1.0 Introduction
This report outlines proponent requirements of the Transport Canada, Navigable Waters Protection Division (“TC NWPD”) to undertake a navigational assessment specific to Independent Power Projects (“IPP”) projects in British Columbia.
In addition proponent requirements as outlined in the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (“CEAA”) and the Provincial Instream Flows Guidelines (“Guidelines”) should be reviewed in context to the navigational assessment requirements.
2.0 Context and Basic Requirements
The following outline defines the requirements to undertake a navigational assessment:
- Description of the Project and Project Hydrology (as required as part of a proponents Project Development Plan);
- Navigational Assessment ; and,
- Mitigation.
In preparing the Navigational Assessment, proponents should reference the following documents that outline what is required as part of a proponents “Project Development Plan”:
- Environmental Impact Statement Guidelines for Screening Level Review under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act for Small Independent Hydro Power Projects in British Columbia;
- Working Guidelines for the Assessment of Fish, Fish Habitat and Instream Flow Characteristics in Support of Applications to Dam, Divert, or Extract Water from Streams in British Columbia; and,
- The Navigable Waters Protection Act.
The navigational assessment requirements outlined herewith is based in part on satisfying those requirements. If proponents have any questions regarding the requirements outlined herewith they should contact the NWPD at 604 775-8867.
3.0 Navigational Assessment
The navigational assessment is based on specific information requirements and incorporates information related to:
- the Project Description; and,
- Project Hydrology.
3.1 Recommended Survey Methods
Three methods have been identified to assist proponents in assessing navigational values. These include:
- Historical Use Method;
- Professional Judgment Methods; and,
- User Survey Methods.
The following table defines the approach to each method.
Table 1: Summary of Recommended Methods to Assess Navigational Values
Method |
Use |
Data Sources |
Historical Use Method |
This is a quick method for getting a feel for certain flow needs and may lead to a legitimate determination of flows at specific sites and situations. This method is based on current use quantified at the subject waterway during one complete recreational season. |
Site visits and field surveys etc. |
Professional Judgment |
Some form of professional judgment is critical to any study. However the use of professional judgment is somewhat limited as the results rely on one individual’s opinion. This method is best integrated with another method that focuses on the hard data to support recommendations. |
A number of professional individuals or groups of individuals reside in British Columbia that could be contacted or retained by proponents in regard to assessing flows along specific reaches of navigable waterways. |
User Survey Methods |
User surveys are based on obtaining relevant flow data from recreational users of the waterway. These methods generally range from telephone discussions, interviews or group meetings with local users, outfitters etc. The purpose is to present both qualitative (through surveys) and quantitative (through actual use of the river) information regarding flows, with a consensus being developed between participants. As British Columbia is recognized as one of the worlds leading whitewater locations, and a number of whitewater groups and users exist throughout BC, this method represents a good means to identify and verify appropriate flows. |
A number of professional individuals or groups of individuals reside in British Columbia that could be contacted or retained by proponents in regard to assessing flows along specific reaches of navigable waterways. |
The more comprehensive the methodology the more readily it can be reviewed by TC NWPD staff.
Ideally a combination of all three methods would be most appropriate in order to assess navigation.
3.2 Work Methodology
To undertake a navigational assessment the following associated tasks are required:
Task: 1 Determine River Classification at the Site of the Proposed Diversion;
Task 2: Detail River Characteristics for Whitewater Activities;
Task 3: Determine Use and Frequency of Use;
Task 4: Verify Experience with Users;
Task 5: Compare Flows with Frequency and Use of River;
Task 6: Identify Optimal Flow Range; and,
Task 7: Prepare Report
The requirements associated with each task are defined below. Data requirements and data sources are provided.
Table 2: Navigational Assessment Requirements
Task 1 |
Determine River Classification at the Site of the Proposed Diversion |
Requirements |
Assessment of the Waterway based on the River Classification System Established for Rivers in British Columbia. |
Deliverables/Data
Sources |
Confirmation of the River Classification
Class 1: Moving water with few or no obstacles. Passages are wide open and easily seen from the river.
Class 2: Rapids with small obstacles and regular features. Passages are open and obvious without scouring, but may require maneuvering.
Class 3: Rapids with irregular features that require maneuvering to negotiate. Passages can be narrow and features such as holes and irregular waves must be run to negotiate the rapid. Risk of injury.
Class 4: Rapids with highly irregular features. Complicated passes that often include vertical drops and may require scouting to find safe passages. Linked maneuvers are required in convoluted passages. Risk of injury and possible risk of your life.
Class 5: Rapids with violent and irregular features. Extremely congested passages that almost always require scouting to determine safe routes. Most class 5 rapids include vertical drops and require running large scale features in a complex series of maneuvers. Definite risk of serious injury and possible risk of death .
Class 6: The difficulties of class 5 taken to the extreme. Rapids with Extremely violent and unpredictable features where experts require considerable advance scouting and planning to determine possible passages. All class 6 rapids require the paddlers to negotiate vertical drops and very large features. Always a risk to your life. Generally only possible at certain water levels.
Information should be compiled based on a photo inventory of impacted waterway reaches illustrating the characteristics identified by the various river classifications. |
Table 2: Navigational Assessment Requirements
Task 2 |
Detail River Characteristics for Whitewater Activities
|
Requirements |
Identification of specific reaches or runs in which the whitewater activities occur be mapped on 1:20,000 trim base maps. Put in and pull out locations, road access points etc. should be mapped and comment provided regarding locations along the reaches in which significant obstacles for navigation are identified (e.g. hits, groundings, obstacles). Reference can be made to the photo inventory undertaken in task one. |
Deliverables/ Data Sources |
Mapping completed at a 1:20,000 or 1:50,000 scales that identifies the waterway reaches, the runs, put in locations, pull out locations and road access points. Actual flows could be identified on the map that coincides with the mapping prepared as part of the project description.
|
Task 3 |
Determine Use and Frequency of Use |
Requirements |
Identify for one complete recreational season (April to October inclusive) the type and frequency of use along the various reaches or runs. |
Deliverables/ Data Sources |
Summary calendar cataloging by day the number of whitewater users and frequency of use along the various reaches of the river.
|
Task 4 |
Verify Experience with Users |
Requirements |
Through user interviews, group meetings where appropriate, undertake surveys with users or enthusiasts to determine the experience and expectations in regard to flows. As part of this review users should be surveyed in context to their own experience levels. |
Deliverables/ Data Sources |
Information augments the findings outlined in previous tasks and verifies flows.
|
Task 5 |
Compare Flows with Frequency and Use of River |
Requirements |
Based on historical flows, flows that have been prepared as part of the “Project Description Plan” and “Project Hydrology”, or actual gauge flows identifying flow ranges by day/month that appear to accommodate the user. |
Deliverables/ Data Sources |
Prepare a hydrograph that illustrates flows and subsequently superimpose the days in which whitewater use occurred, illustrating the range of flows in which whitewater activities occurred.
|
Task 6 |
Identify Optimal Flow Range |
Requirements |
Identify a flow range that would accommodate kayakers use throughout the season based on the average flows. |
Deliverables/ Data Sources |
Prepare a hydrograph of flows superimposing whitewater use by day throughout the season.
|
Task 7 |
Prepare Report |
Requirements |
Report to reflect requirements outlined above and be incorporated into Section 4.5.4 of EIS. |
Deliverables/ Data Sources |
Report to be submitted separately to NWPD and incorporated into EIS. |
3.3 Data Analysis and Presentation
Exhibit 1 presents the evaluation methodology process TC, NWPD will follow in evaluating navigational values. Two options are presented, if the waterway (based on task 1 assessment) is:
- Classified as a class 1-5 the waterway is deemed navigable and further assessment is required (refer to Exhibit 1); and,
- If deemed Class 6, the waterway is considered to be limited use to the general public, and based on Ministerial discretion an assessment can be made to deem the waterway non-navigable under the NWPA.
For illustrative purposes Exhibits 2, 3a and 3b are presented to assist proponents prepare required documentation.
3.4 Mitigation and Conditions of Approval
The NWPA may approve such a project under Section 5(1) but establish “Conditions of Approval.
The following provides an outline of suggested Conditions of Approval (NWPA), and/or works regulations that proponents should consider:
(1) The owner of the work shall, when required by the Minister:
- Install , maintain and operate log chutes to permit the transport of logs through or over the works;
(b) Provide and maintain roads or foot ways for the free passage of the public by vehicle or foot around the work between the upper and lower reaches of the river; and,
(c) Furnish to the minister the records of flow, elevation of water above and below the work and all plans and other material relating to navigation that may be required by the Minister.
(2)The Minister or his authorized representatives shall be permitted to measure the discharge of water in the various channels and passages within the limits or over the work.
(3)The owner of a work shall maintain the limits of flow and elevation of water for navigation purposes as required by the Minister.
Post construction monitoring (recommended for a three year period) may be required depending on usage /value to whitewater enthusiasts as outlined in the works regulations.
Table 3: Suggested Mitigative Measures to Address Navigational Values
Mitigation Techniques |
Description |
Post Project Flow Monitoring
|
Monitoring is the continuing assessment of conditions with respect to a project. Monitoring determines if effects occur as predicted during operations, and remain within acceptable limits as identified as part of the EIS or Navigational review. In context to navigational values, the installation and maintenance of flow gauges along the navigable reaches represents a key requirement associated with post construction and operation. Gauges should be placed along the identified navigational reaches of the stream/river. This information should be compiled in context to recreational use of the waterway to ensure usage is not adversely affected by the project. If usage is negatively affected proponents may be required to modify flows as per works regulations.
|
Real-time Flow Information to Support Recreational Opportunities
|
Upon installation of real-time flow gauges along the navigable reaches of the river, real-time flow information could be made available to the recreational user through a dedicated web site or other information providing process. The intent of information would be to provide all recreational users additional information regarding river flows while at the same time providing flows to address safety and use issues. Information will also be used by proponent to fulfill post project monitoring (if required).
|
Provision of Additional Access Points for the Recreational User
|
One of the key long term benefits associated with the approval of IPP projects is increased accessibility to previously remote recreational resources. One potential “Mitigation” or “Condition of Approval” relates to the provision of additional recreational access points for the recreational user, such as kayak put-in/pull-out points and vehicle parking. The construction of access roads directly to the river access points should also be considered where feasible.
|
Portage Route or By-Pass
|
In instances where a navigable waterway has been impacted as a result of physical construction activities, proponents should consider the establishment of portage or by pass routes around the works or weir.
|
Signage for Construction Hazards
|
Installation and maintenance of warning signs at appropriate locations advising of work in progress and, upon completion will be required. Warning signs indicating that there is a hazard ahead should be established. The NWPD area officer will provide details of required signage.
|
4.0 Conclusions and Recommendations
4.1 Conclusions
A navigational assessment assists proponents of IPPs prepare the required documentation to satisfy:
- The requirements of the NWPA under subsection 5(1) or 6(4) of the Act; and,
- The requirements of a CEAA review pertaining to navigation.
4.2 Recommendations
The following are requirements of proponents in undertaking a navigational assessment:
- Determination of navigability ( NWPD determination);
- Under NWPA is it a named work or cause a substantial interference to navigation (NWPD determination). If yes, requires NWPA 5(1) or 6(4) approval; if no, NWPD issues NWPA 5(2) exemption;
- Description of the Project and Project Hydrology (i.e. as required under current CEAA requirements for all projects, which includes the Project Development Plan and Hydrology Assessment);
- Assessment of Navigational Values (i.e. if a waterway is navigable, but not currently used by the recreational enthusiast, use the “Professional Judgment” method or, if navigable and currently used by the recreational enthusiast a combination of “Historical Use, Professional Judgment and/or User Survey” method be used to assess navigation values. (i.e. this is required to satisfy tasks 2,3, 4 of navigational assessment approach);
- Comparison of Flows with Frequency of Use; and,
- Identification of Optimal Flow Range and Report with Presentation materials (i.e. refer to Exhibits 2,3).
The Evaluation Framework presented in Exhibit 1, suggested mapping presented on Exhibit 2 and the sample hydrographs presented on Exhibits 3a and 3b represent the key deliverables associated with such a review.
Mitigation (table 3) is a significant component of the assessment. It represents a means of establishing and maintaining a new recreational resource in the province of British Columbia.
|
