scotian basin exploration drilling project – project ... · pdf filescotian basin...

Scotian Basin Exploration Drilling Project – Project Description

Prepared by:

BP Canada Energy Group ULC

and Stantec Consulting Ltd.

August, 2015

SCOTIAN BASIN EXPLORATION DRILLING PROJECT – PROJECT DESCRIPTION

File: 121413516 i

Table of Contents ABBREVIATIONS ......................................................................................................................... IV

1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 1.1 1.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES ................................................................. 1.1 1.2 PROPONENT INFORMATION ............................................................................................ 1.3

1.2.1 BP Code of Conduct ..................................................................................... 1.3 1.2.2 Proponent Contacts ...................................................................................... 1.4

1.3 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK ............................................................................................ 1.5 1.4 FEDERAL INVOLVEMENT ................................................................................................... 1.7

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................. 2.1 2.1 PROJECT LOCATION ........................................................................................................ 2.1 2.2 PROJECT COMPONENTS AND ACTIVITIES ..................................................................... 2.2

2.2.1 Drilling ............................................................................................................... 2.2 2.2.2 Vertical Seismic Profiling ............................................................................... 2.4 2.2.3 Well Flow Testing ............................................................................................ 2.5 2.2.4 Well Abandonment ....................................................................................... 2.5 2.2.5 Supply and Servicing ..................................................................................... 2.6

2.3 EMISSIONS, DISCHARGES AND WASTE MANAGEMENT ............................................. 2.15 2.3.1 Atmospheric Emissions ................................................................................ 2.15 2.3.2 Underwater Sound ....................................................................................... 2.16 2.3.3 Drilling Waste ................................................................................................ 2.16 2.3.4 Liquid Discharges ......................................................................................... 2.17 2.3.5 Hazardous and Non-Hazardous Solid Wastes ......................................... 2.17

2.4 PROJECT SCHEDULE ....................................................................................................... 2.18 2.5 ACCIDENTAL EVENTS AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE ................................................. 2.19

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ........................................................................................... 3.1 3.1 SUPPLY BASE AREAS .......................................................................................................... 3.1

3.1.1 Halifax Harbour ............................................................................................... 3.1 3.1.2 Strait of Canso ................................................................................................ 3.4

3.2 OFFSHORE PROJECT AREA .............................................................................................. 3.7 3.2.1 Previous Studies .............................................................................................. 3.7 3.2.2 Biophysical Setting ......................................................................................... 3.9 3.2.3 Socio-economic Setting ............................................................................. 3.18

4.0 CONSULTATION AND ENGAGEMENT .......................................................................... 4.1 4.1 ABORIGINAL ENGAGEMENT ........................................................................................... 4.1 4.2 STAKEHOLDER AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT ....................................................... 4.5

5.0 POTENTIAL PROJECT-RELATED CHANGES TO THE ENVIRONMENT AND SCOPING CONSIDERATIONS ....................................................................................... 5.1

5.1 POTENTIAL PROJECT-RELATED CHANGES TO THE ENVIRONMENT ............................. 5.1 5.1.1 Planned Activities Offshore .......................................................................... 5.1 5.1.2 Planned Activities Onshore .......................................................................... 5.5


File: 121413516 ii

5.1.3 Unplanned Events Offshore ......................................................................... 5.9 5.1.4 Unplanned Events Onshore ....................................................................... 5.13

5.2 SCOPING CONSIDERATIONS ......................................................................................... 5.16

6.0 REFERENCES................................................................................................................... 6.1

LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1 Project Area Coordinates ............................................................................ 2.1 Table 2.2 Supply Base Locations .................................................................................. 2.6 Table 2.3 Operational Requirements for the Supply Base ..................................... 2.13 Table 3.1 Species of Conservation Interest with Potential to Occur in and

around the Project Area ............................................................................. 3.12 Table 3.2 Designated Special Areas within 150 km Radius of the Project

Area ................................................................................................................ 3.17 Table 4.1 First Nations of Nova Scotia .......................................................................... 4.2 Table 4.2 Summary of Aboriginal Engagement Conducted for the Project

(as of May 31, 2015) ..................................................................................... 4.3 Table 4.3 Summary of Stakeholder Engagement Conducted for the

Project (as of May 31, 2015) ........................................................................ 4.7 Table 5.1 Potential Environmental Interactions with Routine Project

Activities .......................................................................................................... 5.2 Table 5.2 Potential Environmental Interactions with Supply Base Activities

in Support of the Project ............................................................................... 5.6 Table 5.3 Potential Environmental Interactions with Accidents and

Malfunctions during Project Activities ...................................................... 5.10 Table 5.4 Potential Environmental Interactions with Accidents and

Malfunctions during Supply Base Activities in Support of the Project ............................................................................................................ 5.14

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.1 Project Location ............................................................................................. 1.2 Figure 2.1 Schematic of Semi-submersible and Drillship ........................................... 2.2 Figure 2.2 Initial Drilling Sequence ................................................................................. 2.4 Figure 2.3 Supply Base Location Options ..................................................................... 2.7 Figure 2.4 Proposed Supply Base Location within the Mulgrave Marine

Terminal ........................................................................................................... 2.8 Figure 2.5 Aerial View of the Mulgrave Marine Terminal ........................................... 2.9 Figure 2.6 Liquid Mud Plant within the Mulgrave Marine Terminal .......................... 2.9 Figure 2.7 (a) Proposed Quayside Location within Woodside Terminal; (b)

Proposed Laydown Area within Woodside Terminal ............................. 2.10 Figure 2.8 Schematic of Liquid Mud Plant within the Woodside Terminal ........... 2.11 Figure 2.9 Proposed Supply Base Location within Richmond Terminals ............... 2.12 Figure 2.10 Aerial Photo of Richmond Terminals ......................................................... 2.12 Figure 2.11 Preliminary Project Schedule ..................................................................... 2.19 Figure 3.1 Environmentally Sensitive Areas in the Vicinity of Halifax Harbour ........ 3.3


File: 121413516 iii

Figure 3.2 Environmentally Sensitive Areas in the Vicinity of the Strait of Canso ............................................................................................................... 3.5

Figure 3.3 Study Areas of Previous Studies Conducted in the Vicinity of the Project Area .................................................................................................... 3.8

Figure 3.4 Available Benthic Habitat Characterization Data in the Vicinity ofthe Project Area ....................................................................................... 3.10

Figure 3.5 Special Areas ................................................................................................ 3.16 Figure 3.6 NAFO Unit Areas ........................................................................................... 3.19 Figure 3.7 Other Fisheries Management Areas ......................................................... 3.20 Figure 3.8 Other Past and Present Petroleum Industry Activity .............................. 3.21 Figure 3.9 Identified Shipwrecks in the Vicinity of the Project Area ...................... 3.23 Figure 4.1 Cyclical Consultation and Engagement Process .................................... 4.1

LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Concordance Table


File: 121413516 iv

Abbreviations

ADW Approval to Drill a Well BOP blowout preventer BP BP Canada Energy Group ULC C-NLOPB Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board CNSOPB Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board CEAA, 2012 Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 CEPA Canadian Environmental Protection Act CO2 carbon dioxide COSEWIC CRA

Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada commercial, recreational, and Aboriginal

DGPS differential global positioning systems DP dynamic positioning EBSAs Ecologically and Biologically Significant Areas EA environmental assessment EIS environmental impact statement EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone ELs Exploration Licences DFO Fisheries and Oceans Canada FAC Fisheries Advisory Committee FSC food, social and ceremonial HSSE health, safety, security and environment ha hectares MARPOL International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships km kilometres KMKNO LFA

Kwilmu’kw Maw-klusuaqn Negotiation Office Lobster Fishing Area

MGO marine gas oil MPA Marine Protected Area MARLANT Maritime Forces Atlantic m metres NEB National Energy Board NCNS Native Council of Nova Scotia NOx nitrogen oxides NGOs non-governmental organizations NAFO Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization


File: 121413516 v

OCTG oil country tubular goods OSVs offshore support vessels OWTG Offshore Waste Treatment Guidelines OSCP Oil Spill Contingency Plan OA Operations Authorization P&A plugged and abandoned ROV remotely operated vehicle SARA Species at Risk Act SEA strategic environmental assessment SO2 sulphur dioxide SBM synthetic-based mud TUS traditional use study VSP vertical seismic profiling WBM water-based mud


Introduction August 2015

File: 121413516 1.1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

BP Canada Energy Group ULC (BP Canada Energy Group ULC and/or any of its affiliates are hereafter generally referred to as “BP”) is proposing to conduct an exploration drilling program on Exploration Licences (ELs) 2431, 2432, 2433, and 2434. The Scotian Basin Exploration Drilling Project (the “Project”) may involve drilling up to seven exploration wells over the term of the ELs. The number of wells will be contingent on drilling results of an initial well proposed to be drilled in 2017 pending regulatory approval. The initial well location is not currently known and will be based on an analysis of seismic data gathered during BP’s 3D seismic exploration program conducted in 2014. The scope of the Project for the purpose of environmental assessment is assumed to be a multi-well program subject to the results of the first well.

Offshore exploration drilling is a designated activity under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 (CEAA, 2012). This document is a Project Description which is required to initiate the environmental assessment (EA) process under CEAA, 2012 to determine specific EA requirements and assist regulatory agencies, Aboriginal organizations and stakeholders in identifying potential interests in the Project which may require specific consideration during Project planning and the EA review process.

1.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

On January 15, 2013, BP was awarded exploration rights to EL 2431, 2432, 2433 and 2434 from the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board (CNSOPB) with a work expenditure bid of approximately $1.05 billion. These licences cover an area of approximately 1,398,180 hectares (ha) and are located approximately 230 to 370 kilometres (km) south-east of Halifax (Figure 1.1) (the “Project Area”).

In 2014, following an environmental assessment and authorization process under the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation (Nova Scotia) Act, BP carried out a 3D Wide Azimuth seismic survey known as the Tangier 3D Seismic Survey. The 3D seismic data acquisition was completed in September 2014 and is being analyzed to identify potential drilling targets.

Exploration drilling is required to determine the presence, nature and quantities of the potential hydrocarbon resource and to help BP fulfill its work expenditure commitments that must be met over the term of the licence period.



File: 121413516 1.2

Figure 1.1 Project Location



File: 121413516 1.3

1.2 PROPONENT INFORMATION

BP is one of the world's leading international oil and gas companies, operating in almost 80 countries around the world with well-established operations in Europe, North and South America, Australasia, Asia and Africa.

BP has decades of experience managing the extraction of oil and natural gas in all types of environments around the world, both onshore and offshore. BP in Canada focuses on developing energy from Canada’s oil sands, home to the third-largest crude reserves in the world and is also pursuing offshore opportunities in the Nova Scotia offshore and the Arctic’s Beaufort Sea.

BP holds a 40% interest in the Nova Scotia Offshore ELs and will operate the exploration program. Partners Hess Canada Oil and Gas ULC and Woodside Energy International (Canada) Limited hold a 40% and 20% interest, respectively.

1.2.1 BP Code of Conduct

BP is dedicated to maintaining values of Safety, Respect, Excellence, Courage and One Team, upholding these values both internally, and externally in the areas it operates. BP’s health, safety, security and environment (HSSE) goals are: no accidents, no harm to people and no damage to the environment. Everyone who works for BP is responsible for ensuring his or her safety and the safety of colleagues, partners, suppliers and local communities.

The BP Code of Conduct applies to all BP employees, officers and members of the Board and BP expects and encourages all contractors and their employees to act in a way that is consistent with the BP Code of Conduct.



File: 121413516 1.4

Our values and behaviours are the foundation of our Code. What we value

Safety

Safety is good business. Everything we do relies upon the safety of our workforce and the communities around us. We care about the safe management of the environment. We are committed to safely delivering energy to the world.

Respect

We respect the world in which we operate. It begins with compliance with laws and regulations. We hold ourselves to the highest ethical standards and behave in ways that earn the trust of others. We depend on the relationships we have and respect each other and those we work with. We value diversity of people and thought. We care about the consequences of our decisions, large and small, on those around us.

Excellence

We are in a hazardous business and are committed to excellence through the systematic and disciplined management of our operations. We follow and uphold the rules and standards we set for our company. We commit to quality outcomes, have a thirst to learn and to improve. If something is not right, we correct it.

Courage

What we do is rarely easy. Achieving the best outcomes often requires the courage to face difficulty, to speak up and stand by what we believe. We always strive to do the right thing. We explore new ways of thinking and are unafraid to ask for help. We are honest with ourselves and actively seek feedback from others. We aim for an enduring legacy, despite the short-term priorities of our world.

One Team

Whatever the strength of the individual, we will accomplish more together. We put the team ahead of our personal success and commit to building its capability. We trust each other to deliver on our respective obligations.

1.2.2 Proponent Contacts

BP has established an office in Halifax, Nova Scotia to oversee the Project. Technical resources will also be drawn from BP’s Canadian headquarters in Calgary, Alberta and BP’s global operations in the United Kingdom and Houston, Texas.

All communications regarding the EA for the Project should be directed to the following contacts.



File: 121413516 1.5

Primary Contact:

Anita Perry Regional Manager, Nova Scotia VP, Comms & External Affairs Canada Tel: (902) 420-2338 [email protected]

BP Canada Energy Group ULC Suite 505, CIBC Building 1809 Barrington Street Halifax, NS B3J 3K8 Canada

Additional Contacts:

Rob O’Connor Canada Exploration Manager Tel: (281) 366-8663 [email protected]

BP America 200 Westlake Park Boulevard Houston, Texas 77079 United States

Paul Sutherland Environment Manager, Exploration & New Ventures Upstream HSE Tel: +44 (0) 2034 015 036 [email protected]

BP Exploration Operating Company Limited Chertsey Road, Sunbury on Thames Middlesex, TW16 7BP United Kingdom

1.3 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK

Petroleum activities in the Nova Scotia offshore environment are regulated by the CNSOPB, a joint federal-provincial agency reporting to the federal Minister of Natural Resources Canada and the provincial Minister of Energy. In 1986, the Government of Canada and the Province of Nova Scotia signed the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resource Accord to promote social and economic benefits associated with petroleum exploitation. The federal and provincial governments established mirror legislation to implement the Accord. The Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation (Nova Scotia) Act are collectively referred to as the Accord Acts. Under the Accord Acts, the CNSOPB issues licences for offshore exploration and development, the management and conservation of offshore petroleum resources, and protection of the environment as well as the health and safety of offshore workers, while enhancing employment and industrial benefits for Nova Scotians and Canadians.

Offshore petroleum activities and the CNSOPB’s decision-making processes are governed by a variety of legislation, regulations, guidelines and memoranda of understanding. Exploration drilling projects require an Operations Authorization (OA) under the Accord Acts. Prior to issuing an OA, the CNSOPB requires the following to be submitted:

an Environmental Assessment Report; a Canada-Nova Scotia Benefits Plan;



File: 121413516 1.6

a Safety Plan; an Environmental Protection Plan (including a waste management plan); Emergency Response and Spill Contingency Plans; appropriate financial security; and appropriate certificates of fitness for the equipment proposed for use in the activities.

For each well in the drilling program, a separate Approval to Drill a Well (ADW) is required. This authorization process involves specific details about the drilling program and well design.

There are several regulations under the Accord Acts which govern specific exploration or development activities. There are also various guidelines, some of which have been jointly developed with the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board (C-NLOPB) and National Energy Board (NEB) which are intended to address environmental, health, safety and economic aspects of offshore petroleum exploration and development activities. Of particular relevance to the environmental assessment of this Project would be the Offshore Waste Treatment Guidelines (NEB et al. 2010) and the Offshore Chemical Selection Guidelines for Drilling and Production Activities on Frontier Lands (NEB et al. 2009).

The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (the “Agency”) will make a determination on the requirement for an environmental assessment under CEAA, 2012, following a screening process conducted by the Agency. The Regulations Designating Physical Activities under CEAA, 2012 (amended October 24, 2013) specify the physical activities to which CEAA, 2012 applies. Based on the activities and location of the Project, it is classed as a “designated project” under section 10 of the amended regulations. Section 10 of the amended Regulations Designating Physical Activities states:

The drilling, testing and abandonment of offshore exploratory wells in the first drilling program in an area set out in one or more exploration licences issued in accordance with the Canada-Newfoundland Atlantic Accord Implementation Act or the Canada-Nova Scotia Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act.

Although there have been other wells drilled in the Project Area (Shubenacadie H-100 drilled in 1982, Evangeline H-98 drilled in 1984, and Newburn H-23 drilled in 2002), these wells were not associated with the current ELs issued to BP. The Project consists of the drilling, testing and abandonment of offshore exploratory wells within the ELs issued to BP by the CNSOPB. It is expected that the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) completed to satisfy the CEAA, 2012 requirements will also satisfy the CNSOPB requirements for an EA as part of the OA review process under the Accord Acts.

A provincial EA under the Nova Scotia Environment Act is unlikely to be required based on the proposed Project scope. No provincial or municipal permits are currently anticipated to be required for the Project, including for the onshore supply base which will be sited at an existing



File: 121413516 1.7

marine terminal. The third party operator of the supply base will be responsible for obtaining any necessary approvals for the supply base that are not already in place.

Additional information on applicable federal legislation, permits and approvals is provided in Section 1.4.

1.4 FEDERAL INVOLVEMENT

Project activities and components in the nearshore and offshore marine environment will take place within federal waters, which, under CEAA, 2012 constitutes “federal lands”. Given the focus of offshore activities for this Project, the term “federal waters” is used although it is acknowledged that the Act does not differentiate between federal lands and federal waters.

BP is currently in the process of procuring an onshore supply base to support the Project. One of the candidate supply base locations is located on federal land. Refer to Section 2.2.5 for more information on the supply base including potential federal involvement and authorizations.

The Project is subject to various federal legislative and regulatory requirements, including:

Accord Acts; Canada Shipping Act; Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012; Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA), 1999; Fisheries Act; Migratory Birds Convention Act, 1994; Species at Risk Act (SARA); and Navigation Protection Act.

As indicated in Section 1.3, the Project will require an Operations Authorization and Approval to Drill a Well from the CNSOPB pursuant to the Accord Acts, and EA approval under CEAA, 2012.

Pending Project design and regulatory review, and an assessment of potential environmental effects, authorizations may also be required under the Fisheries Act and SARA. A Migratory Bird Handling Permit will likely be required from Environment Canada to permit the salvage of stranded birds on offshore vessels during the Project.

There is no federal funding involved in this Project.


Project Description August 2015

File: 121413516 2.1

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.1 PROJECT LOCATION

BP proposes to drill up to seven wells on ELs 2431, 2432, 2433, and 2434. These licences cover an area of approximately 13,982 km2 and are located approximately 230 to 370 km southeast of Halifax and 48 km from Sable Island National Park Reserve. Sable Island is also the nearest permanent, seasonal or temporary residence to the Project Area aside from workers inhabiting offshore platforms at the Sable Offshore Energy Project and the Deep Panuke developments. Water depths in the licences range from 100 metres (m) to more than 3,000 m. The Project will not take place on lands that have been subject to a regional study as described in Sections 73-77 of CEAA, 2012, nor are there any zoning designations or management plans that apply to the Project Area.

Specific drill sites are not yet known and will be based on results from the Tangier 3D Seismic Survey conducted in 2014. Potential wells will be located within the Exploration Licences delineated on Figure 1.1. Corner coordinates for this area are provided in Table 2.1.

Table 2.1 Project Area Coordinates

Project Area “Corner”

NAD 83_CSRS_UTM Zone 20 N X (metres) Y (metres) Latitude DMS Longitude DMS

1 702995.10700 4790378.89572 42° 10' 0.000" N 61° 45' 0.000" W

2 702995.10700 4790378.89572 43° 10' 0.000" N 61° 45' 0.000" W

3 702995.10700 4790378.89572 43° 10' 0.000" N 61° 15' 0.000" W

4 702995.10700 4790378.89572 43° 0' 0.000" N 61° 15' 0.000" W

5 702995.10700 4790378.89572 43° 0' 0.000" N 61° 0' 0.000" W

6 702995.10700 4790378.89572 43° 20' 0.000" N 61° 0' 0.000" W

7 702995.10700 4790378.89572 43° 20' 0.000" N 60° 45' 0.000" W

8 702995.10700 4790378.89572 43° 30' 0.000" N 60° 45' 0.000" W

9 702995.10700 4790378.89572 43° 30' 0.000" N 60° 0' 0.000" W

10 702995.10700 4790378.89572 42° 40' 0.000" N 60° 0' 0.000" W

11 702995.10700 4790378.89572 42° 40' 0.000" N 60° 15' 0.000" W

12 702995.10700 4790378.89572 42° 30' 0.000" N 60° 15' 0.000" W

13 702995.10700 4790378.89572 42° 30' 0.000" N 61° 0' 0.000" W

14 702995.10700 4790378.89572 42° 20' 0.000" N 61° 0' 0.000" W

15 702995.10700 4790378.89572 42° 20' 0.000" N 61° 30' 0.000" W

16 702995.10700 4790378.89572 42° 10' 0.000" N 61° 30' 0.000" W

The EIS will define appropriate spatial boundaries to adequately consider potential adverse environmental effects from the Project. A preliminary “Regional Study Area” has been defined



File: 121413516 2.2

(refer to Figure 1.1) for the purpose of this Project Description to indicate a broad region of interest for the EIS and to capture potential environmental interactions associated with spills. This Regional Study Area, along with a Local Study Area (to capture potential environmental effects from routine activities) will be confirmed in the EIS based on spill trajectory modelling and assessment of other potential environmental effects.

Refer to Section 2.2.5.1 for supply base location details.

2.2 PROJECT COMPONENTS AND ACTIVITIES

2.2.1 Drilling

Wells will be drilled using either a semi-submersible rig or a drillship, due to the water depths involved (potentially from 100 m to over 3000 m). A semi-submersible rig would either be moored in position over the drilling site, or maintained on station by dynamic positioning (DP). A drillship would maintain its position by DP.

The standard mooring technique for a semi-submersible is an eight point spread mooring arrangement using a combination of wire rope, chains, and anchors. The anchors are set in a pre-determined pattern using an anchor handling offshore vessel.

In the DP mode, a semi-submersible or drillship maintains position using thrusters positioned on the hulls, which are controlled by a computerized positioning system.

Figure 2.1 shows a schematic of a semi-submersible rig and a drillship for comparison purposes.

Source: Adapted from MMS 2000

Figure 2.1 Schematic of Semi-submersible and Drillship



File: 121413516 2.3

Prior to drilling, proposed wellsite locations are surveyed, generally using a remotely operated vehicle (ROV) to inspect the seabed for potential hazards and sensitive habitat (e.g., habitat-forming corals).

In offshore drilling, the riser serves to move drilling mud from the sea floor to the mobile offshore drilling unit (MODU) on the surface. Drilling mud can be a water-based or synthetic-based suspension of clays and is used in well drilling to help equalize pressure, keep the drill bit cool, and flush out cuttings from the wellbore. The initial (i.e., surface) sections are normally drilled without a riser system, which serves as a conduit to bring mud and cuttings back to the drilling vessel in a closed loop system. These “riserless” sections are drilled using a water-based mud (WBM), with mud and cuttings returned to the seabed as is permitted by the OWTG (NEB et al. 2010).

As yet the well design has not been completed. In general, following the drilling of the initial sections, the drill string (assembly of drill pipes) is removed and a steel casing is cemented into place to prevent the wall of the well from caving in and prevent seepage of muds and other fluids. The casing also provides adequate pressure integrity to allow a blowout preventer (BOP) and riser system to be installed. The BOP is a system of high pressure valves that prevent water or hydrocarbons from escaping into the environment in the event of an emergency or equipment failure (Stantec 2014b).

Once a riser system has been installed, the deeper (lower hole) sections of the wells may be drilled with synthetic-based mud (SBM). The riser returns mud and cuttings to the drilling vessel in a closed loop system for treatment prior to disposal to the seabed in accordance with the OWTG. More information on the management of drilling waste is provided in Section 2.3.3. An unplanned or planned side-track (i.e., drilling a second wellbore away from an original wellbore) may be drilled to meet the Project objectives. Figure 2.2 presents a schematic demonstrating the initial drilling sequence of a well.



File: 121413516 2.4

Figure 2.2 Initial Drilling Sequence

BP proposes to commence drilling in 2017. Depending on the results of the initial well, up to seven wells may be drilled over the term of the ELs. It is anticipated that it will take up to 120 days to drill each well.

2.2.2 Vertical Seismic Profiling

Following the drilling of each well to its target depth (where hydrocarbon reservoirs are predicted to be located), vertical seismic profiling (VSP) is conducted to obtain accurate “time to depth ties” which allows the correlation of seismic data (which is recorded in time measurements) to well depth (recorded in metres). VSP operations involve deploying an acoustic sound source from the drilling vessel, while a number of receivers are positioned at different levels within the drilled hole to measure the travel time.



File: 121413516 2.5

Typically between three and six sound sources are used, with a volume of 150 – 250 cubic inches each. These sound sources are generally positioned at 5-10 m water depth. VSP operations are typically of short duration, taking up to several days to complete for each well. Specific details of the VSP program will depend on the geological target and the objectives of the VSP operation.

2.2.3 Well Flow Testing

Well flow testing may be undertaken on individual wells, depending on the results of the well evaluation. In the event that a well test is required, it will be subject to BP’s well test assurance process, which is designed to promote safe and efficient well test operations.

In line with industry practice, well flow testing involves flowing the well fluids through temporary test equipment located on the drilling vessel, and requires flaring of gases or other hydrocarbons that come to surface to enable their safe disposal. Flaring activity will be carried out in accordance with industry standard and any applicable regulations. It is anticipated that testing would occur over a one to three month period after drilling is complete. As part of any well test program, there are likely to be separate periods of flaring which may comprise the following activities:

a number of main flow test periods each involving an approximate 24 hours of flaring for any one period; and

other flaring periods for operational purposes including flushing and/or bleeding off surface equipment. These periods are likely to last between 1 and 6 hours each and the flow rates during these periods are expected to be small.

2.2.4 Well Abandonment

All wells drilled in the drilling campaign will likely be permanently plugged and abandoned (P&A) after completion of data acquisition and evaluation programs, in accordance with BP recommended practice and any applicable regulations. P&A procedures are designed to isolate the well and prevent the release of wellbore fluids to the marine environment.

P&A operations involve setting a series of cement and mechanical plugs within the wellbore, including plugs above any hydrocarbon bearing intervals, at appropriate barrier depths in the well and at the surface. The casing is expected to be cut below the seabed and the wellhead and removed prior to completion of the drilling campaign; these details are to be confirmed as Project planning proceeds. A seabed survey is typically conducted for each well using an ROV to survey the seabed for debris.



File: 121413516 2.6

2.2.5 Supply and Servicing

2.2.5.1 Onshore Supply Base

BP requires an onshore supply base to support the Project’s offshore drilling operations. The supply base serves as a location to temporarily store, stage, and load materials onto offshore support vessels (OSVs) to be brought offshore. The supply base also serves as a location for materials to be returned onshore by OSVs, as needed, throughout the Project. BP anticipates OSVs will make two to three trips per week between the drilling vessel and the supply base.

Generally, materials temporarily stored or staged within the supply base will include: wellhead, oil country tubular goods (OCTG) (e.g., drill pipe, pipe casings), tubular accessories, specialty tools, wet and dry bulk material, and water. Marine gas oil (MGO) required by the drilling rig and OSVs will not be provided via the onshore supply base, but rather will be provided by existing fuel facilities within the area.

The supply base will be owned/leased and operated by a third party integrated logistics service provider. The integrated logistics service provider will be responsible for obtaining any new approvals necessary for management and operation of the supply base in association with the Project.

BP has commenced the process to select an integrated logistics service provider and anticipates awarding a contract for these services in early Q4 2015. Additional details on Project scheduling related to the supply base are provided in Section 2.4.

Potential Supply Base Locations

Entering the supplier selection process, BP considers the options presented in Table 2.2 and Figure 2.3 as potential supply base locations to support the Project.

Table 2.2 Supply Base Locations

Potential Supply Base Location Latitude DMS Longitude DMS Mulgrave Marine Terminal (Strait of Canso) 45°36'25.00"N 61°23'18.00"W

Woodside Terminal (Halifax Harbour) 44°38'49.00"N 63°32'53.00"W

Richmond Terminals (Halifax Harbour) 44°40'33.00"N 63°36'42.00"W



File: 121413516 2.7

Figure 2.3 Supply Base Location Options



File: 121413516 2.8

Mulgrave Marine Terminal (Strait of Canso)

The Mulgrave Marine Terminal is owned and operated by the Strait of Canso Superport Corporation and is located in the Town of Mulgrave, on the western shore of the Strait of Canso. The 2.8-hectare Terminal is positioned to service the offshore oil and gas industry. The site also services a range of bulk and break bulk cargo activities requiring warehousing and lay down area at dockside and serves the needs of marine construction projects on Canada’s east coast.

There are two berths available at the Mulgrave Marine Terminal, which total 500 m in length; water depths at the berths range from 6 to 10 m. The wharf length provides operational berthing for two to three vessels depending on vessel length, lay berthing activity, and draft requirement. Handymax bulk ships typically call at this facility.

The Mulgrave Marine Terminal includes over 1.6 ha of fenced lay down area adjacent to dockside and over 4,600 m² of warehouse and office space. This site also contains a complete liquid mud plant and bulk storage tanks, which include two mixing tanks, six storage tanks in an environmentally approved concrete berm, three dry bulk silos with dust collectors, and large capacity dual-lined loading lines to the quayside. Figures 2.4 to 2.6 show the Mulgrave Marine Terminal and existing infrastructure.

Figure 2.4 Proposed Supply Base Location (green polygon) within the Mulgrave

Marine Terminal



File: 121413516 2.9

Figure 2.5 Aerial View of the Mulgrave Marine Terminal

Figure 2.6 Liquid Mud Plant within the Mulgrave Marine Terminal

Woodside Terminal (Halifax Harbour)

The Woodside Terminal is located in Dartmouth, Nova Scotia on the Halifax Harbour across from downtown Halifax. The proposed facility is made up of two areas. This first area, dedicated to quayside operations, is owned by Nova Scotia Business, Inc., leased to ExxonMobil, and subleased to Blue Water Group. The second area, which serves as a temporary storage and laydown area, is owned by ExxonMobil and leased to Blue Water Group.

The two areas are currently being used to support the Sable Offshore Energy Project and the Deep Panuke Offshore Gas Development Project. Shell is also working to establish Woodside Terminal as its supply base to support an upcoming exploration drilling project.



File: 121413516 2.10

The quayside area offers 80 m to 130 m of berthage with a minimum 6.5 m water depth, and 8,000 m² of marshalling area. The available laydown area, located within 1 km from the quayside, is roughly 20,000 m² and contains 1,400 m² of covered storage and a tubular inspection shed/building.

This site also contains a complete liquid mud plant and bulk storage tanks, which include one mixing tank, 18 liquid storage tanks in an environmentally approved bermed area, three dry bulk silos, and loading lines hard-piped to the quayside. Figure 2.7 shows the proposed quayside location and laydown area within the Woodside Terminal. Figure 2.8 is a schematic of the liquid mud plant.

Figure 2.7 (a) Proposed Quayside Location (green polygon) within Woodside Terminal; (b) Proposed Laydown Area (green polygon) within Woodside Terminal



File: 121413516 2.11

Figure 2.8 Schematic of Liquid Mud Plant within the Woodside Terminal

Richmond Terminals (Halifax Harbour)

Richmond Terminals is a large multi-use public port facility owned by the Port of Halifax and located in the north end of Halifax on the Halifax Harbour. The facility currently supports project cargoes, fibre optic cable facilities, heavy lift, bulk, and containers. It has supported oil and gas operations off-and-on since the 1980s. The quayside area offers over 500 m of berthing length, with a minimum 8.8 m water depth. The site has 16,000 m² of marshaling and laydown area and up to 7,000 m² of warehouse space available. Figures 2.9 and 2.10 provide aerial views of the proposed supply base location at Richmond Terminals.



File: 121413516 2.12

Figure 2.9 Proposed Supply Base Location (green polygon) within Richmond

Terminals

Figure 2.10 Aerial Photo of Richmond Terminals



File: 121413516 2.13

Each of the potential supply base locations is an existing marine terminal in a highly developed setting. These sites are also currently used for routine industrial activities that are consistent with those to be carried out in association with the Project. Lastly, an initial evaluation confirmed each site’s ability to meet BP’s minimum operational requirements for a supply base (detailed in Table 2.3 below).

Table 2.3 Operational Requirements for the Supply Base

Criteria Operational Requirements

Berth Access Berthage to accommodate up to two offshore supply vessels within an existing port facility. BP requires dedicated or priority access to berthage for at least one supply vessel.

Berth Draft Sufficient water depth for modern offshore supply vessels to access the berth.

Marshalling area Sufficient area for the safe staging, loading, and unloading of materials to/from offshore supply vessels.

Temporary Storage (Laydown Area)

Temporary storage or laydown area for materials used to drill wells. Generally, these materials will include: Wellhead, OCTG, tubular accessories, and specialty equipment/tools. This area includes space to receive, inspect, store, and move this material.

Temporary Storage (Covered) Covered area or warehouse space for specialty equipment/tools.

Fresh Water Supply Sufficient water supply (and pump rate) to support supply base and offshore operations.

Power Supply Sufficient power supply to safely operate all plant and equipment on site.

Bulk Storage / Liquid Mud Plant Sufficient area for wet and dry bulk storage and liquid mud mixing facility.

Surrounding Infrastructure (Roads) Sufficient roadways to safely access the supply base by land.

Office space Sufficient office facilities for supply base management and crew.

Mobile Lifting Equipment

Equipment required to receive material from trucks arriving at the supply base, move material within the site, and safely load/unload offshore supply vessels. These include fork lifts, cranes, etc.

BP will begin a detailed evaluation of each of these locations as part of the integrated logistics service provider selection process. During this evaluation, BP will quantify the risk and cost associated with operating from each location. Key influences considered during this evaluation include: proximity to indicative drilling location; existing infrastructure; overall site footprint; surrounding infrastructure (e.g., roadways); accessibility; health, safety and environment (HSE) standards; and total cost of operation.



File: 121413516 2.14

Required Plant, Equipment, and Physical Works

Upon selecting an integrated service provider and supply base location, the following infrastructure upgrades may be required, depending on location:

Wet/dry bulk storage tanks and liquid mud mixing plant; Covered storage / warehouse space; Pipe inspection area (covered); Pipe racking (storage system); Temporary office space; and Lighting.

BP desires a supply base location that minimizes infrastructure development costs and risks. Two candidate supply base locations, Mulgrave Marine Terminal (Strait of Canso) and Woodside Terminal (Halifax Harbour), are located on private (non-crown) lands and require no site expansion, major civil works, permanent building construction, clearing, or in-water work to support the Project. No federal authorizations, permits or approvals are anticipated to be required.

The third location, Richmond Terminals (Halifax Harbour) is the only potential supply base location without existing wet/dry bulk storage tanks and liquid mud mixing plant, although the site has been used historically for industrial purpose. The installation of bulk storage tanks and mud mixing at this site would occur within existing site boundaries, on a pre-developed surface. Work related to the installation of a liquid mud plant will require additional time to design, mobilize, and assemble the required equipment. Required civil works would be limited to installing a bunded containment area, concrete pads to ensure proper ground resistance, the placement of required tanks and piping, and the installation of pumps and transfer lines to move the bulk material to the offshore supply vessels. This civil work may require some excavation of the pre-developed surface. These activities are consistent with routine industrial construction works on land intended for and historically used for industrial purpose.

Richmond Terminals is located on federal lands administered by the Halifax Port Authority (HPA). Under Section 67 of CEAA, 2012, the HPA, as a federal authority, is required to determine there are no significant environmental effects before taking any action to allow a project to proceed on federal lands under its jurisdiction. Therefore, it is expected that any modification that may be made to these lands, if selected as the successful supply base location, will be reviewed by the HPA as it is currently required to do for any projects on its lands. No other federal authorizations, permits or approvals are anticipated to be required to permit this work.

There are no wetlands on, adjacent to, or in close proximity to any of the candidate supply base locations. There are no First Nation reserve lands located adjacent to or in close proximity to any of the candidate supply base locations. Millbrook First Nation is the nearest First Nation reserve located approximately 5 km east of the Woodside Terminal supply base option. Distances to the



File: 121413516 2.15

nearest permanent, seasonal or temporary residences are approximately 290 m for Richmond Terminals, 396 m for Woodside Terminal, and 166 m for Mulgrave Terminal. Development at any of the candidate supply base locations will be carefully controlled and is not anticipated to affect migratory birds, fish, fish habitat, aquatic species, physical and cultural heritage resources, or related Aboriginal interests.

2.2.5.2 Vessel and Helicopter Traffic

The drilling vessel and operations is anticipated to require support from vessels and helicopters for equipment and supplies, and for crew changes. It is likely that both supply vessel and helicopter operations will be based out of the Halifax area, although this remains to be confirmed. OSVs will be used to re-supply the drilling vessel with fuel, equipment, drilling mud, and other supplies during the drilling program. It is likely that two to three OSVs will be required, with one vessel on stand-by at the drilling vessel at all times.

It is estimated that the OSVs will make two to three trips per week between the drilling vessel and the supply base. Although the specific location of the supply base is not yet known, it is likely to be located in Halifax Harbour or the Strait of Canso. Travel routes will depend on the supply base location but OSVs will use existing shipping lanes to the extent practical.

It is anticipated that approximately one helicopter trip per day would be required to the drilling vessel for the transfer of crew and supplies not carried by the OSV.

2.3 EMISSIONS, DISCHARGES AND WASTE MANAGEMENT

Efforts will be made to reduce waste emissions and discharges generated during the Project, where possible. All waste generated will be managed and disposed according to regulatory requirements and applicable guidelines. Offshore waste discharges will be managed in compliance with the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL) and/or the OWTG, as applicable. Wastes brought to shore for disposal will be managed in accordance with the Nova Scotia Solid Waste-Resource Management Regulations and other applicable regulatory requirements (including municipal by-laws). The following is a general description of typical wastes to be generated over the course of Project activities and how these wastes will be managed.

2.3.1 Atmospheric Emissions

Atmospheric emissions expected to be associated with Project activities are primarily related to the combustion of marine fuel by the drilling vessel and OSVs. Emissions are also associated with short-term flaring during well testing, if testing is performed. These emissions will include carbon dioxide (CO2), sulphur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and particulate matter. BP will comply with the provincial Air Quality Regulations under the Nova Scotia Environment Act, Ambient Air Quality Objectives under CEPA, regulations under MARPOL and the intent of the



File: 121413516 2.16

Global Gas Flaring Reduction Partnership (which seeks to increase the use of associated natural gas and thus reduce flaring and venting).

2.3.2 Underwater Sound

Underwater sound is generated by a drilling vessel and OSVs as well as during VSP operations. The level of underwater sound generated by a drilling vessel is influenced by the type of drilling vessel (e.g., semi-submersible versus drillship) and method of positioning on station (e.g., DP versus anchoring). Underwater sound associated with the drilling vessel is continuous during a drilling program. Underwater sound generated during VSP operations is impulsive in nature, with higher sound level pulses occurring over of a much shorter duration (up to several days, depending on the VSP method selected).

2.3.3 Drilling Waste

The initial (i.e., surface) sections are normally drilled riserless with WBM, with mud and cuttings returned where they will accumulate in the vicinity of the wellhead. The discharge of WBM cuttings at the seabed, while drilling the first two hole sections is accepted as industry standard practice and is consistent with the OWTG (NEB et al. 2010). The deeper (lower hole) sections of the wells will likely be drilled with SBM. The marine riser located between the BOP and the drilling vessel acts as a conduit for the return of drilling mud and cuttings back to the drilling vessel for treatment prior to disposal to the seabed in accordance with the OWTG.

On the drilling vessel the drilled cuttings and drilling mud are separated and cleaned using solids control equipment. The mud returns carrying the drilled cuttings initially pass through a shale shaker where the majority of mud is separated from the cuttings. Where SBM is used, cuttings from the shale shaker pass through a cuttings dryer, which removes SBM from cuttings. Residual synthetic base mud on cuttings discharged to the marine environment is treated in accordance with the OWTG (NEB et al. 2010). Monitoring of the residual base mud on cuttings levels is carried out during well sections involving use of SBM. After recovery and treatment of drill muds, the drill cuttings are discharged from the drilling vessel at the well site. Spent and excess WBM may be discharged from the drilling vessel without treatment as per the OWTG (NEB et al. 2010). No surplus SBM are discharged to the sea; spent SBM that cannot be reused during drilling are brought to shore for disposal.

The extent of drilling discharge deposition can only be predicted accurately through a drilling discharge dispersion modelling exercise, which will be carried out as part of the environmental assessment process. The zone of deposition would depend on the particle size distribution in the discharge stream, water depth and currents. After the riser has been installed, cuttings and associated drilling fluids are returned to the MODU for treatment. In accordance with applicable regulatory guidelines, following treatment, cuttings and associated residual fluids will be discharged to the marine environment through a caisson near the water surface. The depositional thickness will vary by water depth and is likely to be greater during the riserless



File: 121413516 2.17

drilling associated with the upper well section as WBM cuttings are released directly at the seafloor, which limits the likelihood of cuttings distribution through the water column.

Cement is used to set the well casing strings during drilling. Prior to installation of the riser package (e.g., during drilling of the conductor and surface holes), surplus cement is discharged at the seafloor. Following installation of the riser, spent and surplus cement is brought to shore for disposal in an approved facility.

If a well test is deemed necessary, the wellbore fluids (gas and liquid phases) will be managed in accordance with industry standard practice and any applicable regulations.

2.3.4 Liquid Discharges

The following liquid wastes, if generated, are expected to be managed on the drilling vessel:

Produced water; Bilge and deck drainage water; Ballast water; Grey/black water (sewage); Cooling water; Well treatment fluids; and Fire control testing water.

The OWTG contain performance targets for each of these discharges, including in some cases, required sampling and analysis prior to ocean discharge. Liquid discharges that do not meet performance targets for ocean disposal are transported to shore for disposal at an approved disposal facility.

2.3.5 Hazardous and Non-Hazardous Solid Wastes

Hazardous and non-hazardous solid wastes will also be generated by Project activities. Food wastes will be macerated in accordance with the OWTG prior to discharge at sea. All other solid waste generated offshore will be transported to shore for appropriate treatment and/or disposal in accordance with applicable regulations and municipal by-laws. Non-hazardous wastes may include domestic waste, scrap metal, recyclables and other miscellaneous non-hazardous wastes. Hazardous wastes (including waste dangerous goods) could include oily waste (filters, rags, waste oil), waste chemicals and containers, batteries, biomedical waste, and spent SBM.

BP will retain a third party licensed waste management contractor to manage and dispose of wastes transported onshore. Hazardous wastes will be disposed of at approved facilities in compliance with applicable regulations and approvals.



File: 121413516 2.18

2.4 PROJECT SCHEDULE

BP plans to commence exploration drilling with an initial well in 2017 pending regulatory approval to proceed. Up to seven exploration wells will be drilled over the term of the ELs contingent on the drilling results of the initial well. It is anticipated that each well will take approximately 120 days to drill. VSP operations will take up to several days per well and well testing, where required, would occur over a one to three month period. Well abandonment will be conducted following drilling and/or well flow testing. Wells may be designed for suspension and re-entry but this will be determined through further prospect evaluation. Aboriginal and stakeholder engagement for the Project commenced in 2014 and will continue through the life of the Project as required.

An operational supply base is typically required three to four months prior to the start of offshore drilling operations. This allows for the early receipt and inspection of materials requiring long procurement lead times. The rest of the mobilization schedule will be derived from the required infrastructure development on site and the lead-time to mobilize fully-trained crews and equipment on site. BP anticipates that infrastructure development and mobilization of crews and equipment could begin as early as Q4 2016 if Mulgrave Terminal or Woodside Terminal is selected as the preferred supply base location.

If Richmond Terminals is selected as the preferred supply base location, infrastructure development could begin as early as Q3 2016. In this scenario, design work would begin in early 2016. The expected additional lead time at Richmond Terminals is tied directly to the design, procurement, and installation of wet/dry bulk storage tanks and liquid mud mixing plant.

Regardless of supply base location, BP’s integrated logistics services provider will occupy the site until all offshore drilling operations are concluded and all Project-related drilling materials are removed or sold. If required, BP would also remove or sell any Project-related plant or equipment. BP anticipates similar operations or activities will occur in the region around the same time as the Project. BP hopes to capture synergies related to these operations or activities, which would likely eliminate the need to decommission and demobilize any new plant or equipment on site. Existing liquid mud plants and bulk storage tanks at Woodside Terminal or Mulgrave Marine Terminal would not be decommissioned after the Project.



File: 121413516 2.19

Figure 2.11 Preliminary Project Schedule

2.5 ACCIDENTAL EVENTS AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE

Before a well is drilled, it is necessary to identify the range of potential spill scenarios from the smallest spill up to and including the worst credible case discharge. These scenarios are then used to inform the Oil Spill Modelling (OSM) which is the planning basis for what is needed to respond effectively to an oil spill.

Potential accidental events that could occur during exploration drilling include blowouts (i.e., uncontrolled releases of hydrocarbons during drilling) batch spills (e.g., diesel, drilling muds, etc.), or vessel spills.

Spill prevention measures including spill prevention equipment, policies and procedures, best management practices, and inspection and maintenance activities shall be in place to reduce the probability of a spill occurring and the severity of spill in the unlikely event it should occur. Oil spill preparedness and response shall be managed by an Oil Spill Contingency Plan (OSCP) in accordance with BP’s internal practices as well as applicable legal and regulatory requirements. The OSCP will be submitted to the CNSOPB as part of the OA application process.

BP’s requirements for oil spill preparedness and response planning incorporate our experience over many years of operation, and specifically from the Deepwater Horizon accident. Any of our businesses with the potential to spill oil are required to develop oil spill planning scenarios and response strategies, in line with above requirements. These enhanced requirements obligate relevant businesses to follow a planning process to predict how the spilled oil would behave; identify, assess and understand the environmental and social sensitivities at risk; define effective response strategies; and confirm that appropriate response capabilities are in place. This includes using specialized modelling techniques that help predict the impact of potential spills,

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4Well Selection, Design and PlanningStakeholder and Aboriginal EngagementPermittingLogistics PreparationSupply Base Infrastructure Development and Mobilization of Crew/EquipmentExploration DrillingAssessment of Drilling Program ResultsWell Testing (subject to assessment)Abandonment 1 2Potential Further Exploration Drilling (subject to init ial well results)Nb1) Abandonment if there is no well testingNb2) Abandonment if there is well testing

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019



File: 121413516 2.20

the use of new tools for environmental monitoring and, where appropriate and approved, the provision of stockpiles of dispersants.

The EIS will include a predictive spill modelling to help assess the risk of adverse environmental effects occurring as a result of the Project. Oil spill modelling will take into consideration the water depth of the proposed drilling area, which will affect the behaviour of a subsea spill scenario. In general, water depth affects the buoyancy of the oil plume and accordingly, its rise to the sea surface. A release from a subsea spill in deep water would generally be less buoyant than a subsea release in shallow water, thereby resulting in more mixing in the water column and possibly spreading over a larger area in the water column.

The EIS will also provide an overview of BP’s overall oil spill preparedness and response capability which will include a range of specific response capabilities such as offshore containment and recovery, shoreline protection, and oiled wildlife response.


Environmental Setting August 2015

File: 121413516 3.1

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

3.1 SUPPLY BASE AREAS

Two candidate supply bases, Richmond Terminals and Woodside Terminal, are located in Halifax Harbour; Mulgrave Marine Terminal is located in the Strait of Canso. An overview of the biophysical setting of the relevant nearshore and coastal environments is provided below.

3.1.1 Halifax Harbour

Halifax Harbour is a major inlet of the North Atlantic Ocean surrounded by the city of Halifax. The Port of Halifax, administered by the Halifax Port Authority, accommodates cargo vessels terminals as well as bulk handling facilities, a high volume roll-on/roll-off terminal, oil wharves, rail facilities, and ferry terminals. The harbour extends inland for over 22 km to the northwest with a variable width ranging from approximately 385 m in The Narrows to approximately 4,225 m in the Bedford Basin and reaches depths of up to 70 m in the Bedford Basin and between 20 to 30 m in depth in other areas (Shell and Stantec 2013).

The shore, intertidal zone and seabed of Halifax Harbour include a wide variety of anthropogenic features based on the industrialization of the port which is pronounced in the vicinity of the two candidate supply base locations in Halifax Harbour (Shell and Stantec 2013). These locations are currently subject to high levels of marine-related industrial activity (e.g., ship loading and unloading, container handling, storage and laydown, rail and truck traffic, ship repair and rebuilding, servicing off-shore oil rigs, and/or vessel layup), including associated noise, light, and other sensory disturbance. The two candidate supply base locations in Halifax Harbour have no natural intertidal zones, as the existing shorelines at each site were previously infilled to accommodate present operations and therefore no wetlands, migratory bird sanctuaries, National Wildlife Areas, or marine protected areas are found. Given this previous disturbance, the potential for previously undisturbed heritage, historic, or archaeological resources to be present in the vicinity of the candidate supply bases is also believed to be low (Shell and Stantec 2013). As shown on Figure 3.1, some coastal and onshore features are found in the Halifax Harbour and surrounding area which are recognized nationally, provincially, and/or municipally for their cultural, recreational, and/or ecological value (Shell and Stantec 2013).

A total of 120 bird species have been recorded in the 10 km X 10 km census square in which Richmond Terminals and Woodside Terminal are located (MBBA 2010, cited in Shell and Stantec 2013). At the south end of Halifax Harbour, 43 migratory bird species were recorded in or on the edge of Point Pleasant Park during a breeding bird survey conducted in May 2010, including the Canada Warbler (Wilsonia canadensis), which is listed as Threatened under Schedule 1 of SARA (Shell and Stantec 2013).



File: 121413516 3.2

The migratory bird habitat illustrated on Figure 3.1 includes Great Blue Heron (Ardea herodias) habitat at Morris Lake; Common Eider (Somateria mollissima) habitat in the vicinities of Chebucto Head; and habitat for Canada Goose (Branta canadensis) and American Black Duck (Anas rubripes) on and around the Eastern Habitat Joint Venture Lands in the vicinity of Cole Harbour and Lawrencetown Lake. Maugher Beach, on the western shore of McNabs Island, provides unclassified habitat for Piping Plover (Charadrius melodus), which is listed as Endangered under Schedule 1 of SARA.

The Halifax Harbour and its approaches are within the distribution range of Barrow’s Goldeneye (Bucephala islandica), and Harlequin Duck (Histrionicus histrionicus), both of which are listed as Special Concern on Schedule 1 of SARA (Environment Canada 2015).

Halifax Harbour is within the distribution range of the blue whale (Balaenoptera musculus) and North Atlantic right whale (Eubalaena glacialis), both of which are listed as Endangered on Schedule 1 of SARA (Environment Canada 2015), although it would be very unlikely for these species to be present in Halifax Harbour. Harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), listed as a species of Special Concern under Schedule 2 of SARA has, however, been known to frequent Halifax Harbour (Shell and Stantec 2013). Harbour seals (Phoca vitulina) have been observed in large numbers in Halifax Harbour, with grey seals (Halichoerus grypus) also having been observed occasionally in the Harbour (Brodie 2000).

At least 69 species of fish have been recorded in the nearshore marine habitat of Nova Scotia within the 40 m depth of water (Shell and Stantec 2013), many of which would be considered species of commercial, recreational or Aboriginal (CRA) fisheries. Halifax Harbour is located within NAFO Fishery Unit Area 4Wk and commercial fisheries include a small commercial finfish fishery seaward of McNabs Island consisting of groundfish (cod, haddock, pollock and halibut) and pelagic (herring and mackerel) species. Other areas throughout the harbour, particularly the Bedford Basin, support a bait fishery (pollock, herring, mackerel and smelt) for both commercial and recreational bait (Rozee 2000), typically fished using gillnets and hand-lines. Commercial and recreational fisheries for clams and mussels are closed due to fecal coliform levels in the harbour. Some recreational groundfishing occurs just outside of the harbour, but this type of fishing is not common within the harbour itself.



File: 121413516 3.3

Figure 3.1 Environmentally Sensitive Areas in the Vicinity of Halifax Harbour



File: 121413516 3.4

Lobster is the primary commercial species harvested within Halifax Harbour with a total of 15 to 20 lobster fishers using the Harbour (Shell and Stantec 2013). The majority of fishers in the Halifax area fish with 250 traps. The harbour is included within the boundaries of Lobster Fishing Area (LFA) 33, which extends from Cole Harbour to Yarmouth; however, the area around McNabs Island supports the majority of lobster fishing activity (Shell and Stantec 2013). Most lobsters are caught during the first three weeks of the season which runs from the last Monday in November until the end of May (Shell and Stantec 2013).

In addition to commercial lobster fishing, Aboriginal communal food, social and ceremonial licences have been issued for LFA 33, although it is unknown if any fishing activity related to those licences occurs in Halifax Harbour.

3.1.2 Strait of Canso

The Strait of Canso is a long, narrow channel that separates mainland Nova Scotia from the island of Cape Breton. Following the construction of the Canso Causeway in 1955, the Strait of Canso has become a tidal inlet with limited flows to Northumberland Strait. The key oceanographic attributes of the southern reach of the Strait of Canso are its lack of freshwater input, its great length and narrow width, and its relatively deep bathymetry (Shell and Stantec 2013).

Located approximately midway along the Strait of Canso is the Town of Mulgrave, and the Town of Port Hawkesbury both of which contain active marine facilities that comprise the Strait of Canso Port (i.e., the Mulgrave Marine Terminal and the Port Hawkesbury Pier, respectively) (Shell and Stantec 2013). The shore, intertidal zone, and seabed of the Strait of Canso at Mulgrave Marine Terminal is currently subject to high levels of marine-related industrial activity including ship loading and unloading, container handling, storage and laydown, and truck traffic. The candidate supply base location was previously infilled and has no natural intertidal zone therefore there are no wetlands, migratory bird sanctuaries, National Wildlife Areas, or marine protected areas in the area (Shell and Stantec 2013). The potential for previously undisturbed heritage, historic, or archaeological resources to be present in the vicinity of the Mulgrave Marine Terminal is also believed to be low (Shell and Stantec 2013). There are some coastal and onshore features in the Strait of Canso and surrounding area which are recognized nationally, provincially, and/or municipally for their cultural, recreational, and/or ecological value (refer to Figure 3.2) (Shell and Stantec 2013).



File: 121413516 3.5

Figure 3.2 Environmentally Sensitive Areas in the Vicinity of the Strait of Canso



File: 121413516 3.6

A total of 42 bird species have been recorded in the 10 km X 10 km census square in which the Mulgrave Container Terminal is located (MBBA 2010). Three species of neritic seabirds (i.e., those species that spend most of their time in coastal waters and occasionally forage in inland areas), the Common Tern, Double-crested Cormorant (Phalacrocorax auritus) and Great Cormorant (Phalacrocorax carbo), have been recorded as nesting in Chedabucto Bay and Strait of Canso and unclassified terns have also been recorded inhabiting islands in Chedabucto Bay (Shell and Stantec 2013). The Leach’s Storm-petrel (Oceanodroma leucorhoa) is the only species of pelagic seabird (i.e., species that are typically found out of sight of land and return to coastal waters only to breed) known to breed in proximity to the Strait of Canso (Shell and Stantec 2013). There is known habitat for Harlequin Duck along the southern shoreline of Chedabucto Bay (Figure 3.2).

Grey seals and harbour seals occur year-round in Nova Scotian waters and are fairly common in the Strait of Canso as well as hooded seals (Cystophora cristata) and harp seals (Phoca groenlandica) which are seasonal visitors to Nova Scotian waters (Shell and Stantec 2013).

Incidental observations of fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus) (SARA Schedule 1, Special Concern), and a beached blue whale (SARA Schedule 1, Endangered) have been recorded in the Strait of Canso or its approaches; however, these species are considered uncommon transients given their preference for deeper waters, and would likely only enter the strait area in pursuit of prey (Jacques Whitford 2004). More commonly found in the Strait of Canso are harbour porpoises, pilot whales (Globicephala melas) and minke whales (Balaenoptera acutorostrata).

At least 69 species of fish have been recorded in the nearshore marine habitat of Nova Scotia including demersal groundfish such as flounder, codfish, skate, sand lance and redfish and typical pelagic species such as Atlantic herring and Atlantic mackerel. Anadromous fish species known to occur in the Strait of Canso include salmon, trout, gaspereau, and smelt (Shell and Stantec 2013).

The Strait of Canso is located in NAFO Fishery Unit Area 4Wd where invertebrate fisheries, particularly shrimp and snow crab fisheries, are the most productive and commercially important fisheries in the area (Shell and Stantec 2013). Lobster catches are also substantial in Area 4Wd and an exploratory rock crab season also occurs in the area beginning one week after the lobster season ends (Shell and Stantec 2013). A large proportion of the groundfish catch consists of cod, Atlantic halibut, and pollock as well as catfish, cusk, dogfish, haddock, monkfish, plaice, redfish, turbot, flounder, and hake (Shell and Stantec 2013). The main pelagic fisheries include herring and mackereI along with other commercial pelagic species including alewife, Bluefin tuna, eel, blue shark, mackerel shark, and smelt (Shell and Stantec 2013).

The Mulgrave Marine Terminal is located within DFO Statistical District 14 encompassing the area from Mulgrave to Guysborough (Shell and Stantec 2013). A limited Aboriginal fishery operates out of the St. Peters area in District 9 and these fishers have rights to access the water of District 14 as well (AMEC 2008).



File: 121413516 3.7

3.2 OFFSHORE PROJECT AREA

3.2.1 Previous Studies

The description of the environmental setting for the Project draws primarily on information presented in the Environmental Assessment of BP’s Tangier 3D Seismic Survey (LGL 2014) and the Shelburne Basin Venture Exploration Drilling Project Environmental Impact Statement (Stantec 2014a). Observations from marine wildlife monitoring during BP’s Tangier 3D Seismic Survey (May to September 2014) have also been referenced to characterize cetacean and bird species observed in the Project Area.

Additional studies that will be consulted to inform the preparation of the EIS include the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) for Offshore Petroleum Exploration Activities Western Scotian Slope (Phase 3B) (Stantec 2014b) and the SEA for Offshore Petroleum Exploration Activities Eastern Scotian Slope (Phase 1B) (Stantec 2012). Figure 3.3 shows the study areas associated with these previous studies.

Additionally, deepwater benthic survey data collected in 2001 and 2002 in the vicinity of the Project Area are referenced in Section 3.2.2 with respect to benthic habitat characterization.



File: 121413516 3.8

Figure 3.3 Study Areas of Previous Studies Conducted in the Vicinity of the Project Area



File: 121413516 3.9

3.2.2 Biophysical Setting

The Project Area is located within the Scotian Basin geological formation located on the Scotian Slope offshore Nova Scotia. The Scotian Basin, which extends approximately 1,200 km from the Yarmouth Arch on the United States and Canadian Border in the southwest to the Avalon Uplift located on the Grand Banks of Newfoundland in the North East, encompasses an area of approximately 300 000 km2 (CNSOPB 2013). The Scotian Basin straddles the continental slope and Scotian Shelf, with waters ranging in depth from less than 200 m to over 4,000 m (CNSOPB 2013). Water depth within the Project Area ranges from 100 m to more than 3,000 m.

The seabed of the Project Area is characterized by a variety of surficial sediments on the continental slope, with silty sediments being carried down the slope by suspension, and sand and gravel slumping over the shelf edge. Some areas of steep slope have exposed bedrock, as do the submarine canyons which exist along the slope. These canyons act as a transition from the outer Scotian Shelf to the deeper ocean and act as channels for the transport of sand (WWF 2009). These canyons also contain a greater variety of habitats compared to those of the surrounding shelf and slope. Several benthic surveys have been conducted along the Scotian Slope in 2001 and 2002 in the general vicinity of the Project Area. Additionally, Shell conducted a seabed survey in 2014 which characterized benthic habitat in the Shelburne Basin Venture Exploration project area. Figure 3.4 shows areas of existing benthic characterization (2001 and 2002 data) relative to the Project Area. Based on this data, the benthic habitat is comprised of Holocene mud (silt) and clay. Brittle stars, burrowing anemones, polychaetes, sea cucumbers, sea urchins and large nudibranchs were observed in former ELs 2381 and 2382. Sea whips (Order Gorgonacea), soft coral (Anthomastus spp.) and octocorals (Umbellula spp.) were observed at depths less than 2000 m (JWEL 2003).

The climate in the Project Area is strongly influenced by the warm Gulf Stream and the cold Labrador Current. Ocean current circulation is influenced by these two major currents as well as the Nova Scotia Current which derives from the outflow of the Gulf of St. Lawrence flowing along the inner, middle and outer portions of the Shelf (Stantec 2012). Fog is relatively common, particularly in spring and summer and average daily air temperatures range from -1.4°C (February) to 17.8°C (August) (Stantec 2012).

The steep topography at the Scotian Shelf break causes enhanced vertical mixing. This contributes to an area of increased primary production, drawing higher numbers of cetaceans, fish and birds along the Shelf break. The submarine canyons which line the Scotian Slope are believed to provide diverse habitat for fish and cetaceans. Deep sea corals and other filter feeders can be found on canyon walls (Stantec 2012).



File: 121413516 3.10

Figure 3.4 Available Benthic Habitat Characterization Data in the Vicinity of the Project Area



File: 121413516 3.11

Approximately 20 species of cetaceans are present on the Scotian Shelf and/or Slope. Marine wildlife monitoring during BP’s Tangier 3D Seismic Survey (May to September 2014) identified 13 odontocete species (i.e., toothed whale) and 5 mysticete (i.e., baleen whale) species. Sperm whales (Physeter microcephalus) were overall the most commonly observed species during the monitoring program. Besides sperm whales, long-finned pilot whales (Globicephala melas) and short-beaked common dolphin (Delphinus delphis) were the most commonly observed odontocete species, and fin whales (Balaenoptera physalus) and blue whales (Balaenoptera musculus) the most commonly observed baleen whales (RPS 2014). Several cetacean species known to occur in the area are designated to be at risk under the SARA or by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) (refer to Table 3.1).

Five species of pinnipeds are known to occur on the Scotian Shelf, with Sable Island hosting breeding populations of grey seals (Halichoerus grypus) and harbor seals (Phoca vitulina). Other species known to forage in the area include harp (Phoca groenlandica), hooded (Cystophora cristata) and ringed (Phoca hipsida) seals. No seal populations on the Scotian Shelf are designated to be at risk under SARA or by COSEWIC. Pinnipeds are most commonly found on the Shelf (particularly around Sable Island) and nearshore waters and are less likely to be found in the Project Area.

Four species of sea turtles can be found in the Project Area, with the leatherback sea turtle (Dermochelys coriacea) and loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta) the most likely to occur. These species, as well as the green sea turtle (Chelonia mydas) were observed during BP’s 2014 wildlife monitoring program (RPS 2014). The likelihood of Kemp’s ridley turtle (Lepidochelys kempii) being present in the Project Area is low.

The east coast of Canada supports large numbers of breeding birds as well as migrating birds from the southern hemisphere and northeastern Atlantic (Gjerdrum et al. 2008). Bird species are present year-round on the Scotian Shelf and Slope, with higher densities of sea birds occurring along the Shelf Break where there is higher productivity. The most abundant seabirds encountered in the offshore area include northern fulmar (Fulmarus glacialis), shearwaters, dovekie (Alle alle), storm-petrels, murres, gulls, terns, and black-legged kittiwakes (Rissa tridactyla). During the 2014 wildlife monitoring program around the Project Area from June to September, shearwaters and storm-petrels were the most commonly observed species (RPS 2014).

There are approximately 28 marine fish, 8 mammal, 2 sea turtle and 9 bird species of conservation interest (i.e., species listed by SARA and/or COSEWIC) which are known to occur on the Scotian Shelf and Slope and could be present in the Project Area or Regional Study Area (refer to Table 3.1).



File: 121413516 3.12

Table 3.1 Species of Conservation Interest with Potential to Occur in and around the Project Area

Common Name Scientific Name SARA Schedule 1 Status COSEWIC Designation

Marine Fish Species of Conservation Interest

Acadian redfish (Atlantic population) Sebastes fasciatus Not Listed Threatened

American eel Anguilla rostrata Not Listed Threatened

American plaice (Maritime population) Hippoglossus platessoides Not Listed Threatened

Atlantic bluefin tuna Thunnus thynnus Not Listed Endangered

Atlantic cod (Laurentian South population) Gadus morhua

Not Listed Endangered

Atlantic cod (Southern population) Not Listed Endangered

Atlantic salmon (Outer Bay of Fundy)

Salmo salar

Not Listed Endangered

Atlantic salmon (Inner Bay of Fundy) Not Listed Endangered

Atlantic salmon (Eastern Cape Breton population) Not Listed Endangered

Atlantic salmon (Nova Scotia Southern Upland population) Not Listed Endangered

Atlantic sturgeon (Maritimes populations) Ancipenser oxyrinchus Not Listed Threatened

Atlantic (striped) wolffish Anarhichas lupus Special Concern Special Concern

Basking shark (Atlantic population) Cetorhinus maximus Not Listed Special Concern

Blue shark (Atlantic population) Priomace glauca Not Listed Special Concern

Cusk Brosme brosme Not Listed Endangered

Deepwater redfish (Northern population) Sebastes mentalla Not Listed Threatened

Northern wolffish Anarhichas denticulatus Threatened Threatened

Porbeagle shark Lamna nasus Not Listed Endangered

Roughhead grenadier Macrourus berglax Not Listed Special Concern

Roundnose grenadier Coryphaenoides rupestris Not Listed Endangered



File: 121413516 3.13



Shortfin mako Isurus oxyrinchus Not Listed Threatened

Smooth skate (Laurentian-Scotian population) Malacoraja senta Not Listed Special Concern

Spiny dogfish (Atlantic population) Squalus acanthias Not Listed Special Concern

Spotted wolffish Anarhichas minor Threatened Threatened Striped bass (Southern Gulf of St. Lawrence population

and Bay of Fundy population) Morone Saxatilis Not Listed Special Concern Endangered

Thorny skate Amblyraja radiate Not Listed Special Concern

White shark Carcharodon Carcharias Endangered Endangered

White hake Urophycis tenuis Not Listed Special

Marine Mammal Species of Conservation Interest

Blue whale (Atlantic population) Balaenoptera musculus Schedule 1, Endangered Endangered

Fin whale (Atlantic Population) Balaenoptera physalus Schedule 1, Special Concern Special Concern

Humpback whale (Western North Atlantic population) Megaptera novaeangliae Schedule 3, Special Concern Not at Risk

North Atlantic right whale Eubalaena glacialis Schedule 1, Endangered Endangered

Harbour porpoise (Northwest Atlantic population) Phocoena phocoena Schedule 2, Threatened Special Concern

Killer whale Orcinus orca Not Listed Special Concern

Northern bottlenose whale (Scotian Shelf Population) Hyperoodon ampullatus Schedule 1, Endangered Endangered

Sowerby’s beaked whale Mesoplodon bidens Schedule 1, Special Concern Not Listed

Sea Turtle Species of Conservation Interest Leatherback sea turtle Dermochelys coriacea Schedule 1, Endangered Endangered

Loggerhead sea turtle Caretta caretta Not Listed Endangered



File: 121413516 3.14



Bird Species of Conservation Interest

Peregrine Falcon (anatum/tundrius subspecies) Falco perengrinus anatum/tundrius Special Concern Special Concern

Ivory Gull Pagophila eburnea Endangered Endangered

Roseate Tern Sterna dougallii Endangered Endangered

Barrows Goldeneye Bucephala islandica Special Concern Special Concern

Red-necked Phalarope Phalaropus lobatus Not Listed Special Concern

Harlequin Duck Histrionicus histrionicus Special Concern Special Concern

Piping Plover (melodus subspecies) Charadrius melodus melodus Endangered Endangered

Red Knot (rufa subspecies) Calidris canutus rufa Endangered Endangered

Savannah Sparrow (princeps subspecies) Passerculus sandwichensis princeps Special Concern Special Concern



File: 121413516 3.15

Protected and sensitive areas, collectively referred to as Special Areas, that occur within a 150 km radius of the Project Area are shown on Figure 3.5 and summarized in Table 3.2. Additional Special Areas may be identified for inclusion to the scope of the EIS as Project planning advances and the extent of area potentially affected by the Project is refined.

In addition to the protected areas summarized in Table 3.2, there are several Ecologically and Biologically Significant Areas (EBSAs) that have been designated on the Scotian Shelf and Slope that would fall within a 150 km radius of the Project Area. EBSAs have no formal designation or regulatory protection but are recognized by scientific experts as playing a key role in marine protected areas planning. Of particular relevance are two EBSAs which overlap with the Project Area:

Scotian Slope EBSA; and Emerald-Western-Sable Island Bank Complex EBSA.

The Scotian Slope is the largest EBSA offshore Nova Scotia (72,800 km2), extending the length of the Scotian Slope. It is recognized for its high productivity and fish species diversity, small fish and small invertebrate species richness, unique habitats and sensitive benthic communities. It is also recognized as being important for groundfish and seabirds, and is a migratory route for cetaceans and large pelagic fishes (DFO 2014).

The Emerald-Western-Sable Island Bank Complex is another large EBSA (17,900 km2) which contains important habitat for groundfish (particularly for spawning and nursery areas), invertebrates, seabirds, and cetaceans. It is recognized for its high larval fish abundance and diversity, and has high fish and invertebrate biomass and species diversity. The western gully area of the EBSA (not to be confused with the Gully MPA) is of potential significance to cetaceans (DFO 2014).

These EBSAs and others in the regional study area will be discussed further in the EIS.



File: 121413516 3.16

Figure 3.5 Special Areas



File: 121413516 3.17

Table 3.2 Designated Special Areas within 150 km Radius of the Project Area

Special Area Relative Location Designation and Ecological Significance

Designated Protected Areas

Sable Island National Park Reserve

Approximately 48 km northeast of Project Area

Protected under the National Parks Act and provincial Special Places Protection Act Designated as a Migratory Bird Sanctuary and Important Bird Area Hosts over 190 species of plants and 350 species of birds including SARA-listed Ipswich

(Savannah) Sparrow and Roseate Tern, world’s largest breeding colony of grey seals, and over 400 feral horses

Comprises “critical habitat” designated under SARA for the Roseate Tern

The Gully Marine Protected Area

Approximately 71 km east of Project Area

Designated Marine Protected Area (MPA) under the Oceans Act Part of the Gully is designated as a whale sanctuary to help protect Northern bottlenose whales Comprises “critical habitat” designated under SARA for the Scotian Shelf population of northern

bottlenose whale. Contains significant coral communities, a diversity of shallow and deepwater fish, and variety of cetaceans including a resident population of the SARA-listed northern bottlenose whale and Sowerby’s beaked whale

Northern Bottlenose Whale Critical Habitat

Approximately 82 km east of the Project Area

The Critical Habitat Statement for the Scotian Shelf population of Northern bottlenose whale identifies Zone 1 of the Gully MPA and areas with water depths of more than 500 m in Haldimand and Shortland Canyons as Critical Habitat under SARA

Fisheries Closure Areas

Haddock Box -Haddock Spawning Area

Approximately 125 ha of the Project Area falls within the Haddock Box

An important nursery area for the protection of juvenile haddock which is closed year-round to the commercial groundfish fishery under the Fisheries Act

Adult haddock aggregate to spawn from March to June

Sambro Bank and Emerald Bank Sponge Conservation Areas

Approximately 127 km north of the Project Area

Area approximately 62 km2 on Sambro Bank, between LaHave Basin and Emerald Basin on the Scotian Shelf closed to bottom-contact fishing to protect globally unique aggregations of glass sponge Vazella pourtalesi



File: 121413516 3.18

3.2.3 Socio-economic Setting

Within and surrounding the Project Area, the socio-economic setting is dominated by commercial fisheries activity. Groundfish, pelagic, and invertebrate fisheries occur on the Scotian Shelf and Slope, with large pelagics (e.g., swordfish, tuna, shark) being the most commonly harvested in the Project Area. The Project Area lies within Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization (NAFO) Fishery Unit Areas 4Wf, 4Wm, 4Wj, and 4Wg. Figures 3.6 and 3.7 show the NAFO Unit Areas as well as other commercial fisheries management areas relative to the Project Area.

Waters off Nova Scotia have traditionally been used by Aboriginal peoples for resource harvesting. Commercial and communal commercial fishing licences are held in and around the Project Area. A Traditional Use Study (TUS) will be conducted to examine Aboriginal use of the Project Area and the surrounding area, including food, social and ceremonial (FSC) and communal commercial fishing activities. The findings of the TUS will be incorporated into the EIS to help assess potential effects on Aboriginal resource use.

Other ocean uses include shipping, marine research, oil and gas exploration and military training operations. Shipping traffic in the area is generally concentrated parallel to the Shelf edge and consists primarily of tankers and cargo carriers, as well as fishing vessels, cruise ships and government vessels.

Marine research activities include various scientific studies including, but not limited to: DFO’s annual multi-species trawl surveys which are used to monitor fish populations; ongoing data collection from Environment Canada weather buoys and moorings to collect data for the RAPID Climate Change Program study; and Atlantic Zone Off-Shelf Monitoring Program. Other ocean uses, including research activities, will be identified during the preparation of the EIS.

In addition to the petroleum exploration activity proposed by BP, there are other planned exploration and/or ongoing petroleum development projects offshore Nova Scotia (refer to Figure 3.8). Closest to the Project Area is the prospective drilling area for the proposed Shelburne Basin Venture Exploration Drilling Project located immediately west of the BP exploration licence area, which is scheduled to begin exploration drilling pending regulatory approval, in 2015. The Sable Offshore Energy Project, which comprises a central processing platform, four satellite platforms, subsea wells and flowlines, and a subsea pipeline to shore, is located approximately 11 km northeast from the Project Area. The Deep Panuke Offshore Gas Development Project, which comprises a jack-up mobile offshore production unit, subsea wells and flowlines, and another subsea pipeline to shore, is located 35 km from the Project Area. These developments, which host workers on a rotational basis, represent the nearest temporary residences to the Project. The next closest temporary or seasonal residences to the Project Area would be on Sable Island, a National Park Reserve, which hosts researchers and a few Parks Canada employees.



File: 121413516 3.19

Figure 3.6 NAFO Unit Areas



File: 121413516 3.20

Figure 3.7 Other Fisheries Management Areas



File: 121413516 3.21

Figure 3.8 Other Past and Present Petroleum Industry Activity



File: 121413516 3.22

Maritime Forces Atlantic (MARLANT) represents Canada’s east coast naval presence and engages in various operations and training activities offshore Nova Scotia. The Project Area is outside any military firing exercise areas. Data presented in the SEA for the Eastern Scotian Slope (Phase 1B) (Stantec 2012) suggests there may be an explosive dumpsite in the Project Area, as well as abandoned telecommunication cables.

Given the Project’s offshore location, a consideration of physical and cultural heritage sites is limited to potential shipwrecks in the area. As shown in Figure 3.9, there are several reported shipwrecks on the Scotian Shelf and Slope including few along the periphery of the Project Area.

Well sites will avoid known locations of shipwrecks and other debris. An ROV survey conducted prior to drilling will provide information on hazards, debris or seabed structures at proposed well sites.



File: 121413516 3.23

Figure 3.9 Identified Shipwrecks in the Vicinity of the Project Area

SCOTIAN

ConsultatiAugust 20

File: 1214

4.0

BP recogover the in Nova primary ocommunengagem

Figure 4.

INFORthe P

ENGAopiniomitiga

UNDEAbori

REVIEopera

INFORso tha

4.1 A

BP recogimportanfeedbac

N BASIN EXPL

ion and Enga015

413516

CONSU

gnizes the im life of the Pr Scotia by objectives anications to ment as a cy

.1 Cycli

RM (1): Provroject, its eff

AGE: Providons and coation. ERSTAND: Eniginal group

EW: Incorpoation of the RM (2): Proviat the consu

ABORIGIN

gnizes the ponce of engack on potent

ORATION DR

gement

ULTATION

mportance oroject. BP bebuilding relround consuhelp build uyclical proce

cal Consult

ide accuratfects, and the opportunncerns abou

nable the Ps and stakeh

orate these Project. ide feedbac

ultation and

NAL ENG

otential for taging Aborigial issues and

RILLING PROJ

N AND E

of early andelieves that itationships w

ultation and understandiness as depict

tation and E

te, relevant, he EIS procesnities for Abut the Proje

Project teaholders. concerns

ck to Aborigiengagemen

GAGEMEN

the Project tginal organd concerns.

JECT – PROJE

ENGAGE

d ongoing stt is importanwith Aborigi engageme

ng and trustted in Figure

Engageme

timely and ss.

boriginal groct, and to s

m to unde

and prioriti

inal groups ant process c

NT

to affect Abizations to p

ECT DESCRIP

EMENT

takeholder ent to maintainnal groups

ent are to pro. BP regards

e 4.1 and exp

ent Process

culturally ap

oups and stseek suppor

erstand the

ies into the

and stakehoontinues.

boriginal inteprovide Proj

PTION

engagemenn a social licand key st

ovide transps Aboriginal plained belo

ppropriate in

takeholders rt for the Pro

concerns

e design, c

olders as the

erests and acject informa

nt that contcence to optakeholders.parent and t and stakehow.

nformation a

to express oject and ef

and prioritie

construction

Project dev

cknowledgeation and o

4.1

tinues erate . BP’s timely holder

about

their ffects

es of

and

elops

es the obtain


Consultation and Engagement August 2015

File: 121413516 4.2

There are 13 First Nations in Nova Scotia (refer to Table 4.1). The General Assembly of Nova Scotia Mi’kmaq Chiefs represents the governance for the Mi’kmaq of Nova Scotia. The Kwilmu’kw Maw-klusuaqn Negotiation Office (KMKNO) represents the Assembly with respect to consultation on Mi’kmaq Aboriginal or treaty rights. Sipekne’katik First Nation is a Nova Scotia Mi’kmaq community. Sipekne’katik First Nation is a member of the Assembly of Nova Scotia Mi’kmaq Chiefs but in 2013 chose to represent itself in consultation, as opposed to being represented by the KMKNO. Sipekne’katik First Nation asserts the same rights as other Mi’kmaq communities. The Native Council of Nova Scotia (NCNS) identifies itself as the “self-governing authority for the large community of Mi’kmaq/Aboriginal peoples residing off-reserve in Nova Scotia throughout traditional Mi’kmaq territory” (NCNS 2015). BP’s engagement with the Mi’kmaq of Nova Scotia began in October 2013 when BP was planning the Tangier 3D Seismic Survey Project.

Table 4.1 First Nations of Nova Scotia

Acadia RR#4, P.O. Box 5914-C Yarmouth, NS, B5A 4A8 Tel: 902-742-0257

Membertou 111 Membertou St. Sydney, NS, B1S 2M9 Tel: 902-564-6466

Annapolis Valley P.O. Box 89, Cambridge Station, Kings County, NS, B0P 1G0 Tel: 902-538-7149

Millbrook P.O. Box 634, Truro, NS B2N 5E5 Tel: 902-897-9199

Chapel Island P.O. Box 538 Chapel Island, NS B0E 3B0 Tel: 902-535-3317

Pictou Landing RR#2, Site #6, Box 55, Trenton, NS, B0K 1X0 Tel: 902-752-4912

Eskasoni P.O. Box 7040 Eskasoni, NS B1W 1A1 Tel: 902-379-2800

Paq’tnek (Afton) R.R. #1, Afton Antigonish County, NS B0H 1A0 Tel: 902-386-2781

Sipekne’katik/Indian Brook Indian Brook Post Office, 522 Church St. Indian Brook, NS , B0N 1W0 Tel: 902-758-2049

We’koqma’q P.O. Box 149 Whycocomagh, NS B0E 3M0 Tel: 902-756-2337

Glooscap P.O. Box 449 Hantsport, NS B0P 1P0 Tel: 902-684-9788

Wagmatcook P.O. Box 30001 Wagmatcook, NS B0E 1B0 Tel: 902-295-2598

Bear River P.O. Box 210 Bear River, NS B0S 1B0 Tel: 467-3802



File: 121413516 4.3

Aboriginal engagement conducted to date with respect to the proposed exploration drilling Project is summarized in Table 4.2.

Table 4.2 Summary of Aboriginal Engagement Conducted for the Project (as of May 31, 2015)

Organization Date Means of Consultation Key Issues

Kwilmu’kq Maw-Klusuaqn Negotiation Office (KMKNO)

December 3, 2014 Meeting with Benefits Committee

Emphasis on meaningful engagement and benefits.

December 4, 2014 Meeting with KMK consultant

KMK’s training and capacity strategic plan discussion.

January 28, 2015 Meeting with KMK consultant

KMK’s training and capacity strategic plan discussion update.

February 23, 2015 Meeting Project update and discussion around BP/KMK relationship development including MOU template and engagement commitments

March 11, 2015 Public Symposium BP attendance at the Business Together Symposium, conversations with several leaders of the Assembly about economic opportunities.

March 12, 2015 Meeting Progress made on MOU discussions. April 15, 2015 Meeting Detailed discussion and negotiation of

MOU. April 15, 2015 Meeting Regulatory process and inclusion

of KMK discussed. May 27, 2015 Meeting Detailed discussion and negotiation of

MOU. May 27, 2015 Meeting Follow up on regulatory process and

inclusion of KMK. Sipekne'katik May 20, 2015 Meeting Meeting to engage the community of

Sipekne'katik on the Scotian Basin Project.

Native Council of Nova Scotia (NCNS)

December 3, 2014 Meeting General discussion around BP's future plans in Nova Scotia.

February 25, 2015 Meeting Employment and capacity training and contract opportunity discussion.

March 19, 2015 Meeting Discussion around BP’s plans and NCNS’s interest in offshore fishery. Identified the key areas requiring further discussion as BP progresses to an exploration program.

March 25, 2015

Meeting

General discussion around BP’s exploration program.



File: 121413516 4.4

Interests, issues and concerns raised during discussions with Aboriginal organizations thus far have comprised two broad themes: environmental and operational safety concerns; and interest around economic development opportunities. Environmental topics included: the need for a general understanding of offshore deepwater exploratory well activities; potential impacts of the Project on marine wildlife and fishing activities; the impacts of a potential spill (especially to the fishery); the use of dispersants for a potential spill; and HSE measures BP has implemented based on its experience. Interest in economic development opportunities focused on: potential contract opportunities for Aboriginal businesses, potential employment opportunities from offshore drilling activities, and training opportunities for youth and adults.

BP recognizes that Aboriginal use of marine resources in the study area may extend beyond that solely used by the Mi’kmaq of Nova Scotia. Maliseet and Mi’kmaq First Nations in New Brunswick and Newfoundland and Labrador have been identified as conducting fishing activities in the vicinity of the Project and therefore may also have an interest in the Project. Based on information collected to date, the following Aboriginal organizations have been identified as having fishing licenses in the Project Area:

Nova Scotia

Acadia First Nation; Glooscap First Nation; Membertou First Nation; Millbrook First Nation; Sipekne’katik First Nation; Mime ‘J Seafoods Ltd. (NCNS); Waycobah First Nation; Wagmatcook First Nation;

New Brunswick

Fort Folly First Nation; St. Mary's First Nation; Woodstock First Nation; and

Newfoundland and Labrador

Conne River Band, Miawpukek First Nations.



File: 121413516 4.5

The following additional Aboriginal organizations have been identified as having fishing licenses in the Regional Study Area:

Afton First Nation; Annapolis Valley First Nation; Apaqtukewag Fishermans Co-op; Bear River First Nation; Chapel Island Band Council; Glooscap First Nation; Eskasoni First Nation; Kingsclear First Nation; New Brunswick Aboriginal Peoples Council; Oromocto First Nation; and Tobique First Nation.

There may be additional Aboriginal organizations not identified above that conduct fishing activities within the Project Area or larger regional study area. These will be confirmed during the preparation of the EIS and TUS.

BP has commissioned a TUS which will supplement information obtained during Aboriginal engagement efforts to help to characterize Aboriginal use of marine resources in the vicinity of the Project and assist in the assessment of effects on current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes.

BP will continue to engage Aboriginal groups with whom it has built relationships, and will expand its relationships to include other Aboriginal organizations that may have an interest in the Project Area and potential activities. Ongoing engagement will include listening and responding to the concerns of Aboriginal groups in a timely manner. BP plans to provide educational overviews to aid dialogue of the themes which emerged from early engagement discussions as well as any new Project-relevant topics which emerge.

4.2 STAKEHOLDER AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

BP employs a broad definition of stakeholders, to include fisheries organizations, environmental non-governmental organizations (NGOs), industry associations, government, and the interested public. The following is a preliminary list of stakeholders that have been identified as potentially having an interest in the Project:

CNSOPB; Government of Nova Scotia (various departments); Government of Canada (various departments); Municipal governments and economic development authorities (as applicable);



File: 121413516 4.6

Fish producers and fisheries associations (including the CNSOPB Fisheries Advisory Committee);

NGOs (e.g., Ecology Action Centre, Friends of Sable Island Society); Petroleum industry associations (e.g., Maritime Energy Association, Canadian Association of

Petroleum Producers) and peer companies; Halifax Chamber of Commerce; and Post-secondary institutions.

BP’s stakeholder and community outreach objectives include providing transparent and factual information about its plans and activities and encouraging input from stakeholders. As an active member of the broader Nova Scotia community, investing in local energy education and research initiatives and participating in association memberships, BP also has opportunities to develop and maintain positive working relationships with stakeholders.

A summary of BP’s stakeholder engagement efforts on the Project since November 2014 is provided in Table 4.3. In addition to the meetings outlined below, BP also maintains a website with updates on BP’s activity in Nova Scotia (http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/about-bp/bp-worldwide/bp-in-canada/bp-in-nova-scotia.html). The website also includes newsletters with additional information. The November 2014 Newsletter provided information on the completed Tangier 3D Seismic Survey Project and introduced a potential exploration well program for 2017.



File: 121413516 4.7

Table 4.3 Summary of Stakeholder Engagement Conducted for the Project (as of May 31, 2015)

Organization Date Means of Consultation Key Issues

Government Agencies/Departments

Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency

April 15, 2015 April 20, 2015

Meeting Meeting to introduce project and discuss regulatory framework.

Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO)

March 16, 2015 Meeting Discussion about Aboriginal commercial fishing program.

April 13, 2015 Meeting Discussed insights into areas of interest in EIS.

Nova Scotia Office of Aboriginal Affairs

December 4, 2014 Meeting Regulatory requirements around consultation.

Environment Canada

April 20, 2015 Meeting Discussed insights into areas of interest in EIS.

Fisheries

Fisheries Advisory Committee (FAC) (CNSOPB)

January 21, 2015 Notes for Meeting BP provided a written update on the exploration drilling Project for communication at the FAC meeting.

May 12, 2015 Meeting BP provided a timeline update and discussed the key areas requiring further discussion as BP progresses to an exploration program.

Guysborough County Inshore Fishermen’s Association

March 24, 2015 Meeting Identified the key areas requiring further discussion as BP progresses to an exploration program.

Seafood Producers of Nova Scotia (SPANS)

March 25, 2015 Meeting Identified the key areas requiring further discussion as BP progresses to an exploration program.

Other Interest Groups

Strait Area Chamber of Commerce

November 27, 2014

Meeting BP provided an update on 2014 activities.

BP engaged fisher communities first through the Fisheries Advisory Committee (FAC) of the CNSOPB and then by individual fisher organizations (including aboriginal fisheries.) In discussions both at the FAC and with individual fisher organizations, the common themes of safety and environment were consistent in all discussions. Dialogue about a proposed offshore project with other stakeholders including the Nova Scotia Government and Federal Government Departments (including Fisheries and Oceans) revealed similar concerns.



File: 121413516 4.8

Environmental topics included: the need for a general understanding of offshore deepwater exploratory well activities; how activities may impact fishing activities; the impacts from a potential spill (especially to the fisheries); the use of dispersants for a potential spill; and HSE measures BP has implemented based on its experience.

Interest in economic development and social opportunities focused on: potential contract opportunities for Nova Scotia businesses; potential employment opportunities from offshore drilling activities; community social investment in Nova Scotia; and long term investments in the region including training opportunities for youth and adults.

On-going engagement will include listening and responding to stakeholder concerns in a timely manner. BP will provide educational overviews to aid dialogue of the themes which emerged from early engagement discussions as well as any new Project-relevant topics which emerge.


Potential Project-Related Changes to the Environment and Scoping Considerations August 2015

File: 121413516 5.1

5.0 POTENTIAL PROJECT-RELATED CHANGES TO THE ENVIRONMENT AND SCOPING CONSIDERATIONS

5.1 POTENTIAL PROJECT-RELATED CHANGES TO THE ENVIRONMENT

5.1.1 Planned Activities Offshore

Project activities have potential to result in changes to the environment. Potential routine Project activities that may result in changes to the environment include:

Presence and operation of the drilling vessel (including lights and flare, underwater sound and safety zone);

VSP surveys (underwater sound); Discharges and emissions (e.g., drill muds and cuttings, liquid discharges, atmospheric

emissions); OSV (underwater sound) and helicopter operations; and Well abandonment.

Under CEAA, 2012, the Project Description must provide a description of any potential changes to fish and fish habitat, aquatic species, and migratory birds that may be caused as a result of carrying out the Project. Additionally, the Project Description must also provide information on the effects of any potential environmental changes to federal or transboundary lands as well as on Aboriginal peoples.

Table 5.1 provides an overview of the potential environmental interactions with routine Project activities, including offshore logistical support operations (e.g., OSV and helicopter use) that have the potential to result in changes to the environmental components identified in CEAA, 2012. These potential interactions will be assessed in more detail in the EIS.



File: 121413516 5.2

Table 5.1 Potential Environmental Interactions with Routine Project Activities

Environmental Component of

Concern

Relevant Section of

CEAA, 2012 Potential Environmental Interactions

Fish, Fish Habitat, and Aquatic Species

5(1)(a)(i) 5(1)(a)(ii)

Routine Project activities have the potential to result in changes affecting fish, fish habitat, aquatic species as defined under SARA, marine mammals, and other aquatic species if the following interactions with the environment were to occur: disturbance to aquatic species from underwater sound emissions associated with OSV transit,

drilling and VSP activities; localized degradation and disturbance to the benthic environment (including benthic species) due

to seabed disposal at drill site(s) (i.e., drill mud/cuttings, cement) including potential smothering and mortality of benthic organisms;

localized effects on marine water quality due to routine ocean discharges (e.g., waste water) from the drilling vessel and OSVs; and

potential injury or mortality to marine mammal(s) from vessel collisions.

Migratory Birds 5(1)(a)(iii) Routine Project activities have the potential to result in changes affecting migratory birds, as defined under the Migratory Birds Convention Act, 1994, if the following interactions with the environment were to occur: attraction of migratory birds to OSV and drilling vessel lighting (including flares) and discharges (e.g.

food wastes); and mortality or stranding of migratory birds (particularly storm petrels) on the drilling vessel or OSVs.

Project Activities Occurring on Federal Lands

5(1)(b)(i) Routine Project activities have the potential to result in changes to the environment that would occur on federal waters as a result of the Project Area being located within Canada’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and thus entirely within federal waters under the jurisdiction of the Government of Canada. Given the broad definition of “environment” under CEAA, 2012, potential Project interactions with land, water, air, organic and inorganic matter and living organisms, and interacting natural systems must be considered. In particular, in addition to components of the environment previously addressed above (e.g., effects on water quality, fish, fish habitat, aquatic species and migratory birds) there could also be effects on the atmospheric environment (e.g., air and noise emissions).

Transboundary Issues

5(1)(b)(ii) Environmental interactions from routine Project activities are not anticipated to result in changes to the environment that would occur outside of the Nova Scotian or Canadian offshore area.



File: 121413516 5.3



Concern

Relevant Section of


Health and Socio-Economic Conditions for Aboriginal People

5(1)(c)(i)

Routine Project activities have the potential to result in the following changes to the environment that may have an effect on Aboriginal commercial fishing activities, including those carried out under communal commercial licences in and around the Project Area: establishment of a safety zone (fisheries exclusion zone) around the drilling vessel during drilling

activities, as required by the CNSOPB, and associated spatial and temporal restrictions on commercial fish harvesting activity; and

disturbance from underwater sound emissions, and associated changes in behavior and distribution of commercial fish species.

The Project is also expected to have economic benefits, including economic and contracting opportunities. Routine OSV operations outside of the safety zone will be consistent with existing offshore and nearshore shipping traffic in the region and are not anticipated to result in any changes to the environment that would have an effect on Aboriginal commercial fishing activities. Routine Project activities are not expected to result in any changes to the environment that would have an effect on the health conditions of Aboriginal peoples.

Health and Socio-Economic Conditions

5(2)(b)(i) Routine Project activities have the potential to result in the following changes to the environment that may have an effect on commercial fishing activities, including those carried out under commercial licences in and around the Project Area: establishment of a safety zone (fisheries exclusion zone) around the drilling vessel during drilling

activities, as required by the CNSOPB, and associated spatial and temporal restrictions on commercial fish harvesting activity; and

disturbance from underwater sound emissions, and associated changes in behavior and distribution of commercial fish species.

The Project is also expected to have economic benefits, including economic and contracting opportunities. Routine OSV operations outside of the safety zone will be consistent with existing offshore and nearshore shipping traffic in the region and are not anticipated to result in any changes to the environment that would have an effect on commercial fishing activities. Routine Project activities are not expected to result in any changes to the environment that would have an effect on health conditions.



File: 121413516 5.4



Concern

Relevant Section of


Physical and Cultural Heritage, or Resources of Historical, Archaeological, Paleontological, or Architectural Significance

5(1)(c)(ii) 5(1)(c)(iv) 5(2)(b)(ii) 5(2)(b)(iii)

Routine Project activities are not anticipated to result in any changes to the environment that would have an effect on physical and cultural heritage areas or resources including shipwrecks that have been recorded in the Project Area. Information gathered during 3D seismic surveys and pre-drill ROV site surveys in the Project Area will document the presence/absence of marine heritage resources on the seabed before any seabed disturbance takes place. If any concerns related to this matter are identified during Aboriginal engagement for this Project, they will be considered in the EIS.

Current Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes by Aboriginal People

5(1)(c)(iii) Routine Project activities are not anticipated to result in any changes to the environment that would have an effect on the current use of land and resources for traditional purposes by Aboriginal peoples, other than communal commercial fisheries (discussed above), given the Project Area’s water depth and distance from shore. Routine OSV activities will be consistent with existing shipping traffic in the region and are not anticipated to result in any changes to the environment that would have an effect on traditional Aboriginal fisheries and resource use. Additional information regarding traditional Aboriginal fisheries and traditional resource use will be gathered through Aboriginal engagement and the conduct of a TUS. If any concerns related to this matter are identified during these processes, they will be considered in the EIS.

Other Changes to the Environment Directly Related or Necessarily Incidental to a Federal Authority’s Exercise of a Power or Performance of a Duty or Function in Support of the Project

5(2)(a) Routine Project activities authorized by the CNSOPB have the potential to result in directly related or necessarily incidental changes to the atmospheric and marine environment. All of these changes have been discussed above.

Modified from Shell and Stantec (2013)



File: 121413516 5.5

5.1.2 Planned Activities Onshore

Routine logistical activities at the onshore supply base are either not anticipated to result in any adverse environmental effects, or have the potential to cause only minor environmental effects that can be adequately managed. This conclusion is based on the following considerations:

The onshore supply base will be located at an existing marine terminal in a highly developed setting. The candidate supply base locations are currently used for routine industrial activities that are consistent with those to be carried out in association with the Project and have been shown to meet BP’s minimum operational requirements.

The candidate supply base sites already have most of the primary infrastructure, equipment and facilities onsite to support past or existing operations. Two candidate supply base locations, Mulgrave Marine Terminal (Strait of Canso) and Woodside Terminal (Halifax Harbour), require no site expansion, major civil works, permanent building construction, clearing, or in-water work to support the Project. The third candidate location, Richmond Terminals (Halifax Harbour), would require civil works to support the installation of bulk storage tanks and a liquid mud plant; no in water work is required.

Where civil works are required (e.g., Richmond Terminals), standard industry practices to manage runoff, erosion and sediment control will be applied, including the use of tarping, berming, silt fencing and/or other methods as appropriate. There will be no discharge to the marine environment and no interaction with migratory birds except potentially incremental lighting consistent with port development.

The selected supply base will have approvals and management systems in place for the existing operations and infrastructure on the site, and will already be in compliance with applicable legislation, regulations, rules and requirements, including any applicable environmental assessment processes.

Potential environmental interactions with the supply base in support of the Project (considering all three candidate sites) are summarized in Table 5.2.



File: 121413516 5.6

Table 5.2 Potential Environmental Interactions with Supply Base Activities in Support of the Project

Environmental Component of Concern

Relevant Section of CEAA, 2012 Potential Environmental Interactions


5(1)(a)(i) 5(1)(a)(ii)

Routine activities at the onshore supply base are not anticipated to interact with the environment in such a way that results in changes affecting fish, fish habitat, aquatic species as defined under SARA, marine mammals, or other aquatic species for the following reasons: all supply base activities are carried out entirely onshore; no in-water works (e.g., dredging, wharf extension) are required to prepare the

selected supply base location for Project activities; and if excavation is required for mud batch installation (e.g., at Richmond Terminals),

standard industry practices for the management of erosion, runoff and sediment control will be applied, including the use of tarping, berming, silt fencing and/or other methods as appropriate to prevent discharges to the marine environment.

Migratory Birds 5(1)(a)(iii) Routine activities at the onshore supply base are not anticipated to interact with the environment in such a way that results in changes affecting migratory birds, as defined under the Migratory Birds Convention Act, 1994, for the following reasons: effluent is managed in accordance with environmental regulations which are

designed to mitigate potential impacts from discharges; all of the candidate supply base locations under consideration are active marine

terminal facilities that currently use artificial lighting; and installation of additional lighting (if required) would result in only a small incremental

increase in light emissions beyond those already associated with the supply base and/or surrounding industrial area and the use of directional lighting would be considered.


5(1)(b)(i) Routine Project activities at the onshore supply base have the potential to result in changes to the environment on lands owned by the Halifax Port Authority for the Richmond Terminals location. However, these changes would be temporary and are not expected to result in transboundary effects, or environmental effects on aquatic species, migratory birds or Aboriginal people as demonstrated within this Table.

Transboundary Issues 5(1)(b)(ii) Routine Project activities at the onshore supply base are not anticipated to result in any change to the environment that would occur outside of the existing site boundaries of the selected supply base location.



File: 121413516 5.7





5(1)(c)(i) Routine Project activities at the onshore supply base are not anticipated to result in any change to the environment that may have an effect on heath and socio-economic conditions for Aboriginal people for the following reasons:

there will be no interaction with Aboriginal commercial fishing or other traditional nearshore activities because effluent is managed in accordance with environmental regulations which are designed to mitigate potential impacts from discharges and all supply base activities will be carried out entirely onshore;

there will be no interaction with Aboriginal harvesting of terrestrial resources because all supply base activities are carried out entirely within existing site boundaries (i.e., within a previously disturbed/developed area in an industrial setting that excludes access for traditional use and that precludes the presence or availability of terrestrial resources used for commercial purposes; and

routine supply base activities (including site modification if required) are not expected result in offsite effects (e.g., air emissions, noise) that would interact with the nearest First Nation lands (Millbrook First Nation reserve lands located 5 km from Woodside Terminal).

Routine Project activities at the supply base are not expected to result in any changes to the environment that would have an effect on the health conditions of Aboriginal peoples.


5(2)(b)(i) Routine Project activities at the onshore supply base are not anticipated to result in any change to the environment that may have an effect on heath and socio-economic conditions because there will be no interaction with nearshore commercial or recreational fishing activities; effluent is managed in accordance with environmental regulations which are designed to mitigate potential impacts from discharges and all supply base activities are carried out entirely onshore. Air and noise emissions from supply base activities would be consistent with existing emissions generated at the site and are not expected to result in any changes to health or socio-economic conditions. Routine Project activities at the supply base are not expected to result in any changes to the environment that would have an effect on health and socio-economic conditions.

Physical and Cultural Heritage, or Resources of Historical, Archaeological, Paleontological, or

5(1)(c)(ii) Routine Project activities at the onshore supply base are not anticipated to result in changes to the environment that would have an effect on physical and cultural heritage areas or resources due to the industrial, previously disturbed/developed nature of all of the candidate supply base locations under consideration. Archaeological potential would be



File: 121413516 5.8




Architectural Significance considered low for all supply base site options. However, if any potential heritage resources are identified during work onsite, appropriate mitigation will be implemented by a qualified archaeologist in consultation with the Nova Scotia Museum. KMKNO’s archaeologist will also be consulted in the event of a suspected Mi’kmaq resource.


5(1)(c)(iii) Routine Project activities at the onshore supply base are not anticipated to result in any changes to the environment that would have an effect on the current use of land and resources for traditional purposes for the following reasons:

there will be no interaction with Aboriginal commercial fishing or other traditional nearshore activities because effluent is managed in accordance with environmental regulations which are designed to mitigate potential impacts from discharges and all supply base activities will be carried out entirely onshore and therefore will not interact with marine fishing; and

there will be no interaction with traditional harvesting of terrestrial resources because all supply base activities are carried out entirely within the existing site boundaries of a previously disturbed/developed area in an industrial setting that excludes access for traditional use and that precludes the presence or availability of terrestrial resources used for traditional purposes.


5(2)(a) If the Richmond Terminal is ultimately selected as the preferred supply base location, routine activities authorized by the HPA at the onshore supply base have the potential to result in only minor directly related or necessarily incidental changes to the atmospheric and acoustic environment due to the following interactions with the environment:

low-level and intermittent release of air emissions (e.g., exhaust) associated with operation of vehicles and equipment; and

low-level and intermittent generation of noise associated with operation of vehicles and equipment.

However, the onshore supply base will be located at an existing industrial site in a developed area that is routinely subject to air and noise emissions. Project activities will be conducted in accordance with relevant federal and provincial standards for air emissions and municipal noise by-laws (where applicable).




File: 121413516 5.9

5.1.3 Unplanned Events Offshore

Environmental interactions can also occur from unplanned accidental events and malfunctions (refer to Table 5.3). Potential accidental events that could occur during exploration drilling include blowouts (uncontrolled release of hydrocarbons during drilling), and platform and vessel spills and releases (e.g., hydraulic fluid, drilling mud, diesel). Collectively, these accidental releases are referred to as “spills”. A spill could occur in the offshore (e.g., during drilling) or nearshore (e.g., during OSV transit) environment. Spill trajectory modelling, to be conducted as part of the environmental assessment, will predict areas that could potentially be affected by a spill, including the potential for shoreline interaction with coastal Nova Scotia or Sable Island. Potential environmental interactions can occur within the spill trajectory or as a result of transitory species or their prey travelling through an affected area.

Spill prevention and response measures will be implemented to prevent and/or reduce risk of adverse environmental effects. The EIS will provide additional details regarding these preventative measures designed to prevent accidental events, and contingency and emergency response measures designed to minimize adverse environmental effects in the unlikely event that they should occur.



File: 121413516 5.10

Table 5.3 Potential Environmental Interactions with Accidents and Malfunctions during Project Activities


Relevant Section of



5(1)(a)(i) 5(1)(a)(ii)

An accidental spill or release during Project activities could potentially result in changes to fish, fish habitat, aquatic species as defined in SARA, marine mammals, and other aquatic species, including: reduced availability and quality of habitat; degradation and reduction in marine water quality; and injury, mortality and/or reduced health for fish and other aquatic species.

Migratory Birds 5(1)(a)(iii) An accidental spill or release during Project activities could potentially result in changes to migratory birds, as defined under the Migratory Birds Convention Act, 1994, including injury, mortality and/or reduced health for migratory bird species. An accidental spill could also potentially reach the coastline of Sable Island National Park Reserve, thereby potentially affecting migratory birds, including species at risk.


5(1)(b)(i) An accidental spill or release during Project activities could potentially result in changes to the environment that would occur in federal waters as a result of the Project Area being located within Canada’s EEZ and thus entirely within federal waters under the jurisdiction of the Government of Canada. An accidental spill could also potentially affect coastal federal lands and/or the Sable Island National Park Reserve through shoreline oiling and interactions with wildlife. Given the broad definition of “environment” under CEAA, 2012, potential Project interactions with land, water, air, organic and inorganic matter and living organisms, and interacting natural systems must be considered. In particular, components of the environment not previously addressed above include potential effects on the atmospheric environment (e.g., air and noise emissions).

Transboundary Issues 5(1)(b)(ii) An accidental spill could potentially result in transboundary effects outside of Nova Scotian or Canadian offshore areas. The distance from the Project Area to the United States/Canada boundary is 382 km, to the EEZ is 134 km, and to the Canada/France boundary (Saint-Pierre et Miquelon) is 292 km. Spill probability analysis and trajectory modeling will be conducted to determine the potential for and scope of any transboundary environmental effects. According to the CANUSLANT Joint Marine Pollution Contingency Plan, the Canadian Coast Guard Maritimes Region is the agency responsible for assisting with transboundary spills and the associated response.



File: 121413516 5.11



Relevant Section of



5(1)(c)(i)

An accidental spill or release during Project activities could potentially result in the following changes to the environment that may have an effect on fisheries, including Aboriginal fisheries: contamination-related closure of commercial fishing areas, and associated restrictions on

commercial fish harvesting activity; reduced catchability associated with damage to fishing gear (e.g., fouling) and changes in

population health, behavior, and distribution of commercial fish species as a result of marine pollution; and

changes in population size and health of individuals among commercial fish species, and associated loss of income through reduced catch value.

A vessel collision with fishing gear could also potentially result in changes to the environment that may have an effect on human health and safety for Aboriginal peoples.


5(2)(b)(i) An accidental spill or release during Project activities could potentially result in the following changes to the environment that may have an effect on fisheries: contamination-related closure of commercial fishing areas, and associated restrictions on

commercial fish harvesting activity; reduced catchability associated with damage to fishing gear (e.g., fouling) and changes in

population health, behavior, and distribution of commercial fish species as a result of marine pollution; and

changes in population size and health of individuals among commercial fish species, and associated loss of income through reduced catch value.

A vessel collision with fishing gear could also potentially result in changes to the environment that may have an effect on human health and safety.


5(1)(c)(ii) 5(1)(c)(iv) 5(2)(b)(ii) 5(2)(b)(iii)

An accidental spill or release during Project activities could potentially cause a change to the environment that may result in effects to a physical and cultural heritage area (including shipwrecks). Given the location of the Project offshore, and the ROV survey prior to drilling, non-routine Project activities are not expected to result in changes to resources of historical, archeological, paleontological, or architectural significance.



File: 121413516 5.12



Relevant Section of



5(1)(c)(iii) An accidental spill or release during Project activities could potentially result in the following changes to the environment that may have an effect on traditional Aboriginal fisheries in the area: contamination-related closure of traditional fishing areas, and associated restrictions on

traditional fish harvesting activity; reduced catchability associated with damage to fishing gear (e.g., fouling) and changes in

population size, behavior, and distribution of commercial fish species as a result of marine pollution; and

changes in population size and health of individuals among commercial fish species, and associated reduction in value of fishery resource for traditional use.

These changes could potentially occur within the spill trajectory or as a result of migratory fish species transiting through the affected area.


5(2)(a) An accidental event occurring as a result of Project activities authorized by the CNSOPB could potentially result in temporary and localized changes to marine and atmospheric environment. All of these potential changes have been discussed above.




File: 121413516 5.13

5.1.4 Unplanned Events Onshore

Table 5.4 considers potential environmental interactions that may result from accidents and malfunctions during supply base activities in support of the Project. As indicated in Table 5.4, potential accidents and malfunction at the onshore supply base relate primarily to accidental spills or releases. Accidents and malfunctions are not expected to result in adverse environmental effects to fish, aquatic species, migratory birds, and/or Aboriginal peoples. Any effects are expected to be localized and temporary in nature, and are not expected to extend beyond the existing boundaries of the site or into the marine environment. In the unlikely event that effects extend beyond the boundaries of the site and into the marine environment, they have the potential to cause only minor environmental effects due to the following reasons:

The onshore supply base will be located at an existing marine terminal in a highly developed setting. The candidate supply base locations are currently used for routine industrial activities that are consistent with those to be carried out in association with the Project;

The selected supply base would have approvals and management systems already in place for the existing operations and infrastructure on the site, including systems to address accidents and malfunctions. The operators will already be complying with applicable legislation, regulations, rules and requirements, including any applicable environmental requirements; and

Should any new approvals be needed for new infrastructure or operations associated with the Project, the third party operator will undertake the regulatory processes necessary to obtain those approvals. Environmental effects, if any, would be adequately managed through these other existing legislative or regulatory processes.



File: 121413516 5.14

Table 5.4 Potential Environmental Interactions with Accidents and Malfunctions during Supply Base Activities in Support of the Project




5(1)(a)(i) 5(1)(a)(ii)

An accidental spill or release at the onshore supply base is not expected to result in changes to fish, fish habitat, aquatic species as defined in SARA, marine mammals, and other aquatic species for the following reasons: the presence of a secondary containment system (to reduce spill risk)f for the mud

batch plant; all potentially hazardous materials are stored in designated areas and are

handled by trained personnel; and spill containment/clean-up equipment is kept on-site for use by trained personnel

in accordance with Project-specific emergency response plans.

Migratory Birds 5(1)(a)(iii) An accidental spill, release or other malfunction at the onshore supply base is not expected to result in changes affecting migratory birds, as defined under the Migratory Birds Convention Act, 1994, including injury, mortality and/or reduced health for migratory bird species because these are existing industrial areas, and any accidental spill or release is expected to be contained to the site and not affect the marine environment. Aside from the marine environment, migratory bird habitat at any of the candidate sites would be very limited, if any habitats are present at all.


5(1)(b)(i) An accidental spill or release at the onshore supply base could potentially result in changes to the environment that would occur on lands owned by the Halifax Port Authority for the Richmond Terminal location. Given the existing industrial operations at this location, any potential environmental effects are expected to be minor and adequately managed through other existing legislative or regulatory processes or requirements applicable to this site.

Transboundary Effects 5(1)(b)(ii) An accidental spill or release at the onshore supply base is not expected to result in any change to the environment outside of Canada.


5(1)(c)(i)

An accidental spill or release at the onshore supply base is not expected to result in a change to the environment that would have an effect on Aboriginal fisheries as any spill/release is expected to be contained onsite.



File: 121413516 5.15

Table 5.4 Potential Environmental Interactions with Accidents and Malfunctions during Supply Base Activities in Support of the Project




5(2)(b)(i) An accidental spill or release at the onshore supply base is not expected to result in a change to the environment that would have an effect on commercial or recreational fisheries, adjacent landowners, or the general public, given existing safeguards in relation to industrial operation of the site and the nearshore area and the fact that any spill/release is expected to be contained onsite.


5(1)(c)(ii) 5(1)(c)(iv) 5(2)(b)(ii) 5(2)(b)(iii)

Accidents and malfunctions at the onshore supply base are not expected to cause a change to the environment that would result in the disturbance and/or destruction of a physical and cultural heritage area or resource given the industrial nature of the sites and their current levels of disturbance/development.


5(1)(c)(iii) An accidental spill, release or other malfunction at the onshore supply base is not expected to result in a change to the environment that would have an effect on current use of lands or resources for traditional purposes, including traditional Aboriginal fisheries given that: the supply base options are located on existing industrial lands used as active port

facilities and not for traditional purposes; and any spills/releases are expected to be contained onsite.


5(2)(a) If the Richmond Terminal is ultimately selected as the preferred supply base location, an accidental fire occurring as a result of Project activities authorized by the Halifax Port Authority at the onshore supply base has the potential to result in related changes to the atmospheric environment, including air emissions. However, these changes are not likely to result in effects on migratory birds, aquatic species or Aboriginal peoples.




File: 121413516 5.16

5.2 SCOPING CONSIDERATIONS

Based on a consideration of the potential changes to the environment identified in Section 5.1 and guidance from previous scoping documents and environmental assessments (e.g., Shelburne Basin Venture Exploration Drilling Project, CNSOPB SEAs), BP proposes to focus the EIS on the following environmental components:

Fish and Fish Habitat (including Species at Risk); Marine Mammals and Sea Turtles (including Species at Risk); Marine and Migratory Birds (including Species at Risk); Special Areas; Commercial Fisheries; and Current Aboriginal Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes.

It is recognized that Project-specific EIS Guidelines will be issued by the Agency following a public review of the Project Description as well as input received from Stakeholder and Aboriginal engagement and that the final components to be assessed may change.


References August 2015

File: 121413516 6.1

6.0 REFERENCES

AMEC. 2008. Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Melford International Terminal. Available at: http://www.novascotia.ca/nse/ea/melford.international.terminal.asp

Brodie, P.F. 2000. Halifax Harbour and Marine Mammals: Life in the Shipping Lanes. Preserving the Environment of Halifax Harbour. Workshop #1. Halifax Regional Municipality and Fisheries and Oceans Canada.

CNSOPB (Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board). 2013. Geoscience: Regional Geology. Available from http://cnsopb.ns.ca/geoscience/geoscience-overview/regional-geology.

DFO (Fisheries and Oceans Canada). 2014. Offshore Ecologically and Biologically Significant Areas in the Scotian Shelf Bioregion. DFO Can. Sci. Advis. Sec. Sci. Advis. Rep. 2014/041.

Environment Canada. 2015. Species at Risk Public Registry: A to Z Species Index. Accessed online at http://www.sararegistry.gc.ca/sar/index/default_e.cfm on July 2, 2015 (last modified on May 29, 2015).

Gjerdrum, C. Head, E.J.H., Fifield, D.A. 2008. Monitoring seabirds at sea in Eastern Canada. Atlantic Zone Monitoring Program (AZMP) Bulletin No. 7, March 2008: 52-58.

Jacques Whitford. 2004. Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Bear Head LNG Terminal, Bear Head, Nova Scotia. Prepared for Access Northeast Energy Inc, May 2004. JWEL Project No. NSD17393. Available at: https://www.novascotia.ca/nse/ea/bearHeadLNGTerminal.asp. Accessed: November 2013.

JWEL (Jacques Whitford Environment Limited). 2001a. Kerr-McGee Offshore Canada Ltd. Characterization of Benthic Habitat in the Pinehurst and Pembroke Blocks Exploratory Licences 2396 and 2386.

JWEL (Jacques Whitford Environment Limited). 2001b. Environmental Assessment of Deepwater Exploration Drilling on Torbrook, Weymouth, Barrington, Plympton, Caledonia, and Highland. Report prepared for PanCanadian Energy Corporation.

JWEL (Jacques Whitford Environment Limited). 2003. Shell Canada Limited Characterization of Benthic Habitat Exploration Licenses 2381 and 2382.

LGL (LGL Limited Environmental Research Associates). 2014. Environmental Assessment of BP Exploration (Canada) Limited’s Tangier 3D Seismic Survey. Prepared for BP Exploration (Canada) Limited.


References August 2015

File: 121413516 6.2

MBBA (Maritime Breeding Bird Atlas). 2010. Data Summaries. Available at: http://www.mba-aom.ca/jsp/datasummaries.jsp?lang=en. Accessed: November 2013.

MMS [Minerals Management Service]. 2000. Gulf of Mexico Deepwater Operations and Activities. Environmental Assessment. Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico OCS Region. OCS EIS/EA MMS 2000-001.

NCNS (Native Council of Nova Scotia). 2015. Native Council of Nova Scotia. Available at: http://ncns.ca/. Accessed May 2015.

NEB, C-NLOPB, CNSOPB [National Energy Board, Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board and Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board]. 2009. Offshore Chemical Selection Guidelines for Drilling and Production Activities on Frontier Lands. iii + 13 pp. Available from: http://www.C-NLOPB.nl.ca/pdfs/guidelines/ocsg.pdf

NEB, C-NLOPB, CNSOPB [National Energy Board, Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board and Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board]. 2010. Offshore Waste Treatment Guidelines. Available from: http://www.C-NLOPB.nl.ca/pdfs/guidelines/owtg1012e.pdf

RPS (RPS Energy Canada) 2014. Wildlife Observation Report. BP Tangier 3D WATS Seismic Survey 17 May to 14 September 2014.

Rozee, P. 2000. The Fisheries of the Halifax Inlet. Preserving the Environment of Halifax Harbour. Workshop #1. Halifax Regional Municipality and Fisheries and Oceans Canada. Halifax, Nova Scotia.

Shell (Shell Canada Limited) and Stantec (Stantec Consulting Ltd). 2013. Shelburne Basin Venture Exploration Drilling Project. Project Description.

Stantec (Stantec Consulting Ltd). 2012. Strategic Environmental Assessment for Offshore Petroleum Exploration Activities. Eastern Scotian Slope (Phase 1B). Prepared for the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board.

Stantec (Stantec Consulting Ltd). 2014a. Shelburne Basin Venture Exploration Drilling Project Environmental Impact Statement. Prepared for Shell Canada Limited.

Stantec (Stantec Consulting Ltd). 2014b. Strategic Environmental Assessment for Offshore Petroleum Exploration Activities. Western Scotian Slope (Phase 3B). Prepared for the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board.

WWF (World Wildlife Fund). 2009. An Ocean of Diversity. The Seabeds of the Canadian Scotian Shelf and Bay of Fundy. 24 pp.


APPENDIX A CONCORDANCE TABLE

Regulation Clause Requirement PD Section(s) REGULATION SOR/2012-148

1.0 General Information and Contact(s)

1 The name of the Project 1.0

1 The nature of the Project 1.0

1 The proposed location of the Project 2.1

2 The proponent’s name and contact information and the name and contact information of their primary representative for the purpose of the description of the Project 1.2.2

3 A description of and the results of any consultations undertaken with any jurisdictions and other parties including Aboriginal peoples and the public 4.0

4(a) Other relevant information, including the environmental assessment and regulatory requirements of other jurisdictions 1.3

4(b) Information concerning any environmental study that is being or has been conducted of the region where the Project is to be carried out. 3.2

2.0 Project Information

5 A description of the Project’s context and objectives 1.1

6 The provisions in the schedule to the Regulations Designating Physical Activities describing the Project in whole or in part. 1.3

7 A description of the physical works that are related to the Project including their purpose, size and capacity 2.2

8 The anticipated production capacity of the Project and a description of the production processes to be used, the associated infrastructure and any permanent or temporary structures. N/A

9 A description of all activities to be performed in relation to the Project. 2.2

10 A description of any solid, liquid, gaseous or hazardous waste that is likely to be generated during any phase of the Project and of plans to manage those wastes. 2.3

11 A description of the anticipated phases of and the schedule for the Project’s construction, operation, decommissioning, and abandonment. 2.2, 2.4

3.0 Project Location Information

12 A description of the Project’s location, including:

12(a) Geographic coordinates 2.1, 2.2.5

12(b) Site maps produced at an appropriate scale in order to determine the Project’s overall Figure 1.1

Regulation Clause Requirement PD Section(s) location and the spatial relationship of the Project components

12(c) The legal description of land to be used for the Project, including the title, deed or document and any authorization relating to a water lot 1.3

12(d) The Project’s proximity to any permanent, seasonal or temporary residences 2.1

12(e) The Project’s proximity to reserves, traditional territories as well as lands and resources currently used for traditional purposes by Aboriginal peoples 3.2

12(f) The Project’s proximity to any federal lands 2.1

4.0 Federal Involvement

13 A description of any financial support that federal authorities are, or may be, providing to the Project 1.4

14 A description of any federal land that may be used for the purpose of carrying out the Project 1.4

15 Any federal legislative or regulatory requirements that may be applicable including a list of permits, licence or other authorizations that may be required in order to carry out the Project. 1.4

5.0 Environmental Effects

16 A description of the physical and biological setting 3.1

17 (a) A description of any changes that may be caused, as a result of carrying out the Project, to fish as defined in section 2 of the Fisheries Act and fish habitat as defined in subsection 34(1) of that Act 5.1

17(b) A description of any changes that may be caused, as a result of carrying out the Project to aquatic species, as defined in subsection 2(1) of the Species at Risk Act 5.1

17(c) A description of any changes that may be caused, as a result of carrying out the Project to migratory birds, as defined in subsection 2(1) of the Migratory Birds Convention Act, 1994 5.1

18 A description of any changes to the environment that may occur, as a result of carrying out the Project, on federal lands, in a province other than the province in which the Project is proposed to be carried out or outside of Canada

5.1

19

Information on the effects on Aboriginal peoples of any changes to the environment that may be caused as a result of carrying out the Project, including effects on health and socio-economic conditions, physical and cultural heritage, the current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes or on any structure, site or thing that is of historical, archaeological, paleontological or architectural significance.

5.1

20 Summary of the information required under section 1 to 19 Project Description Summary Document

scotian basin exploration drilling project – project ... · pdf filescotian basin...

Documents