014b. Transportation Services 2013 Progress Report. Last accessed October 8, 2015. Available online at: http://sirepub.halton.ca/cache/2/hlws1upc2qluydvjdpevb3cc/17651310082015093244844.PDF.

Halton Region. 2015a. 2014 Employment Survey Results. Last accessed October 6, 2015 at: http://sirepub.halton.ca/councildocs/pm/17/Apr%2022%202015%20Planning%20and%20Public%20Works%20LPS4715%20%202014%20Employment%20Survey%20ResultsRefer%20to%20%202014%20Employment%20Results%20ReportApril%209pdf%20183171.pdf.

366 File No. 160960844

http://www.heritagemississauga.com/page/Mississaugas-Part-1

https://dr6j45jk9xcmk.cloudfront.net/documents/4642/mnr-fishing-eng-rev-tagged-working-2.pdf

https://dr6j45jk9xcmk.cloudfront.net/documents/4642/mnr-fishing-eng-rev-tagged-working-2.pdf



Halton Region. 2015b. Economic Review 2014. Last accessed July 8, 2015. Available online at: http://www.halton.ca/common/pages/UserFile.aspx?fileId=130497.

Halton Region. n.d. a. Paramedic Services. Last accessed July 9, 2015. Available online at: http://www.halton.ca/cms/One.aspx?portalId=8310&pageId=12557.

Halton Region. n.d. b. Regional Road Improvement Program. Last accessed November 20, 2015. Available online at: http://www.halton.ca/cms/One.aspx?portalId=8310&pageId=109886.

Hastings, M.C. and Popper, A.N. 2005. Effects of Sound on Fish. California Department of Transportation Contract 43A0139, Task Order 1. Available online: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/env/bio/files/Effects_of_Sound_on_Fish23Aug05.pdf. Accessed: December 3, 2015.

Health Canada. 2010. Federal Contaminated Sites Risk Assessment in Canada, Part II: Health Canada Toxicological Reference Values (TRVs) and Chemical-Specific Factors Version 2.0.

Health Canada. 2012. Federal Contaminated Site Risk Assessment in Canada Part I: Guidance on Human Health Preliminary Quantitative Risk Assessment (PQRA), Version 2.0.

Hemson Consulting Ltd. 2012. Greater Golden Horseshoe Growth Forecasts to 2041. Last accessed July 22, 2015. Available online at: http://www.hemson.com/downloads/HEMSON%20-%20Greater%20Golden%20Horseshoe%20-%20Growth%20Forecasts%20to%202041%20-%20Technical%20Report%20Addendum%20and%20Rev.%20Appendix%20B%20-%20Jun2013.pdf.

Hemson Consulting Ltd. 2013. Greater Golden Horseshoe Growth Forecasts to 2041: Technical Report (November 2012). Last accessed October 6, 2015 at: http://www.hemson.com/downloads/HEMSON%20-%20Greater%20Golden%20Horseshoe%20-%20Growth%20Forecasts%20to%202041%20-%20Technical%20Report%20Addendum%20and%20Rev.%20Appendix%20B%20-%20Jun2013.pdf.

Holm, E, N.E. Mandrak and M.E. Burridge. 2009. The Royal Ontario Museum Field Guide to Freshwater Fishes of Ontario. Royal Ontario Museum. Toronto, Ontario.

Huron Wendat Nation. (n.d.) The History of the Huron-Wendat Nation. Available online at: http://www.wendake.com/history.html.

File No. 160960844 367


http://www.halton.ca/cms/One.aspx?portalId=8310&pageId=109886

http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/env/bio/files/Effects_of_Sound_on_Fish23Aug05.pdf

http://www.wendake.com/history.html



Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC). 2015a. Aboriginal peoples and communities. Last accessed on November 21, 2015. Available online at http://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/eng/1100100013785/1304467449155.

Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC). 2015b. First Nations. Last accessed on November 21, 2015. Available online at http://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/eng/1100100013791/1100100013795.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2007. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Summary for Policymakers. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

International Association for Impact Assessment (IAIA). 1999. Principles of Environmental Impact Assessment Best Practice. IAIA International Headquarters. Fargo.

Konrad, S. 2015. Wendake. Progress Report - July 2015. Retrieved 2015. Available online at: http://www.wendake.ca/docs/page-interne/progress-report-from-grand-chief-konrad-sioui-july-2015.pdf?sfvrsn=0.

Lee, H.T., W.D., Bakowsky, J. Riley, Bowles, M. Puddister, P. Uhig, and S. McMurray. 1998. Ecological Land Classification for Southern Ontario: First Approximation and its Application. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Southcentral Science Section, Science Development and Transfer Branch. SCSS Field Guide FG-02.

Lessard, J.L. and Hayes, D.B. 2003. Effects of Elevated Water Temperature on Fish and Macroinvertebrate Communities Below Small Dams. River Research and Applications. 19(7): 721-732.

Machtans, C. S., C. H. R. Wedeles, and E. M. Bayne. 2013. A first estimate for Canada of the number of birds killed by colliding with building windows. Avian Conservation and Ecology 8(2): 6. http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ACE-00568-080206.

Maxted, J.R., McCready, C.H., and Scarsbrook, M.R. 2005. Effects of small ponds on stream water quality and macroinvertebrate communities. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research. 39 (5): 1069-1084.

McCabe, G.J. and S.L. Markstrom. 2007. A monthly water-balance model driven by a graphical user interface. US Department of the Interior. US Geological Survey. 6 pp.

Métis National Council. 2011. Métis Harvester’s Guide 2011. Last accessed December 4, 2015. Available online at http://www.metisnation.ca/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Harverster_Guide_2011_final2.pdf.

368 File No. 160960844

http://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/eng/1100100013791/1100100013795

http://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/eng/1100100013791/1100100013795

http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ACE-00568-080206



Metropolitan Knowledge International. 2008. Study of the Competitiveness of Halton Region for Non-Residential, Non-Retail Development. Prepared for Halton Region. Last accessed October 7, 2015 at: https://www.halton.ca/common/pages/UserFile.aspx?fileId=19172.

Ministry of Finance. 2015. 2015 Ontario Budget: Budget Speech. Last accessed on November 12, 2015. Available online at: http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/budget/ontariobudgets/2015/statement.html.

Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH). 1978. Parkway Belt West Plan 1978 Consolidated to June 2008. Available online at http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/Page5672.aspx.

Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH). 2014. Provincial Policy Statement. Available at: http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/AssetFactory.aspx?did=10463.

Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR). 2005. Natural Heritage Reference Manual for Natural Heritage Policies of the Provincial Policy Statement, 2005. Second Edition.

Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR). 2007. Climate Change Projections for Ontario: Practical Information for Policymakers and Planners. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources.

Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR). 2013. In-water Work Timing Window Guidelines. Available at: www.mnr.go.on.ca/en/business/ letsfish/2columnsubpage/stdprod_100702.html. Accessed: October 21, 2015.

Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF). 2015a. Land Information Ontario (LIO) mapping. Available online at: http://www.lio.ontario.ca/imf-ows/imf.jsp?site=aia_en#.

Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF). 2015b. Natural Heritage Information Centre (NHIC) database. Peterborough, Ontario. Last accessed on June, 2015. Available online at: http://nhic.mnr.gov.on.ca/.

Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF). 2015c. Species at Risk in Ontario (SARO) List. http://www.ontario.ca/environment-and-energy/species-risk-ontario-list.

Ministry of the Environment (MOE). 2003. Stormwater Management Planning and Design Manual. Queen’s Printer for Ontario. Ontario, Canada.National Energy Board (NEB). 2014. National Energy Board Filing Manual. Available online at: http://www.neb-one.gc.ca/clf-nsi/rpblctn/ctsndrgltn/flngmnl/flngmnl-eng.html.

Ministry of the Environment (MOE). 2011a. Ontario Air Standards for benzene. Standards Development Branch. Ontario Ministry of the Environment.

File No. 160960844 369

http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/budget/ontariobudgets/2015/statement.html

http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/AssetFactory.aspx?did=10463

http://www.mnr.go.on.ca/en/business/letsfish/2columnsubpage/stdprod_100702.html

http://www.mnr.go.on.ca/en/business/letsfish/2columnsubpage/stdprod_100702.html

http://www.ontario.ca/environment-and-energy/species-risk-ontario-list

http://www.neb-one.gc.ca/clf-nsi/rpblctn/ctsndrgltn/flngmnl/flngmnl-eng.html

http://www.neb-one.gc.ca/clf-nsi/rpblctn/ctsndrgltn/flngmnl/flngmnl-eng.html



Ministry of the Environment (MOE). 2011b. Ontario Air Standards for benzo(a)pyrene as a Surrogate for Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons. Standards Development Branch. Ontario Ministry of the Environment.

Ministry of Transportation of Ontario (MTO). 2009. Environmental Guide for Fish and Fish Habitat.

Mississauga’s of the New Credit First Nation (MNCFN). (n.d. a). The History of the Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nation.

Mississauga’s of the New Credit First Nation (MNCFN). (n.d. b). Toronto Purchase Specific Claim: Arriving at an Agreement.

National Energy Board (NEB). 2014. National Energy Board Filing Manual, 2014-01 (2014). Available at: http://www.neb-one.gc.ca/clf-nsi/rpblctn/ctsndrgltn/flngmnl/flngmnl-eng.html.

Natural Resources Canada. 2015. Earthquakes Canada. Last accessed December 3, 2015. Available online at: http://www.earthquakescanada.nrcan.gc.ca/index-eng.php.

New Brunswick Department of the Environment and Local Government (NBDELG). 2012. Watercourse and Wetland Alteration Package. Department of the Environment and Local Government, New Brunswick.

Newcombe, C.P. and J.O.T. Jensen. 1996. Channel suspended sediment and fisheries: a synthesis for quantitative assessment of risk. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 16: 693–727.

Natural Resources Canada. 2013. Earthquake zones in Eastern Canada. Last accessed December 4, 2015. Available online at: https://docs.neb-one.gc.ca/ll-eng/llisapi.dll/fetch/2000/90464/90552/92263/790736/890819/956564/956770/980448/C55-2-2_-_AttachmentA_-_A3J7D2.pdf?nodeid=980640&vernum=-2.

Ontario Agricultural Commission. 1881. Appendix B. Vol. II. C. Blackett Robinson, Toronto, Ontario.

Paulson, A., S. Zhong, and J. Wahr. 2007. Inference of mantle viscosity from GRACE and relative sea level data, Geophys. J. Int., 171, doi:10.1111/j.1365-246X.2007.03556.x.

Philips Engineering Ltd. (Phillips). 2004. Technical Appendix Watercourse Systems Indian Creek / Sixteen Mile Creek Sherwood Survey Subwatershed Planning Study. Town of Milton, Ontario.

Poot, H., B. J. Ens, H. de Vries, M. A. H. Donners, M. R. Wernand, and J. M. Marquenie. 2008. Green light for nocturnally migrating birds. Ecology and Society 13(2): 47. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety. org/vol13/iss2/art47/.

370 File No. 160960844

http://www.ecologyandsociety/



Popper, A.N. and Hastings, M.C. 2009. The effects of human-generated sound on fish. Integrative Zoology 4: 43-52.

Rainer, J.H. 1982. Effect of Vibrations on Historic Buildings. The Association for Preservation Technology Bulletin. 14 (1): 2-10.

Reid, S.M. and P.G. Anderson. 2002. Evaluation of Isolated Watercourse Crossings during Winter Construction along the Alliance Pipeline in Northern Alberta. 7th International Symposium on Concerns in Right-of-Way Management. Calgary, Alberta. Elsevier Science. pp. 735–742.

Reijnen, R., R. Foppen, and H. Meeuwsen. 1996. The effects of traffic on the density of breeding birds in dutch agricultural grasslands. Biological Conservation 75:255–260.

Scott, W.B. and E.J. Crossman. 1998. Freshwater Fishes of Canada. Galt House Publications Ltd. Oakville, Ontario.

Six Nations Land and Resources. 2008. List of Treaties. Retrieved 2015. Available online at: http://www.sixnations.ca/LandsResources/TreatyList.pdf

Slabbekoorn, H., and M. Peet. 2003. Birds sing at a higher pitch in urban noise. Nature 424: 267.

Smith, M.E., Kane, A.S., Popper, A.N. 2004. Noise-induced stress response and hearing loss in goldfish (Carassius auratus). The Journal of Experimental Biology 207:427-435.

Stanfield, L., L. Del Giudice, E. Bearss and D. Morodvanschi. 2013. Ontario Stream Assessment Protocol Section 3: Fish Community Sampling.

Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec). 2015a. Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency - Project Description Milton Logistics Hub. Prepared for the Canadian National Railway Company. March 31, 2015.

Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec). 2015b. Canadian Envrionmental Assessment Agency – Project Description Summary Milton Logistics Hub. Prepared for the Canadian National Railway Company. April 1, 2015.

Statistics Canada. 2007a. Milton, Ontario (Code3524009) (table). 2006 Community Profiles. 2006 Census. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 92-591-XWE. Ottawa. Released March 13, 2007. Last accessed November 20, 2015. Available online at: http://www12.statcan.ca/census-recensement/2006/dp-pd/prof/92-591/index.cfm?Lang=E.

Statistics Canada. 2007b. Halton, Ontario (Code3524) (table). 2006 Community Profiles. 2006 Census. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 92-591-XWE. Ottawa. Released March 13, 2007.

File No. 160960844 371

http://www.sixnations.ca/LandsResources/TreatyList.pdf

http://www12.statcan.ca/census-recensement/2006/dp-pd/prof/92-591/index.cfm?Lang=E

http://www12.statcan.ca/census-recensement/2006/dp-pd/prof/92-591/index.cfm?Lang=E



Last accessed November 20, 2015. Available online at: http://www12.statcan.ca/census-recensement/2006/dp-pd/prof/92-591/index.cfm?Lang=E.

Steidl, R. J., and R. G. Anthony. 2000. Experimental effects of human activity on breeding bald eagles. Ecological Applications 10 (1): 258-268.

Strategic Projections Inc. 2013. The Need for an Intermodal Facility on CN’s Lands in Milton. Prepared for the Canadian National Railway Company. September 2013.

Tempel, D. J., and R. J. Gutierrez. 2003. Fecal corticosterone levels in California spotted owls exposed to low-intensity chainsaw sound. Wildlife Society Bulletin 31: 698-702.

Toronto 2015 Pan Am/Parapan Am Games. 2015. Largest Ever Parapan Am Games Make History. Last accessed November 13, 2015. Available online at: www.toronto2015.org/new-details/largest-ever-parapan-am-games-make-hisotry/7621.

Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA). 2004. Belt Width Delineation Procedures. Report to TRCA by Parish Geomorphic. 90 pp.

Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA). 2010. Etobicoke and Mimico Creeks Watersheds Technical Update Report: Aquatic Systems – Instream Barriers to Fish Passage. Available online at: http://www.trca.on.ca/protect/watersheds/etobicoke-mimico-creek/emwtu2011/09-AquaticSystem.pdf. Accessed: October 21, 2015.

Town of Milton. 2008. Town of Milton Official Plan (Consolidated August, 2008). Last accessed on June 25, 2015. Available online at: https://www.milton.ca/en/build/officialplan.asp.

Town of Milton. n.d. Boyne Survey Secondary Plan. Last accessed July 8, 2015. Available online at: https://www.milton.ca/en/townhall/boynesurvey.asp.

Twomy, K.A., Williamson, K.L., and Nelson, P.C. 1984. Habitat Suitability Index Models and Instream Flow Suitability Curves: White Sucker. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/10.64. 56pp.

Vargas-Salinas F., G. Cunnington, A. Amezquita, L. Fahrig. 2014. Does traffic noise alter calling time in frogs and toads? A case study of anurans in Eastern Ontario, Canada. Urban Ecosystems. 17: 945-953.

Voellmy, I.K., Purser, J., Simpson, S.D. and Radford, A.N. 2014. Increased Noise Levels Have Different Impacts on the Anti-Predator Behaviour of Two Sympatric Fish Species. PLoS ONE 9(7): e102946. Doi10.1371/journal.pone.0102946.

White, C. M., and T. L. Thurow. 1985. Reproduction of ferruginous hawks exposed to controlled disturbance. The Condor 87 (1): 14-22.

372 File No. 160960844

http://www.toronto2015.org/new-details/largest-ever-parapan-am-games-make-hisotry/7621

http://www.toronto2015.org/new-details/largest-ever-parapan-am-games-make-hisotry/7621

http://www.trca.on.ca/protect/watersheds/etobicoke-mimico-creek/emwtu2011/09-AquaticSystem.pdf

http://www.trca.on.ca/protect/watersheds/etobicoke-mimico-creek/emwtu2011/09-AquaticSystem.pdf

https://www.milton.ca/en/build/officialplan.asp

https://www.milton.ca/en/townhall/boynesurvey.asp



Wiss, J.F. 1981. Construction Vibrations; State-of-the-Art. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering Division. 107: 167-181.

File No. 160960844 373

Date post:	10-Jun-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times