HomeMy WebLinkAbout182402-Port-Morien-Wastewater-Pre-Design-Summary-Report-Final
182402.00 / 187116.00 ● Final Report ● March 2020
Environmental Risk Assessments & Preliminary
Design of Seven Future Wastewater Treatment
Systems in CBRM
Port Morien Wastewater Interception & Treatment System
Pre-Design Summary Report
Prepared by:
Prepared for:
Port Morien WW Interception &
Treatment System Pre-Design
Summary Report-Draft
March 27, 2020 Darrin McLean James Sheppard Darrin McLean
Issue or Revision Date Issued By: Reviewed By: Prepared By:
This document was prepared for the party indicated
herein. The material and information in the
document reflects HE’s opinion and best judgment
based on the information available at the time of
preparation. Any use of this document or reliance
on its content by third parties is the responsibility of
the third party. HE accepts no responsibility for any
damages suffered as a result of third party use of
this document.
164 Charlotte St.
PO Box 567
Sydney, NS
B1P 6H4
March 27, 2020
Matt Viva, P.Eng.
Manager Wastewater Operations
Cape Breton Regional Municipality (CBRM)
320 Esplanade,
Sydney, NS B1P 7B9
Dear Mr. Viva:
RE: Port Morien Wastewater Interception & Treatment System – Pre-Design Summary
Report
Enclosed, please find, for your files, a copy of the final draft of the Pre-Design Summary Report
for the Port Morien Wastewater Interception & Treatment System.
This report presents a description of proposed wastewater interception and treatment
infrastructure upgrades for the Port Morien Wastewater system, as well as an estimate of the
capital, operating costs, and replacement costs for the proposed infrastructure. Estimated
costs of upgrades and assessments related to the existing wastewater collection system are
also provided. A desktop geotechnical review and results of an intrusive geotechnical
investigation of the wastewater treatment facility site is provided, along with an
archaeological resources impact assessment review for all sites of proposed wastewater
infrastructure. In addition, results of a Phase 1 environmental site assessment are provided.
Finally, an Implementation Timeline is provided, which outlines a tentative schedule for
implementation of the various proposed wastewater system upgrades.
If you have any questions or require clarification on the content presented in the attached
report, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Yours very truly,
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture
Prepared by: Reviewed by:
Darrin McLean, MBA, FEC, P.Eng. James Sheppard, P.Eng.
Senior Municipal Engineer Civil Infrastructure Engineer
Direct: 902-539-1330 (Ext. 3138) Direct: 902-562-9880
E-Mail: dmclean@cbcl.ca E-Mail: jsheppard@dillon.ca
Project No: 182402.00 (CBCL)
187116.00 (Dillon)
HEJV Port Morien Wastewater System Pre-Design Summary Report i
Contents
CHAPTER 1 Introduction & Background ........................................................................................ 1
1.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1
1.2 Background ......................................................................................................................... 1
1.3 Description of Existing Wastewater Collection System ...................................................... 1
1.4 Service Area Population ...................................................................................................... 2
CHAPTER 2 Wastewater Interceptor System ................................................................................. 3
2.1 Description of Proposed Wastewater Interceptor Infrastructure ...................................... 3
2.2 Interception Infrastructure Land/Easement Acquisition Requirements ............................ 3
2.2.1 Lift Station Site ........................................................................................................ 3
2.2.2 Linear Infrastructure ............................................................................................... 4
CHAPTER 3 Existing Wastewater Collection System Upgrades / Assessments ................................ 5
3.1 Asset Condition Assessment Program ................................................................................ 5
3.2 Sewer Separation Measures ............................................................................................... 5
CHAPTER 4 Wastewater Treatment System .................................................................................. 6
4.1 Recommended Wastewater Treatment Facility ................................................................. 6
4.2 Wastewater Treatment Facility Land Acquisition Requirements ....................................... 7
4.3 Wastewater Treatment Facility Site Desktop Geotechnical Review .................................. 7
4.4 Wastewater Treatment Facility Site Intrusive Geotechnical Review.................................. 8
4.5 Wastewater Treatment Facility Site Phase 1 Environmental Assessment ......................... 9
CHAPTER 5 Wastewater System Archaeological Resources Impact Assessment ........................... 11
5.1 Archaeological Resources Impact Assessment ................................................................. 11
CHAPTER 6 Wastewater Infrastructure Costs .............................................................................. 12
6.1 Wastewater Interception & Treatment Capital Costs ...................................................... 12
6.2 Wastewater Interception & Treatment Annual Operating Costs ..................................... 13
6.3 Annual Capital Replacement Fund Contribution Costs..................................................... 13
6.4 Existing Wastewater Collection System Upgrades / Assessment Costs ........................... 15
CHAPTER 7 Project Implementation Timeline ............................................................................. 16
7.1 Implementation Schedule ................................................................................................. 16
HEJV Port Morien Wastewater System Pre-Design Summary Report ii
Appendices
A Port Morien Collection System Pre-Design Brief
B Port Morien Wastewater Treatment System Pre-Design Brief
C Port Morien Environmental Risk Assessment Report
D Port Morien Wastewater Treatment Facility Site Geotechnical Reviews
E Port Morien Wastewater System Archaeological Resources Impact Assessment
F Port Morien Wastewater Treatment Facility Site Phase 1 Environmental Assessment
HEJV Port Morien Wastewater System Pre-Design Summary Report 1
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND
1.1 Introduction
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture (HEJV) was retained by the Cape Breton Regional Municipality
(CBRM) to provide engineering services associated with the preliminary design of wastewater
interception and treatment infrastructure for the community of Port Morien, Nova Scotia as part of
the greater Environmental Risk Assessment and Preliminary Design of 7 Future Wastewater Treatment
Systems in CBRM project. This report presents a description of the proposed infrastructure upgrades
for the Port Morien Wastewater system, as well as an estimate of the capital, operating and
replacement costs for the proposed infrastructure. Estimated costs of upgrades and assessments
related to the existing wastewater collection system are also provided. A desktop geotechnical review
of the wastewater treatment facility site is provided, along with an archaeological resources impact
assessment review for all sites of proposed wastewater infrastructure. Finally, an Implementation
Timeline is provided, which outlines a tentative schedule for implementation of the various proposed
wastewater system upgrades.
1.2 Background
The wastewater collection system in the community of Port Morien, as in many communities
throughout CBRM, currently discharges untreated wastewater to the Atlantic Ocean. The evolution of
the existing wastewater collection and disposal systems in CBRM included the creation of regions of a
community which were serviced by a common wastewater collection system tied to a local marine
outfall. Such design approaches have traditionally been the most cost-effective manner of providing
centralized wastewater collection, and the marine environment has long been the preferred receiving
water given the available dilution. Due to a changing regulatory environment, CBRM is working toward
intercepting and treating the wastewater in these communities prior to discharge.
The Port Morien system has been classified as high risk under the federal Wastewater System Effluent
Regulations (WSER) under the Fisheries Act, requiring implementation of treatment systems by the year
2020.
1.3 Description of Existing Wastewater Collection System
The Village of Port Morien is serviced by a gravity sewer system with pipe sizes that range from 200
to 250mm in diameter. The system conveys sewage to a single pipe outfall located near the end of
Breakwater Street. The outfall is 375mm in diameter and is concrete encased. The pipe overt is set
at the low, low water elevation and terminates approximately 36m from the shore.
HEJV Port Morien Wastewater System Pre-Design Summary Report 2
1.4 Service Area Population
For Port Morien, the service area population was estimated to be 413 people. The population of the
CBRM has been declining and this trend is expected to continue. Recent population projection
studies predict a 17.8% decrease in population in Cape Breton County between 2016 and 2036. For
this reason, no allocation has been made for any future population growth. The primary land use in
the Village of Port Morien is single family housing. The area does not support a seasonal or
transient population; therefore, the WWTP should service a consistent population and land use
year-round.
For the purpose of preliminary design, wastewater infrastructure has been sized based on the current
population, measured flow data, and theoretical flow estimates. Due to significant amounts of inflow
and infiltration (I&I) observed in sewer systems in the CBRM, a given population decrease will not
necessarily result in a proportional decrease in wastewater flow. Therefore, basing the design on
current conditions is considered the most reasonable approach. The preliminary design study
recommends that additional flow metering be conducted prior to detailed design.
HEJV Port Morien Wastewater System Pre-Design Summary Report 3
CHAPTER 2 WASTEWATER INTERCEPTOR SYSTEM
2.1 Description of Proposed Wastewater Interceptor Infrastructure
The proposed wastewater interceptor system for the Port Morien Wastewater System includes the
following major elements:
A new sewage pumping station will be constructed near the existing outfall. A 200 mm
diameter interceptor gravity sewer will redirect flow from the existing outfall into the LS-
PM1 site.
A CSO chamber will be located within the LS site to intercept the incoming flow from the
new gravity interceptor.
Flow that is less than the interception rate of 17.65 l/s, will be directed to the LS. Flow over
and above the interception rate will be diverted back to the existing outfall.
The lift station will convey the intercepted sewer to the WWTP site via a 150 mm diameter
forcemain, 1,330m in length. A 200mm diameter gravity sewer will then convey the flow to
the proposed lagoon for a length of approximately 20m.
The treated flow will then be conveyed back to the existing outfall via a 200 mm diameter
gravity sewer running 1,330 metres along the same route as the interceptor forcemain.
A detailed description of the proposed wastewater interceptor system, including preliminary layout
drawings is provided in Appendix A.
2.2 Interception Infrastructure Land/Easement Acquisition Requirements
2.2.1 Lift Station Site
Construction of new sewage pumping station infrastructure will require land acquisition as shown in
Table 1 below.
Table 1 - Lift Station Site Land Acquisition Requirements
PID# Property
Owner Assessed Value Description Size Required
Purchase
Entire Lot
(Y/N)
15640105 Unknown $8,100 PS Site 15mX30m Y
15370125 PWGSC $248,000 PS Site 8mX15m N
HEJV Port Morien Wastewater System Pre‐Design Summary Report 4
2.2.2 Linear Infrastructure
The installation of linear infrastructure will require an easement at the bottom of Breakwater Street
as shown in Table 2. Another portion of the same PID was recommended for acquisition to allow for
construction of the pumping station in Table 1, above. The remaining linear infrastructure will be
installed within public right‐of‐ways and the parcel of land that HEJV has recommended for purchase
for the construction of the WWTP (see Section 4.2).
Table 2 – Linear Infrastructure Land Easement Requirements
PID# Property
Owner Assessed Value Description Size Required
Purchase
Entire Lot
(Y/N)
15370125 PWGSC $248,000 Force Main &
Gravity Sewer
10m
(Construction)
6m (Final)
X 80m length
N
HEJV Port Morien Wastewater System Pre‐Design Summary Report 5
CHAPTER 3 EXISTING WASTEWATER COLLECTION
SYSTEM UPGRADES / ASSESSMENTS
3.1 Asset Condition Assessment Program
To get a better sense of the condition of the existing Port Morien sewage collection system, HEJV
recommends completing a sewage collection system asset condition assessment program in the
community. The program would carry out an investigation involving two components:
1. Visual inspection and assessment of all manholes in the collection system;
2. Video inspection of 20% of all sewers in the system
The program should be completed with the issuance of a Collection System Asset Condition
Assessment Report that would summarize the condition of the various assets inspected and include
opinions of probable costs for required upgrades.
3.2 Sewer Separation Measures
CBRM should consider completing a sewer separation investigation program for Port Morien. The
program would review catch basins that are currently connected or possibly connected to existing
sanitary sewers. The program should also include the costing of the installation of new storm sewers
to disconnect catch basins from the existing sanitary sewer.
HEJV Port Morien Wastewater System Pre‐Design Summary Report 6
CHAPTER 4 WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
4.1 Recommended Wastewater Treatment Facility
The recommended wastewater treatment facility for Port Morien is an aerated lagoon system. In
aerated lagoons, oxygen is supplied by mechanical aeration, which in newer systems is typically
subsurface diffused aeration. They have average retention times ranging from five to 30 days, with
30 days being common in Atlantic Canada. The WWTP would provide the following general features:
1. Influent chamber;
2. Secondary treatment involving a three‐cell basin. The first and second cells are partially mixed
and the third cell is a non‐aerated settling zone. A single aerator chain will be included in the
third cell for additional aeration in the event of plant upset and or maintenance requirements.
Floating baffle curtains will be utilized.
3. An aeration system consisting of blowers and low‐pressure air distribution piping;
4. Effluent chamber;
5. Disinfection of the treated wastewater with the use of an ultraviolet (UV) disinfection unit;
6. A small process building to provide space for blowers, UV disinfection equipment, basic office
space, and a washroom; and
7. Site access and parking, along with site fencing.
The proposed site of the Port Morien WWTP is located north of Birch Grove Road on PID 1552495.
The design flows for the proposed WWTP are as shown in the table below.
Table 3 – Recommended Design Flow Data
Port Morien WWTP
Population 413
Average Daily Flow L/s (m3/Day) 6.5 (562)
Peak Flow L/s (m3/day) 17.45 (1507)
Based on the largely residential population of Port Morien, HEJV recommends that BOD5 and TSS
loading for design of the new wastewater treatment facility be based on the theoretical loading
derived using the Atlantic Canada Wastewater Guidelines Manual (ACWGM). Design TKN is
recommended to be based on the HEJV sampled value, based on elevated ammonia levels from the
HEJV Port Morien Wastewater System Pre‐Design Summary Report 7
CBRM dataset; however, additional sampling is recommended to ensure better confidence in the TKN
design and potential impacts to the aeration system sizing.
A detailed description of the proposed wastewater treatment system, including preliminary layout
drawings is provided in Appendix B.
The associated Environmental Risk Assessment Report, which outlines effluent criteria for the
proposed wastewater treatment facility for Port Morien is provided in Appendix C.
4.2 Wastewater Treatment Facility Land Acquisition Requirements
The WWTP will be located on a parcel of land owned by Public Works and Government Services
Canada (PWGSC). HEJV recommends purchasing the entire lot from PWGSC due to the size of the
development, the requirements for an access road, the routing for the linear infrastructure and the
permanence of the development. The parcel of land recommended for acquisition is listed in Table
4.
Table 2 – WWTP Land Acquisition Requirements
PID# Property
Owner Assessed Value Description Purchase Entire
Lot (Y/N)
15224945 PWGSC $16,000 WWTP Y
4.3 Wastewater Treatment Facility Site Desktop Geotechnical Review
A desktop review of the geotechnical conditions was carried out for the WWTP. In general, the review
involved a field visit to the site to observe the general conditions and a desktop review of available
documents with the intent of commenting on the following issues:
site topography;
geology (surficial ground cover, probable overburden soil and bedrock type);
geotechnical problems and parameters;
previous land use (review of aerial photographs);
underground/surface mining activities; and
proposed supplemental ground investigation methods (test pits and/or boreholes).
The following geotechnical issues were noted in the report:
1. The area to the south‐southwest of the site was undermined due to historical coal mining
activities and there is a potential for undocumented bootleg pits/mines in the subject area.
2. There is the potential for a layer of limestone to be present underlying the surficial ground
and alternating layers of bedrock below the site. Limestone is water soluble and has the
potential to develop karsts voids (sinkholes).
3. It is anticipated that the overburden soil will be in a very moist to wet condition near the
surface, in particular near the marshy/boggy areas. This will create some problems during
site preparation and construction. A Surficial and Groundwater Control Plan should be
developed for the site.
15524945
HEJV Port Morien Wastewater System Pre‐Design Summary Report 8
The review recommends that a preliminary geotechnical investigation (land‐based drilling program)
be completed at the site to verify the presence or absence of authorized and/or bootleg mining
activities undertaken in these areas, as well as the potential of future subsidence that could impact
structures constructed on the site.
The goal of the supplemental geotechnical ground investigation would be to collect pertinent
information pertaining to the subsurface conditions within the footprint of the proposed new facility.
This information will then be used to develop geotechnical recommendations for use in the design
and construction of the new facility.
The report recommended that borehole locations be selected based upon the location of buried
infrastructure (sewer, water, electrical and fiber optic lines); the required distance needed from
overhead power lines to accommodate drilling operations; and to provide adequate coverage of the
site. It is proposed that representative soil samples be collected continually throughout the
overburden material of each of the three boreholes advanced at each site. Additionally, it is
recommended that during the investigation samples of the bedrock should be collected
continuously to a depth of at least 30.5 metres or more, depending upon the elevation to
underground mine working within the subject area, in two of the three boreholes. The intent of the
bedrock coring is to:
verify the presence or absence of underground mine workings (both authorized commercial
activities and/or bootleg pits).
increase the odds of advancing the borehole through the roof of any mine working (to
determine the potential void space) and not into a supporting pillar.
accurately characterize the bedrock for design of either driven or drilled piles, if needed.
It was recommended that the third borehole be terminated either at 12 metres depth below ground
surface or once refusal on assumed bedrock is encountered (whichever comes first). It should be
noted that if pillar extraction took place, fractures will likely extend 20 metres above mine workings.
If this is the case, drill return water may be lost and rock wedges may be encountered. This will inhibit
coring and an alternative method of drilling through fractured rock may have to be pursued.
A copy of the Port Morien WWTP site desktop geotechnical review report is provided in Appendix D.
4.4 Wastewater Treatment Facility Site Intrusive Geotechnical Review
An intrusive geotechnical investigation was also carried out at the WWTP site. The work involved
advancement of three boreholes on the site and subsequent analysis of the subsurface. A copy of the
intrusive geotechnical investigation report at the Port Morien WWTP site is provided in Appendix D.
The following gives the key geotechnical recommendations resulting from this investigation:
1. Effluent ponds should be constructed using an engineered liner comprised of either a high
density polyethylene (HDPE) liner system; low permeable earthen (till) liner and/or composite
earthen and HDPE systems to prevent the release of organic material and pathogens into the
groundwater/surface waters found on the site.
HEJV Port Morien Wastewater System Pre‐Design Summary Report 9
2. Significant volumes of groundwater and surficial water were observed. Additional
care/control should be planned for during construction to avoid either uplifting of HDPE
liners, softening of the native glacial till and/or any backfill materials to be placed on site.
Careful inspection of the base of the excavations and proof rolling with appropriately sized
equipment will be important to confirm the suitability of the bearing and low permeability
material. Similarly, protection of exposed sub‐grade and compacted fill surfaces against
freezing and thawing should be planned for.
3. The native glacial till deposits encountered at site will provide a suitable bearing stratum for
shallow foundations.
4. Historical mining records indicate that extensive coal mining activities were completed 100
metres south‐southwest of the proposed construction. No available records indicated that
any coal mining activities took place directly below the footprint of the proposed WWTP. As
such, the risk for ground surface settlement due to historical mining activities below the site
is considered to be low. It should be noted that any decisions made based on parameters
outlined on the coal mine working drawings used in this evaluation will have a relatively high
degree of uncertainty for the following reasons:
a. there is no information available on the accuracy of the original survey completed;
b. paper drawings can stretch over time and change the dimensions of the working
depending on the humidity levels where the original underground coal mining maps
were stored;
c. there is no information on the quality of the scanners that were used by Nova Scotia
Department of Natural Resources (NSDNR) to scan the original drawings (all optical
scanners have an inherent error associated with them);
d. there is very limited (if any) coordinated information available on the historical
records; and
e. the techniques used for geo‐referencing is dependent on the geographic features on
the maps (i.e., roadways, watercourses, coastal feature), which can change over time.
4.5 Wastewater Treatment Facility Site Phase 1 Environmental Assessment
A Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment was conducted at the WWTP site. A copy of the associated
report is provided in Appendix F. The general findings of that investigation are as follows:
→ The site is currently and, based on available information, has historically been vacant forested
land. The former Gowrie Mines were located approximately 40 meters (m) southwest and
west of the site. Metals impacts in surface and subsurface soil, which exceeded the Canadian
Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME) and background reference concentrations
were identified on the former mine property. Guideline exceedances were reported at a
former Beehive Coke Ovens location and in multiple separate areas identified as isolated coal
fine dump areas. Based on a review of the available information, the nearest impacts to the
site consist of two isolated areas located approximately 80 m southwest and west of the site
exhibiting metals (i.e., arsenic and/or thallium) concentrations in surface soil in excess of the
CCME commercial guidelines and/or background reference concentrations. Additional areas
of impact were also identified further west and southwest of the site. It is noted that based
on the location of the former Gowrie Mine relative to the proposed WWTP location, and the
available descriptions of where metals impacts were identified on the former mine site, the
HEJV Port Morien Wastewater System Pre‐Design Summary Report 10
potential for impacts to extend onto the site (i.e., PID No. 15524945) is considered low;
however, testing would be required to confirm.
→ Vegetation (i.e., grass) covered mounds and construction debris (i.e., concrete, painted wood,
metal, glass) were observed on the southwest corner of the site near Birch Grove Road.
Construction debris should be removed for disposal at a licenced facility. The nature of the
mounds is unknown.
→ Painted window frames were observed on the southwest portion of the site near Birch Grove
Road. It is unknown if this paint is lead containing. Testing would be required to
confirm/refute the presence of lead.
→ No known pesticide application has occurred on‐site. There is potential for pesticide use, as
a means of vegetation control, to have occurred southwest of the site in relation to the former
railway.
HEJV Port Morien Wastewater System Pre‐Design Summary Report 11
CHAPTER 5 WASTEWATER SYSTEM ARCHAEOLOGICAL
RESOURCES IMPACT ASSESSMENT
5.1 Archaeological Resources Impact Assessment
In 2018, Davis MacIntyre & Associates Limited conducted a phase I archaeological resource impact
assessment at sites of proposed wastewater infrastructure for the Port Morien Wastewater System.
The assessment included a historic background study and reconnaissance in order to determine the
potential for archaeological resources in the impact area and to provide recommendations for further
mitigation, if necessary.
The assessment found that most of the WWTP study area is located within wetland. New gravity
sewers and a forcemain will be constructed along existing roads that have also experienced impact
from existing infrastructure. The location of the lift station is an area that was previously exposed to
tidal and storm surge, and is now protected by an armourstone barrier. Prior to the construction of
the barrier, tidal forces likely prevented the formation of any archaeological deposits.
One collapsed wooden hunting cabin, dating to the mid to late 20th century, was encountered. No
other archaeological resources or areas of potential were identified within the study area. The
assessment concluded that the potential for First Nations or Euro‐Canadian archaeological resources
was low and the collapsed wooden cabin was evaluated to have low archaeological significance.
Therefore, there were no recommendations for further archaeological mitigation for the proposed
WWTP, lift station, new gravity sewer, and forcemain at Port Morien.
If additional areas that were not assessed are expected to be impacted, the study recommended that
an assessment of the new impact area be conducted. If any archaeological resources are encountered
at any time during ground disturbance, it is required that all activity cease and the Coordinator of
Special Places (902‐424‐6475) be contacted immediately regarding a suitable method of mitigation.
The study recommended that, if available, a qualified palaeontologist or geologist be contracted to
examine any bedrock exposed during the project excavation, and to determine the need for any
further paleontological monitoring.
HEJV Port Morien Wastewater System Pre‐Design Summary Report 12
CHAPTER 6 WASTEWATER INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS
6.1 Wastewater Interception & Treatment Capital Costs
An opinion of probable capital cost for the recommended wastewater interception and treatment
system for Port Morien is presented in the table below.
Table 3 – Port Morien Wastewater Interception & Treatment System Capital Costs
Project Component Capital Cost (Excluding
Taxes)
Wastewater Interception System $1,800,190
Wastewater Interception System Land Acquisition $10,400
Subtotal 1: $1,810,590
Construction Contingency (25%): $451,000
Engineering (10%): $181,000
Total Wastewater Interception: $2,442,590
Wastewater Treatment Facility $2,333,357
Wastewater Treatment Facility Land Acquisition $16,000
Subtotal 2: $2,349,357
Construction Contingency (25%): $583,400
Engineering (12%): $280,100
Total Wastewater Treatment: $3,212,857
Total Interception & Treatment System: $5,655,447
HEJV Port Morien Wastewater System Pre‐Design Summary Report 13
6.2 Wastewater Interception & Treatment Annual Operating Costs
An opinion of probable annual operating costs for the recommended wastewater interception and
treatment system for Port Morien is presented in the table below.
Table 4 – Port Morien Wastewater Interception & Treatment System Operating Costs
Project Component Annual Operating Cost
(Excluding Taxes)
Wastewater Interception System
General Linear Maintenance Cost $500
General Lift Station Maintenance Cost $3,500
Employee O&M Cost $3,500
Electrical Operational Cost $6,250
Backup Generator O&M Cost $1,200
Total Wastewater Interception Annual Operating Costs: $14,950
Wastewater Treatment Facility
Lagoon & Equipment Maintenance Cost $5,000
Staffing $25,000
Power $15,400
Sludge Disposal $6,667
Total Wastewater Treatment Annual Operating Costs: $52,067
Total Interception & Treatment System Annual Operating Costs: $67,017
6.3 Annual Capital Replacement Fund Contribution Costs
The CBRM wishes to create a Capital Replacement Fund to which annual contributions would be made
to prepare for replacement of the wastewater assets at the end of their useful life. The calculation of
annual contributions to this fund involves consideration of such factors as the type of asset, the asset
value, the expected useful life of the asset, and the corresponding annual depreciation rate for the
asset. In consideration of these factors, the table below provides an estimate of the annual
contributions to a capital replacement fund for the proposed new wastewater interception and
treatment system infrastructure. This calculation also adds the same contingency factors used in the
calculation of the Opinion of Probable Capital Cost, to provide an allowance for changes during the
design and construction period. The actual Annual Capital Replacement Fund Contributions will be
calculated based on the final constructed asset value, the type of asset, the expected useful life of the
HEJV Port Morien Wastewater System Pre‐Design Summary Report 14
asset, and the corresponding annual depreciation rate for the asset type. Please note that costs
shown below do not account for annual inflation and do not include applicable taxes.
Table 5 – Port Morien Wastewater Interception & Treatment System Capital Replacement Fund
Description of Asset Asset
Value
Asset
Useful Life
Expectancy
(Years)
Annual
Depreciation
Rate (%)
Annual
Capital
Replacement
Fund
Contribution
Wastewater Interception System
Linear Assets (Piping, Manholes and
Other) $1,099,390 75 1.3% $14,292
Pump Station Structures (Concrete
Chambers, etc.) $385,440 50 2.0% $7,709
Pump Station Equipment (Mechanical
/ Electrical) $315,360 20 5.0% $15,768
Subtotal $1,800,190 ‐ ‐ $37,769
Construction Contingency (Subtotal x 25%): $9,442
Engineering (Subtotal x 10%): $3,777
Wastewater Interception System Annual Capital Replacement Fund
Contribution Costs: $50,988
Wastewater Treatment System
Treatment Linear Assets (Outfall and
Yard Piping, Manholes and Other) $559,112 75 1.3% $7,268
Treatment Structures (Concrete
Chambers, etc.) $922,978 50 2.0% $18,460
Treatment Equipment (Mechanical /
Electrical, etc.) $851,267 20 5.0% $42,563
Subtotal $2,333,357 ‐ ‐ $68,291
Construction Contingency (Subtotal x 25%): $17,073
Engineering (Subtotal x 12%): $8,195
Wastewater Treatment System Annual Capital Replacement Fund Contribution
Costs: $93,558
Total Wastewater Interception & Treatment Annual Capital Replacement
Fund Contribution Costs: $144,546
HEJV Port Morien Wastewater System Pre‐Design Summary Report 15
6.4 Existing Wastewater Collection System Upgrades / Assessment Costs
The estimated costs of upgrades and assessments related to the existing wastewater collection
system as described in Chapter 3 are shown in the table below.
Table 6 ‐ Existing Wastewater Collection System Upgrades / Assessment Costs
Item Cost
Collection System Asset Condition Assessment Program
Condition Assessment of Manholes based on 62 MHs $25,000
Condition Assessment of Sewer Mains based on 1.1 kms of
infrastructure $28,000
Total $53,000
Sewer Separation Measures
Separation based on 5.2 kms of sewer @ $45,000/km $234,000
Engineering (10%) $23,000
Contingency (25%) $59,000
Total $316,000
Total Estimated Existing Collection System Upgrade and
Assessment Costs $369,000
HEJV Port Morien Wastewater System Pre‐Design Summary Report 16
CHAPTER 7 PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE
7.1 Implementation Schedule
Figure 1 provides a tentative schedule for implementation of wastewater system upgrades for Port
Morien, including proposed wastewater interception and treatment infrastructure as well as
upgrades to and assessment of the existing collection system.
For the High‐risk systems such as Port Morien, it is expected that implementation of proposed
upgrades will commence in 2020. However, the project implementation schedule has been
tentatively outlined on a generalized basis (Year 1, Year 2, etc.) rather than with specified deadlines.
The schedule has been structured such that asset condition assessments and investigations to locate
sources of extraneous water entering the system would be carried out in Year 1. Design/construction
of recommended upgrades will also start in Year 1. Detailed design of proposed interception and
treatment infrastructure, including additional flow metering, will be conducted in Year 2, with
construction occurring in Year 3. Project closeout would occur near the beginning of Year 4. This
results in a tentative implementation schedule that covers a four (4) year timeline.
Although the process of pursuing the acquisition of properties and easements required to construct
the proposed wastewater upgrades as outlined in previous sections is not shown on the Project
Implementation Schedule, it is recommended that the CBRM pursue these acquisitions prior to the
commencement of detailed design.
No. Project Component Period: Jan ‐ Mar Apr ‐ Jun Jul ‐ Sept Oct ‐ Dec Jan ‐ Mar Apr ‐ Jun Jul ‐ Sept Oct ‐ Dec Jan ‐ Mar Apr ‐ Jun Jul ‐ Sept Oct ‐ Dec Jan ‐ Mar Apr ‐ Jun Jul ‐ Sept Oct ‐ Dec
Schedule:
Cash Flow:
Schedule:
Cash Flow:
Schedule:
Cash Flow:
Schedule:
Cash Flow:
Schedule:
Cash Flow:
Schedule:
Cash Flow:
Schedule:
Cash Flow:
Schedule:
Cash Flow:
Schedule:
Cash Flow:
$2,370,190
$112,040
$3,100,817
$72,400
8 Carry out detailed design for proposed wastewater treatment infrastructure
9 Carry out tendering, construction, commissioning and initial systems operations for proposed
wastewater treatment infrastructure
6 Carry out detailed design for proposed wastewater interception infrastructure
7 Carry out tendering, construction, commissioning and initial systems operations for proposed
wastewater interception infrastructure
$9,200
5 Carry out tendering, construction and commissioning for recommended upgrades to the existing
collection system $306,800
3 Carry out Sewer Separation Investigation Study to locate sources of extraneous water entering the
collection system $15,000
4 Carry out detailed design for recommended upgrades to the existing collection system based on
previous assessments
1 Carry out asset condition assessment of all manholes in the existing collection system
$25,000
2 Carry out video inspection and assessment of selected sanitary sewers in the existing collection system
$28,000
Figure 1 ‐ Project Implementation Schedule Port Morien Wastewater System
Year:1234
HEJV Port Morien Wastewater System Pre‐Design Summary Report Appendices
APPENDIX A
Port Morien Collection System
Pre‐Design Brief
187116 ●Final Brief ●April 2020
Environmental Risk Assessments & Preliminary
Design of Seven Future Wastewater Treatment
Systems in CBRM
Port Morien Collection System Pre-Design Brief
Prepared by: HEJVPrepared for: CBRM
March 2020
March 27, 2020
275 Charlotte Street
Sydney, Nova Scotia
Canada
B1P 1C6
Tel: 902-562-9880
Fax: 902-562-9890
_________________
PORT MORIEN COLLECTION SYSTEM PRE DESIGN BRIEF FINAL REV 2/ek
ED: 16/04/2020 11:43:00/PD: 16/04/2020 11:47:00
April 16, 2020
Matthew D. Viva, P.Eng.
Manager of Wastewater Operations
Cape Breton Regional Municipality
320 Esplanade, Sydney, NS B1P 7B9
Dear Mr. Viva:
RE: Environmental Risk Assessments & Preliminary Design of Seven Future
Wastewater Treatment Systems in CBRM – Port Morien Collection
System Pre-Design Brief
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture (HEJV) is pleased to submit the following
Collection System Pre-Design Brief for your review and comment. This Brief
summarizes the interceptors, local sewers and pumping station that will form
the proposed wastewater collection for the Village of Port Morien. The
collection system will convey sewer to/from a future Wastewater Treatment
Facility that will be located north of Birch Grove Road. The Brief also outlines
the design requirements and standards for the required collection system
infrastructure components.
Yours very truly,
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture
Prepared by: Reviewed by:
James Sheppard, P.Eng. Darrin McLean, MBA, FEC, P.Eng.
Civil Infrastructure Engineer Senior Civil Engineer
Direct: 902-562-9880 Direct: 902-539-1330
E-Mail:jsheppard@dillon.ca E-Mail:dmclean@cbcl.ca
Project No: 187116 (Dillon) and 182402.00 (CBCL)
March 27, 2020
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien Collection System Pre-Design Brief i
Contents
CHAPTER 1 Introduction & Background ........................................................................................... 1
1.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 System Background ........................................................................................................ 1
CHAPTER 2 Design Parameters & Standards .................................................................................... 2
2.1 General Overview ........................................................................................................... 2
2.2 Design Standards ............................................................................................................ 2
CHAPTER 3 Wastewater Interceptor Pre- Design ............................................................................. 4
3.1 General Overview ........................................................................................................... 4
3.2 Design Flows .................................................................................................................. 4
3.2.1 Theoretical Flow ................................................................................................. 4
3.2.2 Observed Flow .................................................................................................... 5
3.2.3 Flow Conclusions & Recommendations ............................................................... 7
3.3 Interceptor System ......................................................................................................... 8
3.4 Combined Sewer Overflows............................................................................................ 9
3.5 Pumping Stations ........................................................................................................... 9
3.5.1 Pumping Design Capacity .................................................................................. 10
3.5.2 Safety Features ................................................................................................. 10
3.5.3 Wetwell ............................................................................................................ 10
3.5.4 Station Piping.................................................................................................... 11
3.5.5 Equipment Access ............................................................................................. 11
3.5.6 Emergency Power ............................................................................................. 11
3.5.7 Controls ............................................................................................................ 12
3.5.8 Security ............................................................................................................ 12
CHAPTER 4 Existing Collection System Upgrades ........................................................................... 13
4.1 Asset Condition Assessment Program ........................................................................... 13
4.2 Sewer Separation Measures ......................................................................................... 13
CHAPTER 5 Pipe Material Selection and Design ............................................................................. 14
5.1 Pipe Material ................................................................................................................ 14
CHAPTER 6 Land and Easement Requirements .............................................................................. 15
6.1 Lift Station Site ............................................................................................................. 15
6.2 WWTP Site ................................................................................................................... 16
6.3 Linear Infrastructure ..................................................................................................... 16
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien Collection System Pre-Design Brief ii
CHAPTER 7 Site Specific Constraints ............................................................................................... 17
7.1 Construction Constraints .............................................................................................. 17
7.2 Environmental Constraints ........................................................................................... 17
7.3 Access Requirements.................................................................................................... 18
7.4 Power Supply Requirements ......................................................................................... 18
CHAPTER 8 Opinion of Probable Costs ........................................................................................... 19
8.1 Opinion of Probable Costs – New Wastewater Collection Infrastructure ....................... 19
8.2 Opinion of Operational Costs ........................................................................................ 19
8.3 Opinion of Existing Collection System Upgrades and Assessment Costs ........................ 20
8.4 Opinion of Annual Capital Replacement Fund Contributions ......................................... 21
CHAPTER 9 References ................................................................................................................... 22
Tables
Table 2-1 Sewer Design Criteria ............................................................................................... 2
Table 2-2 Pumping Station Design Criteria ............................................................................... 3
Table 3-1 Theoretical Flow Summary ....................................................................................... 5
Table 3-2 Flow Monitoring Location Summary ......................................................................... 6
Table 3-3 Average Dry Weather and Design Flows Results ....................................................... 6
Table 3-4 Observed Flows during Rainfall Events...................................................................... 7
Table 3-5 Pump Station Summary .......................................................................................... 10
Table 5-1 Comparison of Pipe Materials ................................................................................. 14
Table 6-1 Lift Station Land Acquisition Details ........................................................................ 15
Table 6-2 WWTP Land Acquisition Details .............................................................................. 16
Table 6-3 Linear Infrastructure Land Acquisition Details ......................................................... 16
Table 8-1 Annual Operations and Maintenance Costs ............................................................ 19
Table 8-2 Estimated Existing Collection System Upgrade and Assessment Costs..................... 20
Table 8-3 Estimated Annual Capital Replacement Fund Contributions.................................... 21
Appendices
Appendix A –Drawings
Appendix B – Flow Master Reports
Appendix C – Opinion of Probable Design & Construction Costs
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien Collection System Pre-Design Brief 1
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION &BACKGROUND
1.1 Introduction
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture (HEJV) has been engaged by the Cape Breton Regional
Municipality (CBRM) to carry out Environmental Risk Assessments (ERAs) and Preliminary Design of
seven future wastewater treatment Systems in the CBRM. The future wastewater collection and
treatment systems will serve the communities of Glace Bay, Port Morien, North Sydney & Sydney
Mines, New Waterford, New Victoria, Louisbourg and Donkin, which currently have no wastewater
treatment facilities.
The preliminary design of the wastewater interceptor systems are being completed as a supplement
to the existing wastewater systems in each community. In general, the proposed interceptor sewers
will convey wastewater from the existing outfalls to the proposed Wastewater Treatment Plant
(WWTP) in each location. The complexity of each system is directly related to the number of
outfalls, geographic size and topography of each community. In general, the scope of work on the
interceptor system generally includes the following:
®Determination of design wastewater flows;
®Making recommendations on the best sites for proposed wastewater treatment facilities;
®Development of the most appropriate and cost-effective configurations for wastewater
interception; and,
®Estimation of capital and operations costs for recommended wastewater components.
This document relates to the interceptors, local sewers, combined sewer overflow and pumping
station that will form the wastewater interceptor system for the proposed WWTP in the Village of
Port Morien. This brief outlines the design requirements and standards for the required
infrastructure components. Information regarding the preliminary design of the proposed
wastewater treatment facility for Port Morien will be provided in a separate Design Brief.
1.2 System Background
The Village of Port Morien is serviced by a gravity sewer system with pipe sizes that range from 200
to 250mm in diameter. The system conveys sewage to a single pipe outfall located near the end of
Breakwater Street. The outfall is 375mm in diameter and is concrete encased. The pipe overt is set
at the low, low water elevation and terminates approximately 36m from the shore. A drawing of the
existing Port Morien sewer system is located in Appendix A for reference.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien Collection System Pre-Design Brief 2
CHAPTER 2 DESIGN PARAMETERS &STANDARDS
2.1 General Overview
The development of a wastewater interceptor system for each of the communities is highly
dependent upon the selection of appropriate design parameters. HEJV has reviewed applicable
design standards and has developed the preliminary design of the interceptor sewer to meet and
exceed these industry standards.
2.2 Design Standards
The design of the interceptor system has been based on the following reference documents and
standards:
®Atlantic Canada Wastewater Guidelines Manual for Collection, Treatment, and Disposal
(ACWGM) (Environment Canada, 2006); and
®Water Environment Federation: Manual of Practice FD-4, Design of Wastewater and
Stormwater Pumping Stations.
The key design criteria that have been established for this project are presented in Table 2-1 and
Table 2-2.
Table 2-1 Sewer Design Criteria
Description Unit Design Criteria Source Comments
Hydraulic Capacity l/s Location dependent HEJV Flow has been set to minimize
sewage overflows.
Material for forcemains
PVC, HDPE or ductile
iron pipe with the
specified corrosion
protection
CBRM See discussion in Chapter 5
Minimum forcemain
velocity m/s 0.6 ACWGM For self-cleansing purposes
Forcemain minimum
depth of cover m 1.8 ACWGM Subject to Interferences
Material of gravity pipe PVC or Reinforced
concrete CBRM See discussion in Chapter 5
Hydraulic design gravity Manning’s Formula ACWGM n = 0.013
Hydraulic design
forcemain
Hazen Williams
Formula ACWGM C = 120
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien Collection System Pre-Design Brief 3
Description Unit Design Criteria Source Comments
Maximum spacing
between manholes m
120 for pipes up to
and including 600 mm
and 150 for pipes over
600 mm
ACWGM
Gravity pipe minimum
design flow velocity m/s 0.6 ACWGM
Gravity pipe maximum
flow velocity m/s 4.5 ACWGM
Pipe crossings
separation mm 450 minimum
Minimum separation must also
meet Nova Scotia Environment
(NSE) requirements.
Horizontal pipe
separation forcemain to
watermain
m 3.0 NSE
Horizontal pipe
separation gravity pipe
to water main
m 3.0 ACWGM
Can be laid closer if the
installation meets the criteria
in Section 2.8.3.1
Gravity pipe minimum
depth of cover m 1.5 HEJV Subject to Interferences
Gravity pipe maximum
depth of cover m 4.5 HEJV Subject to Interferences
Table 2-2 provides a summary of the key design criteria for the Pumping Stations.
Table 2-2 Pumping Station Design Criteria
Description Unit Design Criteria Source Comments
Pump cycle time 1 hour 5 < cycle <10 WEF/
ACWGM
Number of pumps
Minimum of two.
Must be able to
pump design flow
with the largest
pump out of
service.
ACWGM Three minimum for stations
with flows greater than 52 l/s.
Inlet sewer One maximum ACWGM Only a single sewer entry is
permitted to the wetwell.
Header pipe
diameter mm 100 minimum ACWGM
Solids handling mm 75 (minimum)ACWGM Smaller diameter permissible
for macerator type pumps.
Emergency power
generation
To be provided for
firm capacity of the
facility
ACWGM Option to run one pump if
conditions of 3.3.5.1 are met.
Pump station
wetwell ventilation
Air
changes/
hour
30 (Wetwell)
12 (Valve Chamber)ACWGM
Based on intermittent
activation when operating in
the wet well.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien Collection System Pre-Design Brief 4
CHAPTER 3 WASTEWATER INTERCEPTOR PRE-DESIGN
3.1 General Overview
A drawing of the existing Port Morien collection system has been included in Appendix A. The
drawing was created using background data collected from various sources to depict the layout of
the existing gravity network.
The proposed wastewater interceptor system for Port Morien will include a sewage pump station
located near the existing outfall. A new gravity interceptor will redirect flow from the existing
outfall into the proposed sewage pump station site, which will in turn deliver the wastewater to the
proposed Waste Water Treatment Plant (WWTP) site approximately 1,350 metres away. A gravity
sewer will be required to direct the treated flow from the proposed WWTP, back to the original
outfall.
For this Pre-Design Brief, HEJV has compiled a preliminary plan and profile drawing of the proposed
linear infrastructure. The locations of the Lift station, Combined Sewage Overflow (CSO), outfall and
WWTP have also been illustrated on the drawings and are included in Appendix A.
3.2 Design Flows
HEJV completed a review of the theoretical and observed sanitary flows for the Port Morien
sewershed. The purpose of the assessment was to estimate average and design flows for the
environmental risk assessment (ERA) and the preliminary design of the future WWTP and
interception system.
3.2.1 Theoretical Flow
Theoretical flow was calculated based on design factors contained in the ACWGM. To estimate
population, the number of private dwellings were estimated then multiplied by an average
household size. An average value of 2.2 persons per household was used based on the average
household size found in the 2016 Statistics Canada information for Cape Breton. The number of
apartments, nursing homes, townhouses, and other residential buildings were estimated and
considered in the population estimate. Population estimates are shown in Table 3-1. Peak design
flow was calculated using the following equaƟon (1):
ܳ(݀)=ܲݍܯ
86.4 +ܫܣ (1)
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien Collection System Pre-Design Brief 5
Where:
Q(d) = Peak domesƟc sewage flow (l/s)
P = PopulaƟon (in thousands)
q = Average daily per capita domesƟc flow (l/day per capita)
M = Peaking factor (Harman Method)
I = unit of extraneous flow (l/s)
A = Subcatchment area (hectares)
ACWGM recommends an average daily domestic sanitary flow of 340 l/day per person for private
residential dwellings. The unit of extraneous flow was assumed to be approximately 0.21 l/s/ha
based on typical ranges outlined in ACWGM. The contributing sewershed was estimated to be 52
ha. The peaking factor used in Equation 1 was determined using the Harman Formula (2) shown
below:
Harman Formula
ܯ =1+14
4+ܲ.ହ (2)
The estimated average dry weather flow (ADWF) and peak design flows based on the ACWGM
methods discussed above are presented in Table 3-1.
Table 3-1 Theoretical Flow Summary
Station Estimated Area
(ha)
Estimated
Population1 ADWF2 (l/s)4x ADWF
(l/s)
Peak Design Flow3
(l/s)
Port Morien
Sewershed 52 413 1.63 6.50 17.65
1 2016 Cape Breton Census from StaƟsƟcs Canada
2Based on average daily sewer flows of 340 L/day/person (ACWGM 2006)
3EsƟmated using ACWGM equaƟon for peak domesƟc sewage flows (including extraneous flows and peaking factor)
3.2.2 Observed Flow
An initial flow monitoring station was installed downstream of the intersection of Breakwater Street
and Peach Street. After reviewing the dataset, there was concern that the flow values from this
meter were below expected values. HEJV’s flow metering team suspected that the pipe slope (>5%)
contributed to the lower flow values obtained from the first monitoring station. To validate this
theory, two flow meters were installed to compare with initial flow values. A meter was installed on
Peach Street and another installed on Breakwater Street. Sanitary flows along Peach and
Breakwater Streets merge immediately downstream. Therefore the sum of the two measured flows
should be representative of flows downstream at the outfall (i.e. at the initial monitoring location).
A summary of the flow meter deployment locations and monitoring duration is provided in Table 3-
2.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien Collection System Pre-Design Brief 6
Table 3-2 Flow Monitoring Location Summary
Station Street Name Northing Easting Monitoring Start-End Dates Days of
Data
Outfall Breakwater Street 5111669.437 4625788.001 March 4 – April 15, 2018 43
Breakwater1 Breakwater Street 5111669.437 4625788.001 May 11 – June 18, 2018 39
Peach Peach Street 5111790.240 4625860.790 May 11 – June 18, 2018 39
1 Breakwater flow meter locatedwithin the same manhole as the iniƟal flow meter, however the meter was installed on
the Breakwater Street inlet pipe as opposed to the manhole outlet pipe.
Analysis for observed dry weather flows were completed using the United States Environmental
Protection Agency’s (EPA) Sanitary Sewer Overflow Analysis and Planning (SSOAP) toolbox. The
SSOAP toolbox is a suite of computer software tools used for capacity analysis and condition
assessments of sanitary sewer systems. This analysis was completed for all three monitoring
stations, with an additional analysis using the combined raw flow data from the Breakwater and
Peach stations.
Flow and rainfall data were input into the SSOAP program, along with sewershed data for each of
the metered areas. To determine average dry weather flow (ADWF), days that were influenced by
rainfall were deleted. This was done in the SSOAP model by removing data from days that had any
rain within the last 24 hours, more than 5 mm in the previous 48 hours, and more than 5 mm per
day additional in the subsequent days (e.g. 10 mm in the last 3 days).
The calculated ADWF estimates based on monitored flow data evaluated using the SSOAP program
are presented in Table 3-3. The sum of flow estimates from the Peach and Breakwater meters were
used to evaluate the combined ADWF values.
Table 3-3 Average Dry Weather and Design Flows Results
Monitoring Station ADWF From SSOAP
Model (l/s)
4x ADWF
(l/s)
Average Daily
Observed Flow (l/s)
Peak Daily
Average Flow
(l/s)
Outfall 0.9 3.60 1.04 4.27
Breakwater + Peach 3.8 15.20 4.50 8.56
The results in Table 3.3 suggest a design flow range of 3.60 l/s to 15.20 l/s for the Port Morien
outfall, depending on monitoring location. There is significant variation between the metered flows
at the outfall and for the Breakwater + Peach sewers, confirming the flow metering team’s
suspicions of the initial flow data. For the purposes of this assessment, HEJV has assumed that the
data obtained from Breakwater + Peach data set should be carried forward for design purposes. The
obtained flows are in the range of what HEJV expected based on the theoretical flow calculations.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien Collection System Pre-Design Brief 7
3.2.3 Flow Conclusions & Recommendations
Based on the analysis presented in the above sections, HEJV’s recommended design flow for the
interception system is 17.65 l/s. This recommended design flow is based on the theoretical Peak
Design Flow from Table 3-1. Given the relative closeness of the flow values obtained for the
theoretical Peak Design Flow and 4XADWF derived from the SSOAP Model (17.65 vs. 15.20) and the
limited deployment of the Breakwater + Peach Street flow meters, HEJV recommends the adoption
of the more conservative flow value.
The average observed flow over the three week flow metering program in Port Morien was 4.50 l/s
(including a limited number of wet weather flows).
A high level review of rainfall data for Sydney indicates that significant rainfall events (25 mm+
minimum daily accumulation) are expected to occur 10-15 times each year. In estimating annual
average flows, HEJV conservatively assumes twice this number of rainfall events could occur (30
events per year).
The above assumptions indicate an annual average flow in the order of 5.5 - 6 l/s. This is based on
maximum pumping for 30 days of the year, and average daily flows for the remainder of the year
(335 days).
To evaluate performance of the proposed lift station during wet weather conditions, metered flows
during rainfall events have also been considered. The Breakwater and Peach meter deployment
coincided with daily rainfall depths in excess of 10 mm only once. A minimum rainfall depth of 10
mm is assumed to be the minimum rainfall required to result in meaningful wet weather flows in the
sewer. The measured flow was compared to the recommended design flow to indicate if overflow is
expected. The results of the wet weather flow analysis can be seen in Table 3-4.
Table 3-4 Observed Flows during Rainfall Events
Monitoring Station
Minor Rainfall Event
(10-25 mm Daily Rainfall)
# of Events Daily Average
Flow (l/s)
Expected Overflow
(Y/N)
Breakwater 1 8 N
Peach 1 0.6 N
1 Overflow expected when observed flow exceeds design flow
It is important to note that no rainfall events having daily rainfall amounts in excess of 25 mm were
measured during the monitoring period. When considering daily average flows during minor rainfall
events, overflow would not be expected based on the proposed design flow rate of 17.65 l/s.
To consider the effects of moderate rainfall, daily rainfall for the Sydney CS climate station
(Environment Canada Station #8207502) was reviewed for the past 10 years of complete data (2008
- 2017). Review of these data suggests that moderate rainfall events (i.e. daily rainfall greater than
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien Collection System Pre-Design Brief 8
25 mm) are expected to occur frequently within a given year. Based on this review, it is expected
that these moderate rainfalls would occur on average between 10 and 15 times each year and
therefore overflow may be expected during these events. It is HEJV’s recommendation that further
flow metering be completed on the Port Morien system prior to a detailed design to gauge the
impact of these rainfall events on the existing sanitary system and quantify the expected likelihood
of overflow events based on a design flow of 17.65 l/s.
3.3 Interceptor System
The proposed interceptor system for the Port Morien WWTP is presented on the plan and profile
drawing attached in Appendix A. The proposed interceptor system is made up of segments of
pressure and gravity sewers, one lift station and a combined sewer overflow.
The first step in laying out the interceptor sewer route was to determine the location of the future
WWTP that will serve the Village of Port Morien. To accomplish this, the type of treatment process
needed to be considered. Depending on the proposed location this would either mean a traditional
mechanical plant being constructed for a residential location or a sewage lagoon being constructed
in a remote location. In this case, a remote location would be defined as being at least 150 m from
isolated human habitation as required by ACWGM.
For an initial location for the sewage lagoon option, HEJV considered PID 15882277 owned by Public
Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC). The site investigated was located near the
ballfield at the intersection of Long Beach Road and the Marconi Trail. The location met the criteria
for distance away from residences. However, it was determined that the area was greatly influenced
by mining activities. Although ideally situated on government land and away from residences, the
risk of subsidence was too great to utilize the site for the proposed WWTP development.
HEJV reviewed the Village of Port Morien and surrounding areas for possible locations for the
WWTP site. Three sites were reviewed and found to be feasible. The review indicated a sewage
lagoon could be located on PWGSC land north of Birch Grove Road (PID 15224945) or on private
land west of the northern end of Birch Street (PID 15524739). As a third option, HEJV considered a
Mechanical Plant located near the outfall (approx. 400m from the outfall), on a privately owned
parcel of land (PID 15563257). All three of the potential locations have been shown on the existing
sewer system drawing included in Appendix A.
First, HEJV considered the linear infrastructure required between the proposed lift station site and
the two proposed locations for the sewage lagoon. The route to the proposed location north of
Birch Grove Road was slightly longer and would require 70 additional meters of piping. HEJV
concluded that 70 additional meters of linear infrastructure would be worth not constructing the
lagoon on private land. Therefore, HEJV put forward the location north of Birch Grove Road as the
preferred choice for a sewage lagoon.
At a high level, HEJV then compared the initial capital costs between a proposed stabilization pond
and a traditional mechanical plant. The initial capital costs for the mechanical plant outweighed that
of the stabilization pond option by $700,000. Given that the operating and land acquisition costs of
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien Collection System Pre-Design Brief 9
the stabilization pond would also be much less than a mechanical plant, HEJV at that time proposed
the stabilization pond to be the design selection for the Port Morien WWTP. Based on the findings
of the Port Morien WWTP Pre-design Brief. The final selection for the Port Morien WWTP was an
agrated lagoon with UV disinfection. Please refer to the separate Port Morien WWTP Pre-design
Brief completed by HEJV for further details.
With the WWTP location selected, HEJV laid out the interceptor sewer. The major elements of the
interceptor system include:
®LS-PM 1 located near the PM#1 outfall. A 200 mm diameter interceptor gravity sewer will
redirect flow from the existing outfall into the LS-PM1 site.
®A CSO chamber will be located within the LS site to intercept the incoming flow from the
new gravity interceptor.
®Flow that is less than the interception rate of 17.65 l/s, will be directed to the LS. Flow over
and above the interception rate will be diverted back to the existing outfall.
®The lift station will convey the intercepted sewer to the WWTP site via a 150 mm diameter
forcemain, 1,330m in length. A 200mm diameter gravity sewer will then convey the flow to
the proposed lagoon for a length of approximately 20m.
®The treated flow will then be conveyed back to the existing outfall via a 200 mm diameter
gravity sewer running 1,330 metres along the same route as the interceptor forcemain.
Flow Master reports for the proposed linear infrastructure, illustrated on Sheet 1 in Appendix A,
have been included in Appendix B.
3.4 Combined Sewer Overflows
A Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) should be utilized in the proposed interceptor system where
flows directed to a lift station exceed the interception design rate defined in Section 3.2.3 of 17.65
l/s. The chamber will be located at the lift station site, upstream of the lift station wetwell chamber.
The interceptor system has been designed for the peak flow defined by ACWGM. The existing outfall
currently discharges raw sewage to the Atlantic Ocean on a continuous basis. By installing the
interceptor sewer, the amount of raw sewage being directed to the Atlantic Ocean will be limited.
Given the limited number of overflows anticipated, the CSO for Port Morien has been proposed to
be an unscreened overflow chamber. The chamber will essentially act as a flow diversion chamber.
The CSO chamber should be complete with a weir plate that will separate the chamber into two
sections, one for normal everyday flows (below 17.65l/s) and one for overflow events. Normal flows
would be directed to the lift station. As the flow increases above the interception design flow rate,
the level in the CSO chamber will rise, until it crests the weir plate. Flow that crests the weir plate
would be directed back to the original outfall. The CSO should be equipped with
level measurement on either side of the weir plate. The readings should report back to the CBRM
SCADA system.
3.5 Pumping Stations
As discussed above, one new pumping station will be required in the proposed Port Morien
interceptor system to convey wastewater to the proposed WWTP. The pump station should be
equipped with non-clog submersible sewage pumps with an underground wetwell and a building
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien Collection System Pre-Design Brief 10
that will accommodate the mechanical piping, valves, electrical system, control systems,
instrumentation and backup generator. A hydraulic analysis should be completed on the forcemain
to determine if surge valves are warranted. If required, the valves should be installed prior to the
forcemain exiting the lift station building to protect the pipe against unwanted surge forces. A
standard lift station schematic has been presented in Appendix A for illustrative purposes.
3.5.1 Pumping Design Capacity
The pump station is designed to pump the intercepted flows defined in Section 3.2.3 (17.65 l/s) with
one pump out of service. All pumps should be supplied and operated with variable frequency drives
(VFD). A VFD will provide the following benefits to the pumping system:
®Energy savings by operating the pump at its best efficiency point;
®Prevent motor overload;
®Energy savings by eliminating the surge at pump start up; and
®Water hammer mitigation.
3.5.1.1 LIFT STATION
The Port Morien lift station will convey flow to the proposed stabilization pond/engineered wet
land. The lift station will be a duplex station, with one duty and one standby pump. These pumps
should have a capacity of 18 l/s, with a TDH of 35 m.
3.5.1.2 PUMP STATION SUMMARY
Table 3-5 Pump Station Summary
Pumping Station LS #1
Duty Pumps 1
Standby Pumps 1
ADWF (L/s)4.54
Interception Design Flow (L/s)17.65
Pump Capacity
(L/s, each pump)
18.00
Forcemain Diameter (mm)150
TDH (m) at Maximum Design Flow 35.00
Velocity (1 pump running) m/s 1.00
Approximate power requirement (each pump) kW 17.20
3.5.2 Safety Features
The station should report alarm conditions to the CBRM SCADA network. The station should also
incorporate external visual alarms to notify those outside of building of an alarm condition. External
audible alarms should not be used as the station is in a populated area and disturbance to the local
community should be kept to a minimum.
All access hatches should include safety grating similar to Safe-Hatch by Flygt.
3.5.3 Wetwell
The wetwell should be constructed with a benched floor to promote self-cleansing and to minimize
any potential dead spots.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien Collection System Pre-Design Brief 11
The size of the wetwell should be based on factors such as the volume required for pump cycling,
dimensional requirements to avoid turbulence problems, the vertical separation between pump
control points, the inlet sewer elevation, capacity required between alarm levels, overflow
elevations, the number of pumps and the required horizontal spacing between pumps.
The operating wetwell volumes for the pumping station should be based on alternating pump starts
between available pumps while reducing retention times to avoid resultant odours from septic
conditions.
Based on the conditions discussed above for sizing the wetwell, at this time HEJV recommends a
circular precast unit, with a diameter of 2.1m and an overall depth of 4.9m. This recommendation
assumes that the incoming gravity sewer would be 3.0 m below finished grade.
3.5.4 Station Piping
Pump station internal piping should be ductile iron class 350 with coal tar epoxy lining or stainless
steel with a diameter of 150mm. Threaded flanges or Victaulic couplings should be used for ductile
iron pipe joints, fittings and connections within the station. Pressed or rolled vanstone neck flanges
should be used for stainless steel pipe joints, fittings and connections. Piping layout should be
designed to provide minimum friction loss and to provide easy access to all valving, instrumentation
and equipment for the operators.
A common flow meter on the discharge header should be provided for each station to monitor
flows.
3.5.5 Equipment Access
Pump installaƟon and removal for the staƟons should be achieved using a liŌing davit and electric
hoist that would access the pumps through hatches located above the pumps. Due to maintenance
issues associated with exterior davit sockets and portable davits, staƟonary liŌing davits should be
installed inside these liŌ staƟons and accessed through a roll up door.
A heated building should be provided for the liŌ staƟon to eliminate maintenance issues with valve
chambers. All valves and instrumentaƟon should be above ground in the heated building to allow for
easy access and maintenance.
3.5.6 Emergency Power
The pump station should be equipped with a backup generator sized to provide power to all
equipment, lights, and other accessories during power interruptions. An automatic power transfer
switch should transfer the station’s power supply to the generator during a power disruption and
should return to normal operation when power has been restored. The generator should be
supplied with noise suppression equipment to limit disruption to existing neighbours.
If a diesel generator is selected, the fuel tank should be integral with the generator and designed to
meet the requirements of the National Fire Code of Canada, Section 4 and should meet the
requirements of the Contained Tank assembly document ULC-S653.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien Collection System Pre-Design Brief 12
Based on the surrounding environment, HEJV recommends that the backup generator be located
inside the lift station building. The site has potential for sea spray and wave action from the nearby
shoreline that could be potentially harmful to the standby generator. HEJV estimates that the
increase in costs to house the generator inside the lift station building to be $80,000. The added
protection from the elements would greatly increase the life expectancy of the backup generator.
3.5.7 Controls
All equipment should be controlled through a local control panel mounted in the lift station building.
The local control panel would be a custom panel designed to be integrated into the CBRM SCADA
network. The panel should provide a Hand/Off/Auto control selector to allow for manual control of
the station. The control system should report remotely to CBRM’s SCADA system including alarm
conditions.
Control instrumentation and equipment should include the following:
®Level sensors/transmitters in the wetwell
®Flow meter/transmitter on the discharge forcemain(s)
®Pressure transmitter
®Surge valve position indication (if required)
®Level alarms
®Unauthorized building access
®Low fuel level
®Pump or generator fault
®Generator operation
®CSO level controls (either side of weir plate)
The level in the wetwell utilizing ultrasonic level instruments should control the operation of the
pumps. Auxiliary floats will provide high and low level alarms as well as back-up control in the event
of a failure in the ultrasonic equipment.
3.5.8 Security
Security fencing will be installed at the pumping station on the boundary of the land parcel. The
structures will be monitored with an alarm system (via SCADA) to identify unauthorized access.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien Collection System Pre-Design Brief 13
CHAPTER 4 EXISTING COLLECTION SYSTEM UPGRADES
4.1 Asset Condition Assessment Program
To get a better sense of the condition of the existing Port Morien sewage collection system, HEJV
recommends completing a sewage collection system asset condition assessment program in the
community. The program would carry out an investigation involving two components:
®Visual inspection and assessment of all manholes in the collection system
®Video inspection of 20% of all sewers in the system
The program should be completed with the issuance of a Collection System Asset Condition
Assessment Report that would summarize the condition of the various assets inspected and include
opinions of probable costs for required upgrades.
4.2 Sewer Separation Measures
CBRM should consider completing a sewer separation investigation program for Port Morien. The
program would review catch basins that are currently connected or possibly connected to existing
sanitary sewers. The program should also include the costing of the installation of new storm
sewers to disconnect catch basins from the existing sanitary sewer.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien Collection System Pre-Design Brief 14
CHAPTER 5 PIPE MATERIAL SELECTION AND DESIGN
5.1 Pipe Material
Four pipe materials (Ductile Iron, HDPE, PVC, and Reinforced Concrete) were considered for this
project and were evaluated against various factors. Ductile Iron, HDPE and PVC were reviewed for a
suitable forcemain material for the project. PVC and Reinforced Concrete were reviewed against
each other for a suitable gravity pipe material. A summary of the advantages and disadvantages of
the different materials is presented in Table 5-1.
Table 5-1 Comparison of Pipe Materials
Pipe Material Advantages Disadvantages
Ductile Iron
·Is forgiving with regard to problems
caused by improper bedding
·Thinnest wall, greatest strength
·Standard testing method
·CBRM staff and contractors are familiar
with installation of DI forcemains
·Pipe, and fittings are susceptible to corrosion
·High weight
·Installation cost is high
HDPE
·Excellent corrosion resistance of pipe
·Long laying lengths (where practical)
·Relatively easy to handle
·Requires good bedding
·Requires butt fusing
·Careful handling is required due to abrasion
·Long distances of open trench
·Not designed for vacuum conditions
·Installation cost is high if long lay lengths are
not possible
PVC
·CBRM standard
·Excellent corrosion resistance of pipe
·Standard testing method
·Light weight
·High impact strength
·CBRM staff and contractors are familiar
with installation of PVC forcemains
·Cost competitive
·Requires good bedding
·Must be handled carefully in freezing
conditions
·Fittings are susceptible to corrosion
Reinforced
Concrete
·High strength
·Standard testing method
·CBRM staff and contractors are familiar
with installation
·Heavy – harder to handle
·Susceptible to attached by H2S and acids
when not coated
·Requires careful installation to avoid cracking
·Short laying lengths
Based on the above comparison, HEJV recommends that the gravity sewer and forcemain piping for
the Port Morien interceptor sewer be PVC.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien Collection System Pre-Design Brief 15
CHAPTER 6 LAND AND EASEMENT REQUIREMENTS
HEJV has reviewed the requirements for land acquisition and easements. Most of the proposed
system, gravity sewers and forcemains, will be construed within public right-of-way. However, the
lift station and the treatment plant are shown on private and federal lands, as is the piping to/from
Birch Grove Road to the WWTP.
6.1 Lift Station Site
HEJV proposes that the land parcel for the lift station site be purchased due to the development
being a permanent above ground structure requiring regular access from CBRM staff. HEJV
considers easements to be an acceptable option to both CBRM and residential land owners for the
construction and maintenance of the interceptor linear infrastructure.
Find below a summary of the required land acquisitions that should be undertaken to permit the
installation of the required lift station infrastructure. The table below lists the PID, property owner,
assessed value, size of parcel required and whether or not HEJV recommends purchasing the entire
lot. In some circumstances, due to the size of the lot, it might make more sense to purchase the
entire lot from the existing land owner, versus negotiating a piece that would considerably limit the
development on the remaining site. Please note, as illustrated on the Sheet 2 in Appendix A, the lift
station site has been shown on two parcels of land. A detailed design of the LS site, could look at
eliminating the section required on PID 15370125, owned by PWGSC. For the purpose of this
preliminary design, HEJV has conservatively defined the area required for the proposed lift station
development, and has included this area in the opinion of probable costs section that follows in
Chapter 8.
Table 6-1 Lift Station Land Acquisition Details
PID Property
Owner
Assessed
Value
Description Size Required Purchase
Entire Lot
(Y/N)
15640105 Unknown $8,100 PS Site 15mX30m Y
15370125 PWGSC $248,000 PS Site 8mX15m N
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien Collection System Pre-Design Brief 16
6.2 WWTP Site
As discussed in Section 3.3, the WWTP will be located on a parcel of land owned by Public Works
and Government Services Canada (PWGSC). HEJV recommends purchasing the entire lot from
PWGSC due to the size of the development, the requirements for an access road, the routing for the
linear infrastructure and the permanence of the development. Presented below in Table 6-2 are
some of the pertinent details of the parcel of land required to build the WWTP.
Table 6-2 WWTP Land Acquisition Details
PID Property
Owner
Assessed
Value
Description Size Required Purchase
Entire Lot
(Y/N)
15224945 PWGSC $16,000 WWTP Site To be
confirmed in
the WWTP
Pre-Design
Y
6.3 Linear Infrastructure
The installation of linear infrastructure will require an easement at the bottom of Breakwater Street.
The remaining linear infrastructure will be installed within public right-of-way’s and the above
PWGSC parcel of land that HEJV has recommended for purchase. Details on the required easement
area is as follows:
Table 6-3 Linear Infrastructure Land Acquisition Details
PID Property
Owner
Assessed
Value
Description Size Required Purchase
Entire Lot
(Y/N)
15370125 PWGSC $248,000 Forcemain &
Gravity Sewer
10m (Construction)
6m (Final)
X 80m length
N
15524945
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien Collection System Pre-Design Brief 17
CHAPTER 7 SITE SPECIFIC CONSTRAINTS
During the preliminary design of the interceptor system, HEJV has reviewed the site for the lift
station and pipe routing for potential constraints. HEJV reviewed construction constraints,
environmental constraints, access requirements and power supply requirements for the proposed
interceptor infrastructure. A summary of HEJV’s review follows in the next sections of the Design
Brief. In addition, HEJV recommends that an archaeological assessment be carryout out to review
the proposed WWTP site and interception route for culturally sensitive lands.
7.1 Construction Constraints
HEJV has reviewed the preliminary design of the interceptor system from a construction constraints
perspective. Construction sequencing will be the primary focus of this discussion. The lift station will
need to be constructed, tested and commissioned prior to any of the raw discharge being diverted
to the new interceptor system.
One construction constraint exists at the proposed location for the lift station. The site is in close
proximity to the shoreline. Taking sea level rise and increasing storm surge events into
consideration, the site will require some infilling, in the 1-1.5 metre range. There is existing timber
cribwork / armour stone sea wall, but this will require upgrading to protect the new lift station site.
7.2 Environmental Constraints
The proposed pipe routing will cross three streams between the proposed locations of the lift
station and the WWTP. Existing stream crossings on Marconi Trail (Station 0+380) and Birch Grove
Road (Station 0+870) will involve the pipe being routed either above or below an existing culvert. A
third crossing will occur near Station 1+180. This crossing will be with an active stream that will need
to be crossed for both the linear infrastructure and an access road (culvert crossing) that will serve
the WWTP location. Construction of the works will require a temporary stream diversion. A sandbag
berm will need to be installed 5m upstream from the proposed works. When the berm is installed a
pump should be used to pump water around the proposed works. A sandbag berm should then be
installed downstream of the proposed works. The water between the berms should then be
pumped out and any fish or wildlife noticed during de-watering will need to be relocated
downstream. The suction of the pump will need to be monitored for interference with fish
migration. Fish trapped upstream of the temporary berm will also need to be transported
downstream. The temporary diversion and fish mitigation will need to comply with the latest
version of NSE’s Watercourse Alterations Standard at the time of construction.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien Collection System Pre-Design Brief 18
7.3 Access Requirements
Access to the lift station site should be fairly straight forward, as it is adjacent to Breakwater Street.
A driveway off of the street will need to be extended as well as an entrance gate in the fenced
perimeter.
The WWTP location is somewhat remote and will require an access road to be constructed along
with an entrance gate for security purposes. As described in Section 7.2, a culvert crossing will be
required to complete the access road installation. Access requirements for the WWTP site will be
further detailed in the Port Morien WWTP Pre-Design Brief.
7.4 Power Supply Requirements
Three phase power will be required for the pump station. Three phase power is currently accessible
directly off of Breakwater Street. Approximately 50m of new overhead conductors and two utility
poles will be required.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien Collection System Pre-Design Brief 19
CHAPTER 8 OPINION OF PROBABLE COSTS
8.1 Opinion of Probable Costs – New Wastewater Collection Infrastructure
An opinion of Probable Design and Construction Costs for new wastewater collection system
infrastructure has been completed for the project. A detailed breakdown of the estimate has been
provided in Appendix C. The estimate is made up of the linear infrastructure design and
construction costs and associated land acquisition costs, CSO Chamber and lift station required to
collect and convey the sanitary sewer in Port Morien to the proposed WWTP. The estimate also
takes into account the site works required to raise the grade of the lift station site and to provide
additional armour stone protection. For land acquisition costs, HEJV has used a ratio of the amount
of land that is affected by the required easement/property acquisition multiplied by the assessed
value of the entire lot. The Opinion of Probable Construction Design & Costs for the interceptor
sewer for Port Morien is $2,442,590. This estimate is considered to be Class ‘C’ accurate to within
plus or minus 30%.
8.2 Opinion of Operational Costs
HEJV completed an Opinion of Operational Costs for the interceptor system using data provided by
CBRM for typical annual operating costs of their existing submersible lift stations, typical employee
salaries, Nova Scotia Power rates, and experience from similar stations for general maintenance. The
opinion of operational costing includes general lift station maintenance costs, general linear
maintenance costs, employee operation and maintenance costs, electrical operational costs, and
backup generator operation and maintenance costs. A breakdown of costs has provided in Table 8-
1.
Table 8-1 Annual Operations and Maintenance Costs
The general station maintenance cost presented above includes pump repairs (impellers, bearings,
seals), minor building maintenance (painting, siding repairs, roof repairs), electrical repairs and
instrumentation repairs and servicing.
Item Costs
General Lift Station Maintenance Cost $3,500/yr
General Linear Maintenance Cost $500/yr
Employee O&M Cost $3,500/yr
Electrical Operational Cost $6,250/yr
Backup Generator O&M Cost $1,200/yr
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien Collection System Pre-Design Brief 20
The general linear maintenance cost for the interceptor system has been estimated to be $500 per
year in 2018 dollars. This includes flushing, inspection, and refurbishment of structures along the
linear portion of the collection system.
Employee O&M costs were averaged from data provided by CBRM. It was determined that staffing
to maintain their existing lift stations requires an average of 100 hours of effort per submersible lift
station per year.
For the electrical operation cost, HEJV assumed the building would require heat for 5 months of the
year. Basic electrical loads for instrumentation were assumed. Electrical demand from the pumping
system was determined based on the yearly average flow of the station.
Backup generator operation and maintenance costs assumed that a diesel backup generator would
be utilized. The costs include an annual diesel fuel cost assuming that the generator is run for one
hour each month, as well as annual maintenance for the generator (change of filters and oil,
inspection of the generator, and load bank testing).
8.3 Opinion of Existing Collection System Upgrades and Assessment Costs
An opinion of probable costs has been provided for the collection system asset condition
assessment program described in Chapter 4. These costs include the video inspection and flushing of
20% of the existing sanitary sewer network, visual inspection of manholes, traffic control and the
preparation of a collection system asset condition assessment report.
For sewer separation measures, budgetary pricing has been calculated by reviewing recent costs of
sewer separation measures in CBRM involving installation of new storm sewers to remove
extraneous flow from existing sanitary sewers. These costs have been translated into a cost per
lineal meter of sewer main. This unit rate was then applied to the overall collection system. The cost
also includes an allowance of 10% on the cost of construction for engineering and 25% for
contingency allowance. The estimated existing collection system upgrade and assessment costs are
presents in Table 8-2.
Estimates of costs for upgrades to and assessment of the existing collection system as outlined in
Table 8-2 are considered to be Class ‘D’, accurate within plus or minus 45%.
Table 8-2 Estimated Existing Collection System Upgrade and Assessment Costs
Item Cost
Collection System Asset Condition Assessment Program
Condition Assessment of Manholes based on 62 MH’s $25,000
Condition Assessment of Sewer Mains based on 1.1km’s of infrastructure $28,000
Total $53,000
Sewer Separation Measures
Separation based on 5.2km’s of sewer @ $45,000/km $234,000
Engineering (10%)$23,000
Contingency (25%)$59,000
Total $316,000
Total Estimated Existing Collection System Upgrade and Assessment Costs $369,000
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien Collection System Pre-Design Brief 21
8.4 Opinion of Annual Capital Replacement Fund Contributions
The CBRM wishes to create a Capital Replacement Fund to which annual contributions would be
made to prepare for replacement of the assets at the end of their useful life. The calculation of
annual contributions to this fund involves consideration of such factors as the type of asset, the
asset value, the expected useful life of the asset, and the corresponding annual depreciation rate for
the asset. In consideration of these factors,Table 8-3 provides an estimation of the annual
contributions to a capital replacement fund for the proposed new wastewater collection and
interception infrastructure.
Table 8-3 Estimated Annual Capital Replacement Fund Contributions
Description of Asset Asset Value
Asset Useful
Life Expectancy
(Years)
Annual
Depreciation
Rate (%)
Annual Capital
Replacement
Fund
Contribution
Linear Assets (Piping, Manholes
and Other)$1,099,390 75 1.3%$14,292
Pump Station Structures
(Concrete Chambers, etc.)$385,440 50 2.0%$7,709
Pump Station Equipment
(Mechanical / Electrical)$315,360 20 5.0%$15,768
Subtotal $1,800,190 --$37,769
Contingency Allowance (Subtotal x 25%):$9,442
Engineering (Subtotal x 10%):$3,777
Opinion of Probable Annual Capital Replacement Fund Contribution:$50,988
Note:
Annual contribuƟons do not account for annual inflaƟon.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien Collection System Pre-Design Brief 22
CHAPTER 9 REFERENCES
Environment Canada (2006) –Atlantic Canada Wastewater Gidelines Manual for Collection,
Treatment and Disposal.
Harbour Engineering Inc. (2011).Cape Breton Regional Municipality Wastewater Strategy 2009.
Nova Scotia Environment (2018).Environment Act.
Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (2013).Water Utility Accounting and Reporting Handbook.
UMA Engineering Ltd. (1994). Industrial Cape Breton Wastewater Characterization Programme –
Phase II.
Water Environment Federation (2009),Design of Wastewater and Stormwater Pumping Stations
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien Collection System Pre-Design Brief 23
APPENDIX A
Drawings
SEWERSHED
BOUNDARY
EXISTING GRAVITY
SEWER
EXISTING WATER
FEATURE
EXISTING OUTFALL
(PM#1)
AREA IMPACTED BY PAST
MINING OPERATIONS (TYP.)
BIRCH
G
R
O
V
E
R
O
A
D
MARC
O
N
I
T
R
A
I
L
LONG
B
E
A
C
H
R
D
MA
R
C
O
N
I
T
R
A
I
L
BI
R
C
H
S
T
BR
E
A
K
W
A
T
E
R
S
T
AN
D
R
E
W
S
L
N
POTENTIAL LOCATION FOR
PORT MORIEN WWTP (TYP.)
FINAL LOCATION FOR
PORT MORIEN WWTP
1
ENVIRONMENTAL RISK ASSESSMENTS & PRELIMINARY DESIGN
OF 7 FUTURE WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEMS IN CBRM
JRS
JRS TAB
TAB 18-7116
1:3000
AUGUST 2018
HA
R
B
O
U
R
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
I
N
G
J
O
I
N
T
V
E
N
T
U
R
E
,
2
7
5
C
H
A
R
L
O
T
T
E
S
T
R
E
E
T
,
S
Y
D
N
E
Y
,
N
S
,
B
1
P
1
C
6
A
B
ISSUED FOR DRAFT DESIGN BRIEF
ISSUED FOR FINAL DESIGN BRIEF
08/01/18
03/11/19
JRS
JRS EXISTING PORT MORIEN SEWER SYSTEM
DATE
DESIGN
DRAWN
PROJECT NO.
SHEET NO.
No.DATE BYISSUED FOR
written permission from Dillon Consulting Limited.
than those intended at the time of its preparation without prior
Do not scale dimensions from drawing.
Report any discrepancies to Dillon Consulting Limited.
Verify elevations and/or dimensions on drawing prior to use.
Conditions of Use
REVIEWED BY
CHECKED BY
Do not modify drawing, re-use it, or use it for purposes other
SCALEj o i n t v e n t u r e
BIRC
H
G
R
O
V
E
R
O
A
D
MA
R
C
O
N
I
T
R
A
I
L
BIR
C
H
S
T
BR
E
A
K
W
A
T
E
R
S
T
EXISTING OUTFALL (PM#1)
LS-PM1
15370125
(PUBLIC WORKS AND
15640105
(UNKNOWN)
200
m
m
Ø
GOVERNMENT
SERVICES CANADA)
15524945
(PUBLIC WORKS AND
GOVERNMENT
SERVICES CANADA)
150
m
m
Ø
AREA
IMPACTED
BY PAST
MINING
OPERATIONS
PROPOSED CSO
ARMOUR STONE
EXISTING WATER
FEATURE (TYP.)
PROPOSED 150mmØ FORCEMAIN
AND 200mmØ GRAVITY SEWER PROPOSED
WWTP SITE
OUTLINE OF PROPERTY
REQUIRING ACQUISITION
OUTLINE OF PROPERTY
REQUIRING ACQUISITION
OUTLINE OF PROPERTY
REQUIRING AN EASEMENT
2
ENVIRONMENTAL RISK ASSESSMENTS & PRELIMINARY DESIGN
OF 7 FUTURE WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEMS IN CBRM
JRS
JRS TAB
TAB 18-7116
AS NOTED
AUGUST 2018
HE
J
V
,
2
7
5
C
H
A
R
L
O
T
T
E
S
T
R
E
E
T
,
S
Y
D
N
E
Y
,
N
S
,
B
1
P
1
C
6
A
B
ISSUED FOR DRAFT DESIGN BRIEF
ISSUED FOR FINAL DESIGN BRIEF
08/01/18
03/18/19
JRS
JRS
PORT MORIEN INTERCEPTOR
PLAN/PROFILE
PLAN
1:2500
PROFILE
HOR:1:2500\VERT:1:500
DATE
DESIGN
DRAWN
PROJECT NO.
SHEET NO.
No.DATE BYISSUED FOR
written permission from Dillon Consulting Limited.
than those intended at the time of its preparation without prior
Do not scale dimensions from drawing.
Report any discrepancies to Dillon Consulting Limited.
Verify elevations and/or dimensions on drawing prior to use.
Conditions of Use
REVIEWED BY
CHECKED BY
Do not modify drawing, re-use it, or use it for purposes other
SCALEj o i n t v e n t u r e
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien Collection System Pre-Design Brief 24
APPENDIX B
Flow Master Reports
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien Collection System Pre-Design Brief 25
APPENDIX C
Opinion of Probable Design & Construction
Costs
OPINION OF PROBABLE
COST, CLASS 'C'
Preliminary
Collection and Project Manager:D. MacLean
Interception Infrastructure Costs Only Est. by: J. Sheppard Checked by: D. McLean
Port Morien, NS PROJECT No.:187116 (Dillon)
182402.00 (CBCL)
UPDATED:April 16, 2020
NUMBER UNIT
Linear Infrastructure $999,390.00
*200 mm Diameter PVC sewer 1,370 m $340.00 $465,800.00
*150 mm Diameter PVC sewer 1,330 m $265.00 $352,450.00
Precast Manhole 15 each $5,500.00 $82,500.00
Connection to Existing Main 2 each $8,000.00 $16,000.00
Closed Circuit Televsion Inspection 1,330 m $8.00 $10,640.00
Trench Excavation - Rock 800 m3 $60.00 $48,000.00
Trench Excavation - Unsuitable Material 800 m3 $10.00 $8,000.00
Replacement of Unsuitable with Site Material 400 m3 $10.00 $4,000.00
Replacement of Unsuitable with Pit Run Gravel 400 m3 $30.00 $12,000.00
Lift Station $700,800.00
Pump Station 1 L.S.$500,000.00 $500,000.00
Site Work 1 L.S.$120,000.00 $120,000.00
Mass Excavation - Rock 1,330 m3 $60.00 $79,800.00
MassExcavation - Unsuitable Material 20 m3 $10.00 $200.00
Replacement of Unsuitable with Site Material 20 m3 $10.00 $200.00
Replacement of Unsuitable with Pit Run Gravel 20 m3 $30.00 $600.00
Combined Sewer Overflow $100,000.00
Combined Sewer Overflow 1 L.S.$100,000.00 $100,000.00
SUBTOTAL (Construction Cost)$1,800,190.00
Contingency Allowance (Subtotal x 25 %)$451,000.00
Engineering (Subtotal x 10 %)$181,000.00
Land Acquisition $10,400.00
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST (Including Contingency)$2,442,590.00
* Pricing assumes a combined single trench installation for the gravity and forcemain.
UNIT COSTITEM DESCRIPTION
THIS OPINION OF PROBABLE COSTS IS PRESENTED ON THE BASIS OF EXPERIENCE, QUALIFICATIONS, AND BEST JUDGEMENT. IT HAS BEEN PREPARED IN
ACCORDANCE WITH ACCEPTABLE PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICIES, MARKET TRENDS, NON-COMPETITIVE BIDDING SITUATIONS, UNFORSEEN LABOUR AND
MATERIAL ADJUSTMENTS AND THE LIKE ARE BEYOND THE CONTROL OF HEJV. AS SUCH WE CANNOT WARRANT OR GUARANTEE THAT ACTUAL COSTS
WILL NOT VARY FROM THE OPINION PROVIDED.
PREPARED FOR:
Cape Breton
Regional Municipality
EXTENDED TOTALS QUANTITY TOTAL
March 27, 2020
HEJV Port Morien Wastewater System Pre‐Design Summary Report Appendices
APPENDIX B
Port Morien Treatment System
Pre‐Design Brief
187116 ●Final Brief ●April 2020
Environmental Risk Assessments & Preliminary
Design of Seven Future Wastewater Treatment
Systems in CBRM
Port Morien Wastewater Treatment Facility Pre-Design
Brief
Prepared by:HEJVPrepared for: CBRM
March 2020
FINAL Port Morien
Wastewater Treatment
Facility Pre-design Brief
April 16, 2020 David McKenna, P.Eng.
Kyle MacIntyre, P.Eng.
Mike Abbot, P.Eng. Darrin McLean, MBA,
FEC., P.Eng.
DRAFT Port Morien
Wastewater Treatment
Facility Pre-Design Brief
February 20, 2019 Daniel Bennett, P.Eng. Mike Abbot, P.Eng. Darrin McLean, MBA,
FEC., P.Eng.
Issue or Revision Date Prepared By:Reviewed By:Issued By:
This document was
prepared for the party
indicated herein. The
material and information
in the document reflects
the opinion and best
judgment of Harbour
Engineering Joint Venture
(HEJV) based on the
information available at
the time of preparation.
Any use of this document
or reliance on its content
by third parties is the
responsibility of the third
party. HEJV accepts no
responsibility for any
5 May 2020
Whathe
March 27, 2020
March 27, 2020
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTF Pre-Design Brief i
Contents
CHAPTER 1 Introduction & Background ........................................................................................... 1
1.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 System Background ........................................................................................................ 1
CHAPTER 2 Existing Conditions ........................................................................................................ 3
CHAPTER 3 Basis of Design ............................................................................................................... 4
3.1 Design Flows .................................................................................................................. 4
3.1.1 Theoretical Flow ................................................................................................. 4
3.1.2 Observed Flow .................................................................................................... 5
3.1.3 Flow Conclusions & Recommendations................................................................ 6
3.2 Influent Design Loading .................................................................................................. 7
3.3 Effluent Requirements .................................................................................................... 8
CHAPTER 4 Treatment Process Alternatives ..................................................................................... 9
4.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 9
4.2 Plant Hydraulics and Flow Characteristics ....................................................................... 9
4.3 Stabilization Basins (Lagoons) ......................................................................................... 9
4.3.1 Facultative Lagoons .......................................................................................... 10
4.3.2 Aerated Lagoon ................................................................................................ 10
4.3.3 Aeration Equipment .......................................................................................... 11
4.3.4 Pre-Treatment Equipment ................................................................................ 12
4.4 Wetlands ...................................................................................................................... 12
4.5 Treatment Process Recommendation ........................................................................... 12
4.6 Disinfection .................................................................................................................. 13
4.6.1 Chlorination ...................................................................................................... 13
4.6.2 UV Disinfection ................................................................................................. 13
4.6.3 Ozonation ......................................................................................................... 14
4.6.4 Recommended Disinfection Process ................................................................. 14
CHAPTER 5 Preliminary Design ....................................................................................................... 15
5.1 General Overview ......................................................................................................... 15
5.2 Preliminary Treatment ................................................................................................. 15
5.3 Aerated Lagoon ............................................................................................................ 15
5.3.1 Lagoon Design Capacity .................................................................................... 15
5.3.2 Aeration Equipment .......................................................................................... 16
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTF Pre-Design Brief ii
5.4 Control Building ............................................................................................................ 17
5.4.1 Site Piping ......................................................................................................... 17
5.4.2 Equipment Access ............................................................................................. 18
5.4.3 Emergency Power ............................................................................................. 18
5.4.4 Controls ............................................................................................................ 18
5.4.5 Security ............................................................................................................ 18
CHAPTER 6 Site Specific Constraints ............................................................................................... 19
6.1 Construction Constraints .............................................................................................. 19
6.2 Environmental Constraints ........................................................................................... 19
6.3 Access Requirements.................................................................................................... 20
6.4 Utility Requirements .................................................................................................... 20
CHAPTER 7 Opinion of Probable Costs ........................................................................................... 21
7.1 Capital Cost Estimate .................................................................................................... 21
7.2 Operating Cost Estimation ............................................................................................ 21
7.3 Opinion of Annual Capital Replacement Fund Contributions ......................................... 22
CHAPTER 8 References ................................................................................................................... 23
Tables
Table 3-1 Theoretical Flow Summary ....................................................................................... 5
Table 3-2 Flow Monitoring Location Summary ......................................................................... 5
Table 3-3 Comparison of SSOAP Average Dry Weather and Design Flow Results ...................... 6
Table 3-4 Recommended Design Flow Data ............................................................................. 6
Table 3-5 Port Morien WWTP Influent Data ............................................................................. 8
Table 3-6 Port Morien WWTP Effluent Requirements .............................................................. 8
Table 4-1 Port Morien WWTP Lagoon Sizing .......................................................................... 11
Table 5-1 Lagoon Sizing and Treatment Process Summary ..................................................... 15
Table 5-2 Embankment Key Dimensions ................................................................................ 16
Table 5-3 Port Morien WWTP Piping Summary ...................................................................... 17
Table 7-1 Annual Operating Costs Breakdown........................................................................ 21
Table 7-2 Estimated Annual Capital Replacement Fund Contributions.................................... 22
Appendices
Appendix A –Drawings
Appendix B – Process Evaluation
Appendix C – Opinion of Probable Construction Costs
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTF Pre-Design Brief 1
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION &BACKGROUND
1.1 Introduction
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture (HEJV) has been engaged by the Cape Breton Regional
Municipality (CBRM) to carry out Environmental Risk Assessments (ERAs) and Preliminary Design of
seven future wastewater treatment systems in the CBRM. The future wastewater collection and
treatment systems will serve the communities of Glace Bay, Port Morien, North Sydney & Sydney
Mines, New Waterford, New Victoria, Louisburg and Donkin, which currently have no wastewater
treatment facilities.
In general the proposed wastewater treatment plants (WWTP) should treat wastewater to a
standard set by Nova Scotia Environment (NSE). The complexity of each system is directly related to
incoming flow quantity, wastewater characteristics, available space, population attributes and
implementation strategy. The objectives of this study can be summarized as follows:
®Using study outcomes from the ERA, Population Growth Forecasts, Geotechnical Reports
and in conjunction with the Collection System Preliminary Design Brief, accurately assess
existing conditions and determine design requirements for the new WWTP;
®Evaluate different wastewater treatment methods and make recommendations based on
treatment efficiency, operational and maintenance requirements, and capital and
operational costing;
®Develop a clear implementation strategy that provides a plan and schedule for design,
construction, of the recommended option; and
®Present the findings for the preliminary design in a clear, concise manner containing project
information and recommendations developed throughout the preliminary design process.
The contents of this document relate solely to the proposed WWTP in the Village of Port Morien,
and have been produced in conjunction with following related documents:
®Environmental Risk Assessments & Preliminary Design of Seven (7) Future Wastewater
Treatment Systems in CBRM;
®Port Morien Environmental Risk Assessment (ERA); and,
®Port Morien Collection System Preliminary Design Brief.
1.2 System Background
Currently wastewater in the Village of Port Morien is discharged directly into the Atlantic Ocean, as
is the case in hundreds of coastline communities across Atlantic Canada. The evolution of the
existing wastewater collection and disposal systems in Cape Breton included the creation of
clusters/neighbourhoods/regions of a community that were serviced by a common wastewater
collection system that was tied to a local marine outfall. Such design approaches have traditionally
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTF Pre-Design Brief 2
been the most cost-effective manner of providing centralized wastewater collection, and the marine
environment has long been the preferred receiving water given available dilution. Due to a changing
regulatory environment, CBRM is working toward intercepting and treating the wastewater in these
communities prior to discharge.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTF Pre-Design Brief 3
CHAPTER 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS
Currently the entire Village of Port Morien discharges directly into the Atlantic Ocean through one
common outfall by gravity.
In 2011 Harbour Engineering Inc. was retained to complete a Wastewater Strategy by CBRM. The
study recommended a new mechanical plant be constructed on Amy Street, as it was the most cost
effective method in meeting regulatory requirements.
As part of HEJV’s Port Morien Collection System Pre-Design Brief, alternate locations for the Port
Morien WWTP were reviewed. The Collection System Pre-Design Brief concluded that the most cost
effective alternative was a lagoon constructed north of Birch Grove Road.
As identified in the HEJV’s Environmental Risk Assessments & Preliminary Design of Seven (7) Future
Wastewater Treatment Systems in CBRM and Port Morien Collection System Pre-Design Brief, the
Village of Port Morien has an estimated current population of 413. The population in Cape Breton
County has been declining since the 1970s and a recent report by Turner Drake & Partners Ltd.
predicts a 17.8% decrease in population in Cape Breton County between 2016 and 2036 (Turner
Drake & Partners Ltd., February 2018). The primary land use in the Village of Port Morien is single
family housing. The area does not support a seasonal or transient population; therefore, the WWTP
should service a consistent population and land use year-round.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTF Pre-Design Brief 4
CHAPTER 3 BASIS OF DESIGN
3.1 Design Flows
The HEJV completed a review of the theoretical and observed sanitary flows for the Port Morien
sewershed. The purpose of the review was to estimate average and design flows for the
environmental risk assessment (ERA), and the preliminary design of the future WWTP and
interception system.
3.1.1 Theoretical Flow
Theoretical flows were calculated based on design factors contained in the Atlantic Canada
Wastewater Guidelines Manual (ACWGM). To estimate wastewater flow, the number of private
dwellings is multiplied by an average household size. An average value of 2.2 persons per household
was used based on the average household size determined from the 2016 Statistics Canada
information for Cape Breton. The number of apartments, nursing homes, townhouses, and other
residential buildings were estimated and considered in the population estimate. The estimated
population is shown in Table 3-1. Comparatively, CBRM’s GIS database contains an average per
person household size of 1.7 persons for the Port Morien area. Given that the population value is to
be used in theoretical calculations, HEJV utilized the more conservative value of 2.2 persons per
home. Based on a total of 188 residential units, the estimated current population of the Village of
Port Morien to be used in data analysis is 413.
Peak design flow was calculated using the following equaƟon (1):
ܳ(݀)=ܲݍܯ
86.4 +ܫܣ +ܵܰ (1)
Where:
Q(d) = Peak domesƟc sewage flow (l/s)
P = PopulaƟon (in thousands)
q = Average daily per capita domesƟc flow (l/day per capita)
M = Peaking factor (Harman Method)
I = unit of extraneous flow (l/s)
A = Subcatchment area (hectares)
S = Unit of Manhole inflow allowance for each manhole in sag locaƟon, in l/sec
N = Number of manholes in sag locaƟon
ACWGM recommends an average daily domestic sanitary flow of 340 l/day per person for private
residential dwellings, excluding extraneous flow. The unit of extraneous flow representing ingress
and infiltration was assumed to be 0.21 l/s/ha based on the midpoint of the range outlined in
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTF Pre-Design Brief 5
ACWGM. The contributing sewershed was estimated to be 52 ha. The impact of inflow from
manholes was excluded based on the small size of the sewer shed. The peaking factor used in
Equation 1 was determined using the Harman Formula (2) shown below:
Harman Formula:
ܯ =1+14
4+ܲ.ହ (2)
The peaking factor, M, calculated for Port Morien is 4.0.
The estimated average dry weather flow (ADWF) and peak design flows based on the ACWGM
methods discussed above are presented in Table 3-1.
Table 3-1 Theoretical Flow Summary
Station Estimated Area
(ha)
Estimated
Population1 ADWF2 (l/s)4x ADWF3
(l/s)
Peak Design Flow4
(l/s)
Port Morien
Sewershed 52 413 1.63 6.50 17.45
1 2016 Cape Breton Census from StaƟsƟcs Canada
2Based on average daily sewer flows of 340 L/day/person (ACWGM 2006)
3Factor of 4 was applied to ADWF to account for inflow and infiltraƟon (Industrial Cape Breton Wastewater
CharacterizaƟon Program – Phase 2, 1994)
4EsƟmated using ACWGM equaƟon for peak domesƟc sewage flows (including extraneous flows and peaking factor)
For the Port Morien sewershed, the calculated peaking factor of 4.0 applied to the ADWF to account
for inflow and infiltration is similar to observed CBRM sewersheds of similar size (New Victoria and
Louisbourg) as covered in the UMA Engineering Report “Industrial Cape Breton Wastewater
Characterization Programme – Phase 2” produced in 1994.
3.1.2 Observed Flow
HEJV conducted sewer flow monitoring as part of this project. An initial flow monitoring station was
installed downstream of the intersection of Breakwater Street and Peach Street, close to the outfall
discharge, to record sewer flow. After reviewing the flow monitoring data, there was concern that
the flows from this meter were significantly below expected values. HEJV’s flow metering team
suspected that the pipe slope (>5%) at the monitoring location contributed to lower flow values
obtained from the initial flow monitoring program (2018).
To validate this theory, additional flow monitoring was performed. Two flow meters were installed
on sewers that combine upstream of the first monitoring location, to compare with initial flow
values. A meter was installed on Peach Street and another installed on Breakwater Street. Sanitary
flows along Peach and Breakwater Streets merge immediately downstream, prior to the initial
monitoring location and outfall. Therefore the sum of the two new measured flows should be
representative of flows downstream at the outfall (i.e. at the initial monitoring location). A summary
of the flow meter deployment locations and monitoring duration is provided in Table 3- 2.
Table 3-2 Flow Monitoring Location Summary
Station Street Name Northing Easting Monitoring Start-End Dates Days
of Data
Outfall1 Breakwater Street 5111669.437 4625788.001 March 4 –April 15, 2018 43
Breakwater2 Breakwater Street 5111669.437 4625788.001 May 11 –June 18, 2018 39
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTF Pre-Design Brief 6
Station Street Name Northing Easting Monitoring Start-End Dates Days
of Data
Peach Peach Street 5111790.240 4625860.790 May 11 –June 18, 2018 39
1 IniƟal monitoring locaƟon.
2 Breakwater flow meter located within the same manhole as the iniƟal flow meter, however the meter was installed on
the Breakwater Street inlet pipe as opposed to the manhole outlet pipe.
Analysis of flow monitoring data for observed dry weather flows were completed using the United
States Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Sanitary Sewer Overflow Analysis and Planning
(SSOAP) toolbox. The SSOAP toolbox is a suite of computer software tools used for capacity analysis
and condition assessments of sanitary sewer systems.
Flow and rainfall data were input into the SSOAP program, along with sewer shed data for each of
the metered areas. To determine average dry weather flow (ADWF), days that were influenced by
rainfall were excluded. This was done in the SSOAP model by removing data from days that had any
rain within the last 24 hours, more than 5 mm in the previous 48 hours, and more than 5 mm per
consecutive day (e.g. 10 mm in the last 3 days).
The estimates for ADWF based on monitored flow data evaluated using the SSOAP program are
presented in Table 3-3. The sum of flow estimates for the Peach and Breakwater locations were
used for the ADWF value.
Table 3-3 Comparison of SSOAP Average Dry Weather and Design Flow Results
Monitoring Station ADWF From SSOAP Model (l/s)Peak Daily Average Flow
(l/s)
Outfall1 0.9 4.27
Breakwater + Peach 3.8 8.56
1 IniƟal monitoring locaƟon.
There is significant variation between the initial flow metering data at the outfall compared to the
Breakwater + Peach flow monitoring data, confirming the flow metering team’s suspicions of the
initial flow data.
3.1.3 Flow Conclusions & Recommendations
HEJV is recommending that design flows for new Port Morien wastewater infrastructure be based
on theoretical values, as calculated using the ACWGM approach. The period of flow monitoring used
to record collection system flows was limited, with varying results.Table 3-4 provides a summary of
the recommended design flows.
Table 3-4 Recommended Design Flow Data
Port Morien WWTF
Population 413
Average Daily Flow L/s (m3/Day)6.5 (562)
Peak Flow L/s (m3/day)17.45 (1507)
As stated in the Port Morien Collection System Preliminary Design brief, the HEJV recommends that
further flow metering be considered on the Port Morien collection system prior to detailed design,
allowing for a greater confidence in design flow parameters. However, as discussed in the following
section, the recommended wastewater treatment facility is a lagoon based process, with
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTF Pre-Design Brief 7
wastewater transfer from a lift station. Setting complementary design flows for the transfer station
and associated lagoon size reduces the risk of not achieving wastewater treatment performance.
The risk with not pursuing additional monitoring data therefore is related to the frequency and
volume of collection system overflows that could bypass the treatment facility, in the event that the
theoretical peak flow underestimates actual collection system peak flows during precipitation
events.
During the second flow monitoring event (May 11 – June 18, 2018) there was only one recorded
precipitation event with 10-25mm, of rain and a corresponding measured collection system flow of
8.56 l/s, which is approximately half of the recommended design flow. This could be related to
recharge of surface storage and relatively low ground saturation preceding the rain event, and less
extraneous groundwater reaching the collection system. On average, Port Morien experiences 10-15
rain events per year that exceed 25mm. In addition, flow monitoring at other CBRM municipalities
suggests high extraneous flows during the spring snow melt season. If additional flow monitoring is
performed, it should capture the March-June period. A comparison of theoretical and measured
flows at Glace Bay during a similar period showed close correlation between measured and
theoretical peak flows.
3.2 Influent Design Loading
The theoretical per capita loading rates listed in the Atlantic Canada Wastewater Guidelines Manual
(ACWGM) are 0.08 kg BOD5/person/day, 0.09 kg TSS/person/day, and 0.0133 kg TKN/person/day.
With a total service population of 413, this would result in a loading of 33 kg BOD5/day, 37 kg
TSS/day, and 5.4 kg TKN/d. Based on an average dry weather flow of 562 m3/day, this results in
average concentrations of 58.8 mg/L BOD5, 66.1 mg/L TSS, and 9.8 mg/L TKN during dry weather
conditions.
The HEJV collected one untreated wastewater sample from the existing outfall on April 24th 2018,
and the results are presented in Table 3.5. CBRM also conducted a three-year sampling program
from 2015 through 2017, and a summary of this sampling program is also provided in Table 3.5.
Results show the theoretical values are close to the HEJV sampling data for BOD and TSS, while the
concentrations from the CBRM dataset are much higher. The sampled TKN value of 14.0 mg/L is
approximately 40 percent higher than the theoretical value.
It is unknown why there is such a large difference in the two sampling datasets, particularly when
the HEJV sampling event likely occurred during a dry period when concentrations of BOD5 and TSS
are expected to be higher than average. Potential sources for the difference in the datasets may be
related to sampling procedures, sampling during very dry periods, or if any discharge of
commercial/industrial, septic or other waste was occurring to the sewer.
Based on the largely residential population of Port Morien, HEJV recommends that BOD5 and TSS
loading for design of the new wastewater treatment facility be based on the theoretical loading
derived using the ACWDG. Design TKN is recommended to be based on the HEJV sampled value,
based on elevated ammonia levels from the CBRM dataset; however, additional sampling is
recommended to ensure better confidence in the TKN design and potential impacts to the aeration
system sizing.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTF Pre-Design Brief 8
Table 3-5 Port Morien WWTP Influent Data
Parameter Units Theoretical
Value
HEJV
Testing
CBRM Historic Testing
Average Maximum No. of
Samples
CBOD5 mg/L 58.8 66 227 740 33
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN)mg/L 9.8 14
Nitrogen (Ammonia Nitrogen) as
N mg/L -5.9 15.6 40 12
Unionized Ammonia mg/L -0.0039 0.042 0.12 13
pH pH -7.15 7.0 7.41 12
Total Phosphorus mg/L -2.3
Total Suspended Solids mg/L 66.1 64 122 1400 33
E. coli MPN/
100mL -240,000 ---
Total Coliforms MPN/
100mL ->240,000 ---
Based on the extremes noted in wastewater quality analytical results from the CBRM dataset for
CBOD, compared to the HEJV sample results and theoretical values, it is recommended that
additional sampling occur to validate the loading assumptions recommended for the design basis.
Because the Port Morien sewershed is largely residential, HEJV believes there is a low risk in
adopting theoretical loadings for design. It is recommended that CBRM staff receive additional
training in sample collection, and sampling procedures reviewed to ensure future collected samples
are representative.
If additional sampling results indicate that wastewater strength exceeds the theoretical loading
values, then the sewershed should be investigated for potential sources of high strength
wastewater. Risks of designing the new Port Morien WWTP if loadings exceed the theoretical basis
include:
®WWTP effluent that does not meet licence requirements;
®Insufficient aeration capacity and low dissolved oxygen levels in the lagoon;
®Odour risks;
®Elevated TSS in the effluent that impacts UV disinfection.
3.3 Effluent Requirements
Effluent Discharge Objectives (EDOs) were established as part of the Port Morien ERA, and Table 3-6
shows a summary of the EDOs.
Table 3-6 Port Morien WWTP Effluent Requirements
Parameter Units Influent Effluent Requirement
CBOD5 mg/L 58.8 25
Total Suspended Solids mg/L 66.1 25
Unionized Ammonia mg/L 1.25
E. Coli MPN/ 100mL >240,000 200
Total Residual Chlorine mg/L -0.02
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTF Pre-Design Brief 9
CHAPTER 4 TREATMENT PROCESS ALTERNATIVES
4.1 Introduction
As part of the CBRM Wastewater Strategy (Harbour Engineering Inc., 2011) a mechanical plant was
proposed at Amy Street to provide an alternative for future wastewater treatment. However, this
preliminary design report focuses on lagoons and wetlands specifically. This preliminary design brief
also addresses plant hydraulics, flow characteristics, and effluent disinfection. Subsequent sections
explore equipment sizing in greater detail, and construction options.
In conjunction with the preliminary design of the collection system, the most appropriate location of
the Port Morien WWTP was determined to be north of Birch Grove Rd. HEJV recommends CBRM
purchase PID 1552495 owned by Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC) at the
recommended site. The existing Port Morien Sewer System and Port Morien Interceptor Plan/Profile
Drawings in Appendix A detail the proposed location of the new Port Morien WWTP.
4.2 Plant Hydraulics and Flow Characteristics
As identified in HEJV’s Collection System Pre-Design report, wastewater from the Port Morien
sewershed will be conveyed by gravity to a new lift station located at the bottom of Breakwater
Street. Wastewater would then be pumped through a single 150 mm force main to an influent
chamber at the new Port Morien WWTP.
The WWTP influent chamber is located at the highest elevation within the treatment process. This
would allow the entire plant to be gravity fed from the influent chamber, and also allow a gravity
sewer to convey the treated effluent back to the existing outfall structure.
As established in the design basis, the Port Morien WWTP will service predominately residential
properties. It is expected that the WWTP will receive a daily peak flow occurring mid-morning, with
declining flow throughout the day until mid-evening. It is expected that during the night flows will
significantly decrease with periods of low to zero flows, based on lift station operation.
The following sections present treatment options that were evaluated for the new Port Morien
WWTP.
4.3 Stabilization Basins (Lagoons)
In applications such as Port Morien, lagoons are well suited as there is an abundance of available
land. While lagoons require greater footprint than other treatment methods, the regular
operational and maintenance requirements are significantly less.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTF Pre-Design Brief 10
4.3.1 Facultative Lagoons
Facultative lagoons are unmixed basins that can be used to treat both municipal and industrial
wastewater. They are typically shallow, approximately one and half meters deep. The surface of the
lagoon is aerobic as oxygenation occurs from diffusion from air, wind, and seasonally from
photosynthetic algae. Suspended solids deposit at the bottom of the pond creating a sludge layer
where anaerobic bacteria can thrive, and digest the organic solids. The zone between the surface
and bottom of the pond is called the facultative zone, which is a transition layer where anoxic
conditions occur. All three zones in a facultative lagoon are complementary, and provide an
effective means to treat wastewater.
To prevent short circuiting facultative lagoons are typically divided into multiple cells, either through
separate cells or through the use of baffle curtains.
Typical hydraulic retention times for facultative lagoons range between twenty-five (25) and one
hundred and eighty (180) days. While 95 percent BOD5 reduction can typically be achieved, the
presence of algae in the summer season will increase effluent Total Suspended Solids (TSS), in some
cases above discharge limits. Most provinces allow elevated effluent TSS from lagoons during the
algae season for this reason. In colder climates process efficiency is reduced during the winter
period due to low wastewater temperatures, and ice formation which affects retention time and
oxygenation of lagoon contents.
The ACWGM states that a BOD5 loading of 22 Kg/ha/day should not be exceeded for a facultative
lagoon. The Port Morien WWTP design basis is 33 Kg BOD/day; therefore, approximately 1.5
hectares (1,500 m2) of lagoon surface area is required. Using first order kinetics BOD5 removal can
be calculated using the equation outlined in Formula [1]:
ܮ
ܮ
=1
ቂ1 +ܭ௧ ∙ܶ
݊ ቃ
[1]
Where:
Le = Effluent BOD5
Li = Influent BOD5
Kt = Reaction Rate Coefficient
T = Total Hydraulic Retention Time
n = Number of ponds in series
When using Formula 1 to calculate effluent BOD, consideration must be given to lagoon conditions.
The HEJV has assumed Kt of 0.028 accounting for a winter climate and 0.15m of ice cover at the
surface of the lagoon and 0.15m of sludge accumulation at the bottom of the lagoon. When using
these assumptions the calculated lagoon surface area required to achieve design BOD5 removal is
3.3 hectares (3,300 m2).
4.3.2 Aerated Lagoon
Aerated lagoons are constructed deeper than facultative lagoons, and have diffused air introduced
into the wastewater either mechanically or pneumatically. Depending on the quantity of air added,
an aerated lagoon can either be partially or completely mixed. In a complete mixed lagoon, the
concentration of oxygen is the same throughout the wastewater, and the air rate exceeds the
biological requirements. For Port Morien, low pressure blowers are proposed to supply air to
submerged diffusers. An aerated lagoon is classified as partially mixed if enough air is being supplied
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTF Pre-Design Brief 11
to meet the dissolved oxygen requirements of the bacteria (preventing anoxic conditions from
developing). In a completely mixed lagoon, enough air needs to be supplied to satisfy both the
biological oxygen requirements and to keep all solids in suspension.
Typically both completely and partially mixed lagoons are designed with multiple cells, with the first
cell having the most intense aeration, and the final cell receiving no aeration to encourage
clarification by settlement of suspended solids.
Typical hydraulic retention times for aerated lagoons range between five (5) and thirty (30) days.
Similar to facultative lagoons, 95% of BOD5 removal can be achieved; however, unlike facultative
lagoons, lower effluent algae levels are possible if a settling zone is utilised. Nitrification of ammonia
can occur in aerated lagoons during warm weather seasons due to the aerobic conditions.
Using Formula [1] BOD5 removal can be calculated and subsequent lagoon sizing can be determined.
Similar to the facultative lagoon calculation, the HEJV has designed for a winter climate and
assumed a worst case ice cover thickness of 0.15m and sludge accumulation of 0.15m. The HEJV has
assumed Kt of 0.276 for the partial mix lagoon, and 1.0 for a complete mix lagoon.Table 4-1 shows
the proposed Port Morien sizing for both complete and partial mixed aerated lagoons, and for
reference shows the facultative lagoon sizing.
Table 4-1 Port Morien WWTP Lagoon Sizing
No.
of
Cells
Total
Width
1(m)
Total
Length1
(m)
Foot-
print1
(m2)
Water
Depth
(m)
Uncorrected
Volume2(m3)
Corrected
Volume3
(m3)
Uncorrected
Retention
Time2 (Days)
Corrected
Retention
Time3(Days)
Completely
Mixed 3 30 90 2,700 3 3,618 6,827 6.5 6
Partially
Mixed 3 40 116 4,630 3 7,800 7,020 13.9 12.5
Facultative 3 330 100 33,000 1.5 42,923 34,339 76 61
1Top of inside berm dimension shown, assuming use of curtain baffles
2Uncorrected Volume/Retention Time based on Summer Conditions no ice coverage and no sludge accumulation
3 Corrected Volume/Retention Time based on Winter Conditions 0.15m ice coverage and 0.15m sludge accumulation
4.3.3 Aeration Equipment
Oxygen is commonly transferred into the wastewater in an aerated lagoon via two different
methods: (1) surface aerators and (2) submerged diffusers.
With surface aeration, floating aerators are tethered into position on the surface of the lagoon and
mechanically churn the water allowing for intimate contact of air and wastewater. This style of
mixer eliminates the need for blowers and associated piping; however, they are less efficient than
the diffused systems, and during cold weather there is a potential risk of the aerators to overturn
due to ice buildup from splashing water.
The other common form of oxygen transfer is via submerged diffusers. Diffusers are located near
the bottom of the lagoon and piped air from blowers pass through the diffusers. Diffusers can be
fine or coarse bubble, which impacts the size of the bubble produced and resultant oxygen transfer
efficiency. Fine bubble diffusers normally are made with a membrane material with tiny holes,
which create very small air bubbles as the air passes through. Course bubble diffusers are typically
constructed of a pipe with penetrations that allow air to pass through, and release bubbles that
rapidly rise to the surface creating mixing currents. The fine and coarse air bubbles contact the
wastewater and transfer oxygen as the bubbles rise through the wastewater column, and also
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTF Pre-Design Brief 12
create currents that mix the wastewater. Fine bubble diffusion creates very small bubbles with
much higher total surface area that remain in the water column longer compared to coarse bubbles,
but provide less mixing energy.
Fine bubble aeration is more efficient compared to coarse bubble aeration due to the increased
surface area of the bubbles and the longer time it takes for the bubbles to rise to the surface, and
coarse bubble aeration is more efficient than surface aeration. However, diffusers require greater
installation and maintenance effort in comparison to surface aerators. Typically, lagoons use a
system of floating air laterals and diffuser assemblies that are suspended from the floating lateral
pipes.
4.3.4 Pre-Treatment Equipment
Pre-treatment upstream of lagoons is normally not required for treatment reasons. However,
screening is sometimes used to eliminate floatable materials that are considered a nuisance. These
materials can accumulate on the surface and shoreline, and can be blown by wind. Removal of rags
from the incoming wastewater can also mitigate periodic maintenance to remove this material if it is
long enough to wrap around floating fine bubble diffusers.
The Port Morien lagoon WWTP will be fed from a lift station, so all material reaching the WWTP will
be macerated through a sewage pump; in this case, floatable materials and rags will be relatively
small compared to a lagoon fed by a gravity sewer system. Discussions were held with CBRM during
preliminary design review, and it was agreed that screening would not be included. If CBRM wants
to add screening, then this decision should be captured in advance of detailed design, since
screening will need to be located indoors, and will affect the design hydraulic gradelines to
accommodate gravity flow from a screening building into the lagoon.
4.4 Wetlands
Typically Wetlands are used for effluent polishing (effluent quality down to 10 mg/l BOD5 and TSS)
and for nutrient removal, specifically the removal of ammonia and phosphorus. Based on data
collected during the Port Morien ERA, Port Morien untreated wastewater meets the treated effluent
discharge objective for unionized ammonia, and therefore further ammonia removal is not required.
There are two styles of wetlands: Free Water Surface (FWS) and Subsurface Flow (SF) wetlands. Both
types of wetland operate on the same principle where wastewater is treated by emergent
vegetation. The flow enters the basin and is directed through pathways designed in the wetland to
prevent short circuiting and to ensure appropriate retention times. In a FWS wetland the water
surface is exposed to the atmosphere whereas in a SF wetland the basin is filled with a growth
matrix, primarily graded gravel mixed with organic soils. SF wetlands typical have higher biological
activity than FWS due to the higher surface area available for organisms to grow on.
In Atlantic Canada wetlands are usually implemented in applications where the effluent is being
discharged directly into an inland river or lake where nutrients have a greater impact on the aquatic
environment. Treated effluent form Port Morien will be discharged directly into the Atlantic Ocean.
HEJV does not recommend a wetland for this application, as a lagoon will provide sufficient
treatment to meet current regulatory requirements.
4.5 Treatment Process Recommendation
HEJV recommends that a partially mixed aerated lagoon be utilised for the new Port Morien WWTP.
The selection of this lagoon type was ultimately determined by available land and topography. The
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTF Pre-Design Brief 13
proposed parcel of land is limited due to: previous mining operations, proximity to neighbouring
properties, and an existing watercourse.Appendix B shows a detailed evaluation of lagoon types.
There are multiple suppliers that can provide the equipment required for aerated lagoon systems;
however, HEJV has engaged two local suppliers to obtain initial proposal packages for the
preliminary design. The diffuser manufacturers are EDI™ and Nexom™. Both of the proposals are
similarly priced and adequate for the Port Morien application. The blower manufacturers provided
with the proposals were Aerzen™ and Atlas Copco™, which were both similarly sized.
HEJV recommends that equipment suppliers be selected by competitive tender. To complete the
HEJV preliminary design drawings the Atlas Copco™ blower has been shown for convenience;
however, this is not to be taken as a recommendation or endorsement. A general layout for
diffusers has also been shown for preliminary design purposes; however, the diffusers from
different manufacturers have different performance characteristics that will affect diffuser layout in
the detailed design.
4.6 Disinfection
As established in the Port Morien ERA, Nova Scotia Environment has typically set treated
wastewater effluent bacterial limits to 200 E. coli/100mL. There are three traditional forms of
disinfection used for municipal wastewater treatment: chlorination, ultra violet light (UV) radiation
and ozonation. Chlorination and UV Radiation are the most common forms of disinfection found in
Atlantic Canada wastewater treatment. The WSER requires that Total Residual Chlorine in treated
wastewater effluent be less than 0.02mg/L at discharge. The subsequent sections of this design brief
will look at each disinfection option in further detail.
4.6.1 Chlorination
Chlorine disinfection is where chlorine is injected into the wastewater to kill bacteria and other
organisms. Chlorine is available in different forms including chlorine gas and liquid sodium
hypochlorite. Chlorine is injected upstream of a contact chamber that provides the necessary
hydraulic retention time for the chlorine to neutralize the bacteria. However the wastewater leaving
the chlorine contact chamber normally has a free chlorine concentration that exceeds allowable
discharge limits. To remove the residual chlorine, contact with a dechlorination chemical such as
sodium bisulfite is required.
The main advantage of chlorination is that it is a well-established and reliable technology. However,
chlorine itself is extremely toxic and needs to be transported, stored, and handled with great care.
In addition, control of the chlorine and dechlorination chemical injection rates must be closely
monitored to ensure disinfection and discharge limits are achieved.
4.6.2 UV Disinfection
UV disinfection has become the most commonly used form of disinfection in Atlantic Canada. UV
disinfection functions by exposing bacteria in the treated effluent to UV light, which damages the
organisms’ DNA, preventing reproduction.
UV systems are typically more user friendly than other disinfection systems, and do not require
downstream hydraulic retention time, reducing the overall footprint of the treatment area. In
applications where a UV system is used following a lagoon, the amount of suspended solids (SS) in
the wastewater is typically higher compared to a mechanical wastewater treatment process, and a
higher dose of UV light to achieve the same level of disinfection. To maintain optimum operability
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTF Pre-Design Brief 14
cleaning of the lamps should be completed on a scheduled basis and further lamps may be added
for redundancy for elevated solids events.
4.6.3 Ozonation
Ozone is an extremely strong disinfectant that does not result in a chlorine residual in the treated
wastewater, and requires a shorter retention time relative to chlorine. It is uncommon to see ozone
disinfection used for lagoon applications, but they are sometimes used on large mechanical
WWTPs. Ozone is produced on site using ozone generators, and ozone gas added to the effluent
wastewater in a contact vessel to provide hydraulic retention time. Ozonation is more effective than
both chlorination and UV disinfection; however the ozone equipment has a higher capital and
operating cost, is more complex to operate and requires greater operator attention and
maintenance.
4.6.4 Recommended Disinfection Process
HEJV recommends that a UV disinfection system be installed at the Port Morien WWTP. The UV
equipment requires a smaller footprint that meet regulatory guidelines. The preventative
maintenance requirements for the UV system are less complex than the other options and can be
completed by CBRM Staff. Typical maintenance will include periodically cleaning the UV lamps, and
replacing lamps as they reach their end of life.Appendix B shows a detailed evaluation of
disinfection methods.
HEJV has obtained preliminary quotes from two UV Equipment suppliers; Enaqua™ and Trojan™.
Both the Enaqua™ and Trojan™ equipment is suitable in the Port Morien application and are
similarly priced. The difference between the two proposals is the UV reactor configuration. HEJV
recommends that the equipment supplier be selected by competitive tender. To complete the HEJV
preliminary design drawings the Trojan system has been shown for convenience; however, this
should not be taken as a recommendation or endorsement.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTF Pre-Design Brief 15
CHAPTER 5 PRELIMINARY DESIGN
5.1 General Overview
This section will outline the specifics of the HEJV preliminary design. The recommended WWTP
configuration for the Village of Port Morien includes an aerated lagoon, followed by UV disinfection.
The WWTP should include a control building to house the following: blowers required for diffused
aeration system, UV disinfection equipment, and electrical and controls systems. The WWTP, which
is proposed to be located north of Birch Grove Road, should be accessed from a new gravel road.
5.2 Preliminary Treatment
Flow from the Port Morien collection system will be pumped from the proposed lift station at the
bottom of Breakwater Street to the new WWTP site. The wastewater will discharge into an influent
chamber positioned at the inlet of the plant within the lagoon berm at an elevation of 28.00 metres.
The influent chamber will be concrete and contain an overflow weir plate that will control gravity
flow into the downstream lagoon. Once flow passes over the weir it would be gravity fed into the
lagoon via a 150 mm diameter pipe.
5.3 Aerated Lagoon
5.3.1 Lagoon Design Capacity
The Aerated Lagoon has been designed as a three cell basin and has top of inside berm dimensions
of 116 metres by 40 metres. The first and second cells are partially mixed and the third cell is a non-
aerated settling zone. A single aerator chain will be included in the third cell for additional aeration
in the event of plant upset and or maintenance requirements. The lagoon has been designed for
operation in a cold climate and volume allowances for ice cover and sludge accumulation. Due to
this design approach, treatment in the summer months will have a longer retention time compared
to winter.Table 5-1 outlines the aerated lagoon design and expected treatment performance.
To eliminate short-circuiting in the lagoon cells and make efficient use of the available space,
floating baffle curtains are recommended to divide the lagoon cells. The baffle curtains will be
anchored to the top of the berm to hold them in place and will be weighted at the bottom to
prevent floatation and maintaining separation of the sections of the cell.
Table 5-1 Lagoon Sizing and Treatment Process Summary
Top of Berm Uncorrected
Volume1
(m3)
Uncorrected
HRT1
(Days)
Summer
Volume2
(m3)
Summer
HRT2
(Days)
BOD5
Effluent
Summer
(mg/L)
Winter
Volume3
(m3)
Winter
HRT3
(Days)
BOD5
Effluent
Winter
(mg/L)
Width
(m)
Length
(m)
Cell
#1 40 48 3,100 5.5 2,945 5.24 24.0 2,790 4.96 34.6
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTF Pre-Design Brief 16
Top of Berm Uncorrected
Volume1
(m3)
Uncorrected
HRT1
(Days)
Summer
Volume2
(m3)
Summer
HRT2
(Days)
BOD5
Effluent
Summer
(mg/L)
Winter
Volume3
(m3)
Winter
HRT3
(Days)
BOD5
Effluent
Winter
(mg/L)
Width
(m)
Length
(m)
Cell
#2 40 41 3,100 5.5 2,945 5.24 9.8 2,790 4.96 20.3
Cell
#3 40 27 1600
2.85
(1.06 @
(MDF)
1,520
2.70
(1.01 @
MDF)
9.8 1,440
2.56
(0.95 @
MDF)
20.3
Tot
.40 116 7,800 13.88 7,410 13.18 7,020 12.49
1 Uncorrected volumes and HRT have no climate assumptions or any sludge accumulation
2 Summer volumes and HRT have assumed a summer climate (No ice cover) and 0.15M of sludge accumulation
3 Winter volumes and HRT have assumed a winter climate (0.15M of ice cover) and 0.15M of sludge accumulation.
The parcel of land where the WWTP is proposed to be built has a significant slope. To reduce
construction costs, the lagoon will be built in to the slope. This will reduce the amount of fill
required for berm construction and also the amount of cut volume. Both the inner and outer slopes
of the berms should be constructed at three (horizontal) to one (vertical). The ACWGM requires a
minimum top of berm width of three (3) meters. Which allows for vehicle traffic. The aeration piping
will be shallow buried in the top portion of the berm; therefore, HEJV recommends the berm have a
five (5) meter width on sides where aeration piping is installed. Key dimensions have been shown in
Table 5-2.
Table 5-2 Embankment Key Dimensions
Elevations (m)Embankment Details
Bottom of Lagoon 23.00 Inner Slope 3-to-1
Liquid Level 26.00 Outer Slope 3-to-1
Top of Embankment 27.00 Top Width 5 m
Grading, ditches and a berm built from excess soil from the construction should be used to prevent
surface run off from entering the lagoon.
Effluent from the lagoon should enter the effluent chamber via a 200 mm diameter pipe. The
effluent chamber would contain an overflow weir at an elevation of 26.00 m. The effluent from the
effluent chamber is gravity fed to the Control Building where the UV reactors are installed.
5.3.2 Aeration Equipment
Fine bubble diffused aeration is recommended for lagoon aeration. HEJV has calculated that 60
kg/O2/day is required to provide partial aeration to meet the treatment performance listed in Table
3-6. Dependent on diffuser efficiency, the required air flow rate is 225 m3/hr (134 SCFM). The plant
has been designed to operate with one duty blower, and a second standby blower in the event of
failure of the duty blower. It is recommended that the blowers operate with variable frequency
drives (VFD). VFDs will provide the following benefits:
®Improved process control, as speed of the blower and resultant amount of air being
supplied to the lagoon can be changed dependent on actual conditions, and seasonal
demand;
®Energy saving, by being able to reduce blower speed and power consumption to match
oxygen demand; and,
®Reducing wear and tear on motors, as VFDs can be programmed for gradual acceleration
and deceleration reducing stress on motors and their components.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTF Pre-Design Brief 17
5.4 Control Building
As discussed previously in Section 5.1, a Control Building is required at the proposed Port Morien
WWTP. The control building will house the following systems:
®Two (2) aeration blowers with sufficient space for a third in the event of future expansion;
and,
®UV disinfection equipment.
In addition to process equipment the control building will accommodate the following auxiliary
systems:
®Mechanical piping and valves;
®Electrical and controls systems including: high voltage transformers; motor control centre,
local control panels and PLC;
®Heating and ventilation;
®Sump pump and chamber;
®Plumbing facilities (e.g., washroom, Janitorial sink, hot water tank); and,
®Operator desk.
The control building will consist of three rooms; blower room, UV room, and washroom. A
washroom has been provided for convenience due to the remoteness of the property. To
accommodate gravity hydraulics the UV equipment should be located below grade whereas the
blower room can be at grade. The exterior walls can be supported by a strip footing and the slabs for
two rooms would be poured on grade. The building is recommended be a masonry structure with a
pitched roof.
The building will require a clean water source in order to serve the plumbing fixtures, and utility
water requirements, and HEJV recommends that a connection to the domestic water service on
Birch Grove Road be made. Sanitary and water utilised for cleaning will be collected in a sump
chamber and pumped to the influent chamber.
5.4.1 Site Piping
Piping materials and sizing have been determined based on flow conditions and fluid properties.
Table 5-3 shows a summary of the piping proposed for the Port Morien WWTP. For ductile iron
piping, threaded flanges or Victaulic couplings are recommended for any joints, fittings, and
connections. For stainless steel piping pressed or rolled Van Stone neck flanges are recommended
for joints, fittings, and connections. For PVC, piping glued fittings are recommended for any joints,
fittings, and connections. The piping layout should be designed to optimize friction loss and to
provide easy access to all valving, instrumentation, and equipment for the operators.
Table 5-3 Port Morien WWTP Piping Summary
Piping System
Interior Interior-
Exterior
Connection
Exterior Buried
Material Size Material Size
Influent Chamber –
Lagoon Not Applicable HDPE 150 mm
Aeration Stainless
Steel
Various
Common Header
– 200 mm
Blower Intake &
Discharge -
100 mm
DI Coupling HDPE
Various
Common Header –
200 mm
Laterals – Diffuser
Manufacturer To
Determine
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTF Pre-Design Brief 18
5.4.2 Equipment Access
The control building has been designed to allow easy access to all equipment with manufacturer
recommended clearances provided for all equipment. Control building dimensions should be re-
confirmed in detailed design to meet specifications of selected equipment. Maintenance
requirements have been reviewed and it has been determined that for routine maintenance, no
specialised devices such as permanently mounting lifting devices are required.
Hydraulics allows the valves required for the sanitary sump pumps to be installed outside the sump
chamber, eliminating confined space entry to operate and service those particular valves. The access
hatch for the sump chamber should be fitted with a “Safe-Hatch™” (a Flygt product) or comparable
alternative to allow safe inspection of the covered chamber without exposing the operator to a fall
hazard.
5.4.3 Emergency Power
No provisions for emergency power have been included in the design of the Port Morien WWTP.
Flow through the facility is via gravity, and the lagoon has a large hydraulic retention time so the
impacts of a short power outage will be minimal. Consideration for a future generator including a
generator hook-up station, should be made in the event of a prolonged power outage. This will
allow a generator to be easily tied-in for critical process equipment and building services including
heat.
5.4.4 Controls
All equipment should be controlled via local control panels mounted inside the Control Building in
close proximity to the related equipment. The control panels for the UV Disinfection Equipment and
Sump Pumps should be vendor supplied, and should be designed to be integrated with CBRM
Electrical, Controls and SCADA Standards. The control panels for the blowers should be custom
designed to be integrated with CBRM Electrical, Controls and SCADA Standards.
Ventilation in the control building should have two modes of operation one for automatic and one
for manual manipulation of service.
In the event of the temperature dropping to lower than the adjustable set point, heaters will be
called to run; and, if the temperature is higher than the set point the exhaust fans will be called to
run. Controls circuits for the ventilation system will be housed in the MCC. No provisions have been
made for air conditioning.
5.4.5 Security
The control building will be located inside the site perimeter fencing and will be accessible via the
lockable entry gate at the main site entrance. The control building will be monitored with an alarm
system that will annunciate any unauthorised access events via SCADA.
Piping System
Interior Interior-
Exterior
Connection
Exterior Buried
Material Size Material Size
Effluent Piping from
Lagoon to Sewer DI 200 mm DI Coupling HDPE 200 mm
Sump –Sanitary DI 100 mm DI Coupling PVC 100 mm
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTF Pre-Design Brief 19
CHAPTER 6 SITE SPECIFIC CONSTRAINTS
During the preliminary design of the wastewater facility, HEJV has reviewed the proposed design for
potential constraints both during construction and operation of the facility. HEJV reviewed
construction constraints, environmental constraints, access requirements and utility requirements
for the proposed wastewater facility. The following sections will briefly discuss each item.
6.1 Construction Constraints
HEJV has reviewed the preliminary design of the Port Morien WWTP from a construction constraints
perspective. Construction sequencing will be the primary focus of this discussion. The construction
of the new Port Morin WWTP needs to be completed prior to the new Port Morin collection system.
Initial start-up and commissioning can commence prior to the collection being tied-in. However final
commissioning on raw influent can only occur once the collection system has been tied-in.
6.2 Environmental Constraints
With the proximity of the proposed WWTP to a watercourse and potential for drinking water
sources in the nearby vicinity, a hydrogeological study should be conducted. The results of this study
could impact the location of the lagoon on the proposed site and may influence the liner selection.
There is a watercourse that will need to be crossed by linear infrastructure and the access road near
Station 1+180. Construction of the works will require a temporary stream diversion. A sandbag
berm will need to be installed 5m upstream from the proposed works. When the berm is installed, a
pump should be used to pump water around the proposed works. A sandbag berm should then be
installed downstream of the proposed works. The water between the berms should then be
pumped out. Any fish or wildlife noticed during de-watering will need to be relocated downstream.
The suction of the pump will need to be monitored for interference with fish migration. Fish trapped
upstream of the temporary berm will also need to be transported downstream. The temporary
diversion and fish mitigation will need to comply with the latest version of NSE’s Watercourse
Alterations Standard at the time of construction.
The facility has been designed for continuous year round disinfection, once constructed and
commissioned; CBRM may want to explore the possibility of seasonal disinfection with the
regulator. Seasonal disinfection is where treated effluent undergoes UV disinfection during spring,
summer and fall months only. During the winter months UV disinfection would be turned off as
recreational contact near the point of discharge is a low probability.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTF Pre-Design Brief 20
6.3 Access Requirements
Access to the WWTP from Birch Grove Road will be in a remote location and require an access road
approximately 400 m in length. As discussed in Section 6.2, culverts will be required to complete the
access road. A small parking lot will be constructed nearby the Control Building.
It is recommended that a lockable entry gate be installed at the property line on the access road
close to Birch Grove Road, to restrict unauthorised vehicular traffic. A security fence around the
perimeter of the entire WWTP site is proposed, to restrict unauthorised access.
6.4 Utility Requirements
Three phase power will be required for the proposed treatment plant. Three phase power is
currently accessible directly off of Birch Grove Road. Approximately 400 m of new overhead
conductors and utility poles will be required.
The control building will require water service. The Village of Port Morien has potable water service,
and a connection to the existing watermain will need to be made at Birch Grove Road.
Approximately 400 m of buried pipe will be required.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTF Pre-Design Brief 21
CHAPTER 7 OPINION OF PROBABLE COSTS
7.1 Capital Cost Estimate
An opinion of Probable Construction Costs has been completed for the project, and a detailed
breakdown of the estimate has been provided in Appendix C. The estimate is made up of the Civil
Works, Structural Works, Equipment Purchases, Mechanical and Electrical Installation and
associated land acquisition costs. The Opinion of Probable Construction Costs for the WWTP for Port
Morien, as defined herein, is $3,213,000. The cost of interception and pumping are extra and are
detailed in the Port Morien Collection System Pre-Design Brief.
7.2 Operating Cost Estimation
HEJV completed an opinion of operating costs for the Port Morien WWTP using data provided by
CBRM for typical annual operating costs of existing infrastructure, typical employee salaries, Nova
Scotia Power rates, and experience from similar installations for general maintenance. For the
operating cost calculation, HEJV a 30 year life cycle duration. The opinion of operating costs includes
lagoon and equipment maintenance costs, employee operation and maintenance costs and
electrical costs. This opinion of operating cost in presented below in Table 7-1.
Table 7-1 Annual Operating Costs Breakdown
The lagoon and equipment maintenance costs include the lagoon diffusers (cleaning), blowers
(belts, bearings, filters) and UV equipment (UV lamp, ballasts), minor building maintenance
(painting, siding repairs, roof repairs), electrical repairs and instrumentation repairs and servicing.
Staffing costs it has been assumed that will be 420 hours of work conduct at the plant over a one
year period, approximately 1 day a week. The lagoon will need to undergo sludge removal once
every 20-25 years, and based on the HEJV previous experience with desludging similar sized lagoons
we have estimated a cost.
For the electrical operation cost, HEJV assumed the building would require heat for 5 months of the
year. Basic electrical loads for instrumentation were assumed. Electrical demand from the blowers
and UV equipment was determined based on the yearly average flow of the plant.
Item Costs (based on a 30 year duration)
Lagoon and Equipment Maintenance Cost $5,000/year
Staffing Cost $25,000/year
Electrical Operational Cost $15,400/year
Desludging Cost $200,000
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTF Pre-Design Brief 22
7.3 Opinion of Annual Capital Replacement Fund Contributions
The CBRM wishes to create a Capital Replacement Fund to which annual contributions would be
made to prepare for replacement of the wastewater assets at the end of their useful life. The
calculation of annual contributions to this fund involves consideration of such factors as the type of
asset, the asset value, the expected useful life of the asset, and the corresponding annual
depreciation rate for the asset as per the accounting practices for asset depreciation and
Depreciation Funds recommended in the Water utility Accounting and Reporting Handbook (Nova
Scotia Utility and Review Board, 2013). In consideration of these factors,Table 6-2 provides an
estimation of the annual contributions to a capital replacement fund for the proposed new
wastewater treatment system infrastructure. This calculation also adds the same contingency factor
used in the calculation of the Opinion of Probable Capital Cost. The actual Annual Capital
Replacement Fund Contributions will be calculated based on the final constructed asset value, the
type of asset, the expected useful life of the asset, and the corresponding annual depreciation rate
for the type of asset.
Table 7-2 Estimated Annual Capital Replacement Fund Contributions
Description of Asset Asset Value
Asset Useful
Life
Expectancy
(Years)
Annual
Depreciation
Rate (%)
Annual
Capital
Replacement
Fund
Contribution
Treatment Linear Assets (Outfall and Yard
Piping, Manholes and Other)$559,112 75 1.30%$7,268
Treatment Structures (Concrete Chambers,
etc.)$922,978 50 2.00%$18,460
Treatment Equipment (Mechanical /
Electrical, etc.)$851,267 20 5.00%$42,563
Subtotal $2,333,357 --$68,291
Contingency Allowance (Subtotal x 25%):$17,073
Engineering (Subtotal x 12%):$8,195
Opinion of Probable Annual Capital Replacement Fund Contribution:$93,559
·Notes:
1.Annual contribuƟons do not account for annual inflaƟon.
2.Costs do not include applicable taxes
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTF Pre-Design Brief 23
CHAPTER 8 REFERENCES
Harbour Engineering Inc. (2011).Cape Breton Regional Municipality Wastewater Strategy 2009
Harbour Engineering Inc. (2018).Cape Breton Regional Municipality Environmental Risk Assessment
& Preliminary Design of Seven (7) Future Wastewater Treatment Systems in CBRM Base
Information2018
Harbour Engineering Inc. (2018).Cape Breton Regional Municipality Environmental Risk Assessment
& Preliminary Design of Seven (7) Future Wastewater Treatment Systems in CBRM Port Morien
Collection System Pre-Design Brief 2018
Turner Drake & Partners Ltd. (February 2018).Population Projects Cape Breton, Nova Scotia.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTF Pre-Design Brief 24
APPENDIX A
Drawings
SEWERSHED
BOUNDARY
EXISTING GRAVITY
SEWER
AREA IMPACTED BY PAST
MINING OPERATIONS (TYP.)
BIRCH
G
R
O
V
E
R
O
A
D
LONG
B
E
A
C
H
R
D
MA
R
C
O
N
I
T
R
A
I
L
BR
E
A
K
W
A
T
E
R
S
T
AN
D
R
E
W
S
L
N
1
ENVIRONMENTAL RISK ASSESSMENTS & PRELIMINARY DESIGN
OF 7 FUTURE WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEMS IN CBRM
JRS
JRS TAB
TAB 18-7116
1:3000
AUGUST 2018
HA
R
B
O
U
R
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
I
N
G
J
O
I
N
T
V
E
N
T
U
R
E
,
2
7
5
C
H
A
R
L
O
T
T
E
S
T
R
E
E
T
,
S
Y
D
N
E
Y
,
N
S
,
B
1
P
1
C
6
A
B
ISSUED FOR DRAFT DESIGN BRIEF
ISSUED FOR FINAL DESIGN BRIEF
08/01/18
10/29/18
JRS
JRS EXISTING PORT MORIEN SEWER SYSTEM
DATE
DESIGN
DRAWN
PROJECT NO.
SHEET NO.
No.DATE BYISSUED FOR
written permission from Dillon Consulting Limited.
than those intended at the time of its preparation without prior
Do not scale dimensions from drawing.
Report any discrepancies to Dillon Consulting Limited.
Verify elevations and/or dimensions on drawing prior to use.
Conditions of Use
REVIEWED BY
CHECKED BY
Do not modify drawing, re-use it, or use it for purposes other
SCALE
2
ENVIRONMENTAL RISK ASSESSMENTS & PRELIMINARY DESIGN
OF 7 FUTURE WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEMS IN CBRM
JRS
JRS TAB
TAB 18-7116
AS NOTED
AUGUST 2018
HE
J
V
,
2
7
5
C
H
A
R
L
O
T
T
E
S
T
R
E
E
T
,
S
Y
D
N
E
Y
,
N
S
,
B
1
P
1
C
6
A
B
ISSUED FOR DRAFT DESIGN BRIEF
ISSUED FOR FINAL DESIGN BRIEF
08/01/18
10/30/18
JRS
JRS
PORT MORIEN INTERCEPTOR
PLAN/PROFILE
PLAN
1:2500
PROFILE
HOR:1:2500\VERT:1:500
DATE
DESIGN
DRAWN
PROJECT NO.
SHEET NO.
No.DATE BYISSUED FOR
written permission from Dillon Consulting Limited.
than those intended at the time of its preparation without prior
Do not scale dimensions from drawing.
Report any discrepancies to Dillon Consulting Limited.
Verify elevations and/or dimensions on drawing prior to use.
Conditions of Use
REVIEWED BY
CHECKED BY
Do not modify drawing, re-use it, or use it for purposes other
SCALE
PLAN
1:500
PROFILE 1
1:500 H. 1:100 V.
PROFILE 2
1:500 H. 1:100 V.
PROFILE 3
1:500 H. 1:100 V.
DATE
DESIGN
DRAWN
PROJECT NO.
SHEET NO.
No.DATE BYISSUED FOR
written permission from Dillon Consulting Limited.
than those intended at the time of its preparation without prior
Do not scale dimensions from drawing.
Report any discrepancies to Dillon Consulting Limited.
Verify elevations and/or dimensions on drawing prior to use.
Conditions of Use
REVIEWED BY
CHECKED BY
Do not modify drawing, re-use it, or use it for purposes other
SCALE
C101
ENVIROMENTAL RISK ASSESSMENT & PRELIMINARY DESIGN
OF FURTURE WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEMS IN CBRM
PORT MORIEN WWTF - PROPOSED SITE LAYOUT
DRB
DRB
18-7116
AS NOTED
OCT 2018
1 INTERNAL REVIEW - 30% PRE DESIGN 2018/10/16 DRB
j o i n t v e n t u r e
j o i n t v e n t u r e
DATE
DESIGN
DRAWN
PROJECT NO.
SHEET NO.
No.DATE BYISSUED FOR
written permission from Dillon Consulting Limited.
than those intended at the time of its preparation without prior
Do not scale dimensions from drawing.
Report any discrepancies to Dillon Consulting Limited.
Verify elevations and/or dimensions on drawing prior to use.
Conditions of Use
REVIEWED BY
CHECKED BY
Do not modify drawing, re-use it, or use it for purposes other
SCALE C102
ENVIROMENTAL RISK ASSESSMENT & PRELIMINARY DESIGN
OF FURTURE WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEMS IN CBRM
PORT MORIEN WWTF - MISCELLANEOUS DETAILS
DRB
DRB
18-7116
AS NOTED
OCT 2018
1 INTERNAL REVIEW - 30% PRE DESIGN 2018/10/16 DRB
DATE
DESIGN
DRAWN
PROJECT NO.
SHEET NO.
No.DATE BYISSUED FOR
written permission from Dillon Consulting Limited.
than those intended at the time of its preparation without prior
Do not scale dimensions from drawing.
Report any discrepancies to Dillon Consulting Limited.
Verify elevations and/or dimensions on drawing prior to use.
Conditions of Use
REVIEWED BY
CHECKED BY
Do not modify drawing, re-use it, or use it for purposes other
SCALE P101
ENVIROMENTAL RISK ASSESSMENT & PRELIMINARY DESIGN
OF FURTURE WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEMS IN CBRM
PORT MORIEN WWTF
CONTROL BUILDING PLAN
DRB
DRB
18-7116
1:25
OCT 2018
1 INTERNAL REVIEW - 30% PRE DESIGN 2018/10/16 DRB
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTF Pre-Design Brief 25
APPENDIX B
Process Evaluation
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTF Pre-Design Brief 26
Table B-1 Lagoon Style Evaluation
FACULATIVE LAGOONS AERATED LAGOON
Advantages
·Moderately effective in removing
settle able solids, BOD, pathogens,
fecal coliform, and ammonia.
·Easy to operate.
·Require little energy, with systems
designed to operate with gravity
flow.
·The quantity of removed material
would be relatively small compared
to other secondary treatment
processes.
·Requires less land and volume than
facultative lagoons.
·Sludge disposal may be necessary
but the quantity would be relatively
small compared to other secondary
treatment processes.
Disadvantages
·Settled sludges and inert material
require periodic removal.
·Difficult to control or predict
ammonia levels in effluent.
·Sludge accumulation would be
higher in cold climates due to
reduced microbial activity.
·Mosquitos and similar insect vectors
can be a problem if emergent
vegetation is not controlled.
·Requires relatively large areas of
land.
·Strong odors occur when the
aerobic blanket disappears and
during spring and fall lagoon
turnovers.
·Burrowing animals may be a
problem.
·Clarifier.
·Aerated lagoons are not as effective
as facultative lagoons in removing
ammonia nitrogen or phosphorous,
unless designed for nitrification.
·Diurnal changes in pH and alkalinity
that affect removal rates for
ammonia nitrogen and phosphorous
in facultative ponds do not occur in
aerated ponds.
·Aerated lagoons may experience
surface ice formation.
·Reduced rates of biological activity
occur during cold weather.
·Mosquito and similar insect vectors
can be a problem if vegetation on
the dikes and berms is not properly
maintained.
·Sludge accumulation rates would be
higher in cold climates because low
temperature inhibits anaerobic
reactions.
·Requires energy input.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTF Pre-Design Brief 27
Table B-2 Disinfection Evaluation
Treatment Efficiency Safety Costing
Chlorination
·Reliable technology and
well established in
Atlantic Canada;
however, dechlorinating
is required upon
disinfection to ensure
residual regulatory
requirements are met.
·All forms of chlorine
are high toxic
making chlorination
the most hazardous
form of disinfection.
·Strict shipping,
handling and
storage regulations.
·As dechlorinating is
required.
·Strict building code
requirements are
necessary.
·Chlorination is the
most expensive
form of disinfection.
UV
Disinfection
·Reliable technology that
is well established in
Atlantic Canada does not
leave any residual
effects.
·Shortage contact time of
the three disinfection
methods.
·Direct expose to UV
light can cause skin
burns; however, UV
light is shielded and
with the
implementation of
safe work practice
hazard can be
avoided.
·UV disinfection is
user-friendly and
easier to operate in
comparison with
other disinfection
methods.
·Preventative
maintenance of
systems to prevent
fouling and bulb
replacement is
required.
·Requires less space
to install.
Ozone
Disinfection
·Ozone is more effective
than chlorination and
disinfection; however,
low dosages may not be
sufficient to disinfect
some bacteria.
·Required retention time
can vary between ten
(10) and thirty (30)
minutes.
·Harmful residuals need
to be removed after
treatment.
·Ozone is extremely
irritating and
possibly toxic; off-
gas from its creation
need to be
destroyed to
prevent exposure to
workers.
·Ozone is produced
on site, this
eliminates safety
hazards associated
with transportation.
·Ozone disinfection
is a more complex
technology than
chlorination or UV
disinfection,
requiring specialist
equipment and
further operation
training.
·Ozone is very
corrosive requiring
corrosion-resistant
material such as
stainless steel.
·Treatment cost can
be high in capital
and power usage.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTF Pre-Design Brief 28
APPENDIX C
Opinion of Probable Construction Costs
OPINION OF PROBABLE
COST, CLASS 'C'
Wastewater Treatment System
Costs Only Project Manager:D. McLean
Port Morien, NS Est. by: D. Bennett Checked by: M. Abbot
PROJECT No.:187116 (Dillon)
182402.00 (CBCL)
UPDATED:April 13, 2020
NUMBER UNIT
1.0 General Conditions $303,032.48
Mobilization, Bonds, Insurance, P.C Mngmt 1 LS $100,000.00 $100,000.00
Contractor Overhead & Fees 10 %$203,032.48
2.0 Site Works $1,062,000.00
Grubbing and Clearing 7,500 m2 $5.00 $37,500.00
Mass Excavation 6,000 m3 $20.00 $120,000.00
Rock Excavation 600 m3 $60.00 $36,000.00
Fill - Borrow 4,500 m3 $10.00 $45,000.00
Fill - Import 1,500 m3 $30.00 $45,000.00
Forcemain Pump Station to Influent Chamber 200 m $340.00 $68,000.00
Influent Chamber 1 L.S.$15,500.00 $15,500.00
Gravity Sewer Influent Chamber - Lagoon 150mm PVC 25 m $300.00 $7,500.00
Outfall Lagoon to Control BLDG 200mm PVC 75 m $340.00 $25,500.00
Effluent Chamber 1 L.S.$15,500.00 $15,500.00
Outfall Control Building to Birch Street 200mm PVC 200 m $340.00 $68,000.00
Aeration Piping 200mm HDPE 150 m $300.00 $45,000.00
Control BLDG Sump Discharge 100mm PVC 200 m $200.00 $40,000.00
Water Service Connection 400 m $150.00 $60,000.00
Sanitary Connection 400 m $150.00 $60,000.00
Pre Cast Manhole 3 each $5,500.00 $16,500.00
Field Tile 1 L.S.$100,000.00 $100,000.00
Top Soil 3,000 sq.m $8.00 $24,000.00
Hydroseeding 3,000 sq.m $1.00 $3,000.00
Land Scaping 1 L.S.$10,000.00 $10,000.00
Access Road - Gravel 400 m $400.00 $160,000.00
Culvert Crossing 2 Ea $5,000.00 $10,000.00
Perimeter Fence 500 m $100.00 $50,000.00
3.0 Concrete $85,800.00
Building Foundation 60 m3 $1,000.00 $60,000.00
Interior Wall 15 m3 $1,200.00 $18,000.00
Misc. Concrete Items 10 %$7,800.00
4.0 Masonry $7,701.00
Interior Masonry 45 m2 $170.00 $7,701.00
5.0 Metals & Roofing $136,400.00
Metal Railings, Stairs, Grating, Hatches 90 m2 $400.00 $36,000.00
Pre-Engineered Building (Incl. Roof)90 m2 $1,060.00 $95,400.00
Miscellaneous Metals Items 1 L.S $5,000.00 $5,000.00
6.0 Finishes/Doors/Windows $42,710.00
Carpentry, Assessories and Fixtures 90 m2 $40.00 $3,600.00
Louvers 90 m2 $65.00 $5,850.00
Painting 90 L.S $50.00 $4,500.00
Epoxy Painting 90 m2 $54.00 $4,860.00
Windows (Exterior - Single)3 ea $2,650.00 $7,950.00
Doors (Single Swing Steel)2 ea $1,100.00 $2,200.00
Doors (Double Swing FRP)2 ea $3,500.00 $7,000.00
Other Interior Finishes 90 m2 $75.00 $6,750.00
7.0 Process Equipment Supply $280,669.00
Aeration Blowers 2 Each $17,500.00 $35,000.00
UV Disinfection Equipment 1 Each $69,789.00 $69,789.00
Sump Pump & Control Panel 1 Each $30,000.00 $30,000.00
Aeration Diffusers 1 L.S.$62,000.00 $62,000.00
Isolation Valves 7 Ea $1,000.00 $7,000.00
Baffle Curtains 2 Ea $26,440.00 $52,880.00
Lagoon Lining 4,800 m2 $5.00 $24,000.00
8.0 Mechanical $181,467.60
HVAC and Plumbing 90 m2 $700.00 $63,000.00
S.S 316 Aeration Piping 10 m $500.00 $5,000.00
100mm Dia. Blower Isolation Valves 2 Each $300.00 $600.00
100mm Dia. Blower Check Valves 2 Each $300.00 $600.00
Process Installation 40 %$112,267.60
9.0 Electrical $233,577.19
Power Supply & Distribution 8 %$143,739.81
Instrumentation & Controls 5 %$89,837.38
TOTAL DIRECT & INDERECT CONSTRUCTION COST (Excluding Contingencies and Allowances)$2,333,357.27
CONTINGENCIES AND ALLOWANCES:
A Contingency Allowance 25%$583,400.00
B Engineering 12%$280,100.00
C Land Purchase $16,000.00
OPINION OF PROBABLE TOTAL DIRECT & INDRECT CONSTRUCTION COST WITHOUT HST $3,212,857.27
ITEM DESCRIPTION
THIS OPINION OF PROBABLE COSTS IS PRESENTED ON THE BASIS OF EXPERIENCE, QUALIFIACATIONS, AND BEST JUDGEMENT. IT HAS BEEN PREPARED IN ACCORDANCE
WITH ACCEPTABLE PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICIES, MARKET TRENDS, NON-COMPETITIVE BIDDING SITUATIONS, UNFORSEEN LABOUR AND MATERIAL ADJUSTMENTS
AND THE LIKE ARE BEYOND THE CONTROL OF HEJV. AS SUCH WE CANNOT WARRANT OR GUARANTEE THAT ACTUAL COSTS WILL NOT VARY FROM THE OPINOIN
PROVIDED.
PREPARED FOR:
Cape Breton
Regional Municipality
EXTENDED TOTALS QUANTITY TOTALUNIT COST
March 27, 2020
HEJV Port Morien Wastewater System Pre‐Design Summary Report Appendices
APPENDIX C
Port Morien Environmental Risk Assessment
182402.00 ● Report ● April 2020
Port Morien Wastewater Treatment Plant
Environmental Risk Assessment
Final Report
Prepared by:
Prepared for:
March 2020
Final Report April 15, 2020 Darrin McLean Karen March Holly Sampson
Revised Draft – Revision 1 November 7, 2018 Darrin McLean Karen March Holly Sampson
Draft for Review August 15, 2018 Darrin McLean Karen March Holly Sampson
Issue or Revision Date Issued By: Reviewed By: Prepared By:
This document was prepared for the party indicated
herein. The material and information in the
document reflects HE’s opinion and best judgment
based on the information available at the time of
preparation. Any use of this document or reliance
on its content by third parties is the responsibility of
the third party. HE accepts no responsibility for any
damages suffered as a result of third party use of
this document.
182402.00
March 27, 2020
275 Charlotte Street
Sydney, Nova Scotia
Canada
B1P 1C6
Tel: 902-562-9880
Fax: 902-562-9890
_________________
182402 RE 001 FINAL WWTP ERA PORT MORIEN/mk
ED: 15/04/2020 14:28:00/PD: 15/04/2020 14:29:00
April 15, 2020
Matt Viva, P.Eng.
Manager Wastewater Operations
Cape Breton Regional Municipality (CBRM)
320 Esplanade,
Sydney, NS B1P 7B9
Dear Mr. Viva:
RE: Port Morien Wastewater Treatment Plant ERA
Final Report
Enclosed, please find a copy of the Environmental Risk Assessment (ERA) Report
for the Port Morien Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP).
The report outlines Environmental Quality Objectives (EQOs) for all parameters
of potential concern listed in the Standard Method for a “very small” facility.
Environmental Discharge Objectives (EDOs) were also calculated for all
parameters of potential concern.
If you have any questions or require clarification on the content presented in
the attached report, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Yours very truly,
Harbour Engineering
Prepared by: Reviewed by:
Holly Sampson, M.A.Sc., P.Eng. Karen March, M.Sc.
Intermediate Chemical Engineer Environmental Scientist
Direct: 902-539-1330 Phone: 902-450-4000
E-Mail: hsampson@cbcl.ca E-Mail: kmarch@dillon.ca
Project No: 182402.00 (CBCL)
187116.00 (Dillon)
March 27, 2020
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA i
Contents
CHAPTER 1 Background and Objectives ................................................................................... 1
1.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Background ................................................................................................................... 1
1.3 Facility Description ........................................................................................................ 2
CHAPTER 2 Initial Effluent Characterization ............................................................................. 4
2.1 Substances of Potential Concern .................................................................................. 4
2.1.1 Whole Effluent Toxicity ..................................................................................... 5
2.2 Wastewater Characterization Results .......................................................................... 5
CHAPTER 3 Environmental Quality Objectives ......................................................................... 7
3.1 Water Uses .................................................................................................................... 7
3.2 Ambient Water Quality ................................................................................................. 9
3.2.1 Stream Discharge Option .................................................................................. 9
3.2.2 Ocean Discharge Option ................................................................................. 10
3.3 Physical/ Chemical/ Pathogenic Approach ................................................................. 12
3.3.1 Stream Discharge Option ................................................................................ 12
3.3.2 Ocean Discharge Option ................................................................................. 16
CHAPTER 4 Mixing Zone Analysis ........................................................................................... 22
4.1 Methodology ............................................................................................................... 22
4.1.1 Definition of Mixing Zone ............................................................................... 22
4.1.2 Stream Discharge Option ................................................................................ 24
4.1.3 Ocean Discharge Option ................................................................................. 27
4.2 Modeled Effluent Dilution .......................................................................................... 31
4.2.1 Stream Discharge Option ................................................................................ 31
4.2.2 Ocean Discharge Option ................................................................................. 31
CHAPTER 5 Effluent Discharge Objectives .............................................................................. 35
5.1 The Need for EDOs ...................................................................................................... 35
5.2 Physical/ Chemical/ Pathogenic EDOs ........................................................................ 35
5.3 Effluent Discharge Objectives ..................................................................................... 36
CHAPTER 6 Compliance Monitoring ....................................................................................... 38
CHAPTER 7 References .......................................................................................................... 39
Appendices
A Laboratory Certificates
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 1
CHAPTER 1 BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
1.1 Introduction
Harbour Engineering (HE) was engaged by the Cape Breton Regional Municipality (CBRM) to complete
an Environmental Risk Assessment (ERA) for the proposed Port Morien Wastewater Treatment Plant
(WWTP). As this is a proposed WWTP that has not yet been designed, this ERA was completed with the
objective that it serve as a tool to establish effluent criteria for the design of a new WWTP. For this
reason, the ERA was completed without the frequency of testing required by the Standard Method
outlined in Technical Supplement 3 of the Canada-wide Strategy for the Management of Municipal
Wastewater Effluent (Standard Method) for initial effluent characterization. With the exception of the
initial effluent characterization sampling frequency, the ERA was otherwise completed in accordance
with the Standard Method.
1.2 Background
The Canada-wide Strategy (CWS) for the Management of Municipal Wastewater Effluent was adopted
by the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME) in 2009. The Strategy is focused on
two main outcomes: Improved human health and environmental protection; and, improved clarity
about the way municipal wastewater effluent is managed and regulated. The Strategy requires that all
wastewater facilities discharging effluent to surface water meet the following National Performance
Standards (NPS) as a minimum:
• Carbonaceous Biochemical Oxygen Demand for five days (CBOD5) – 25 mg/L;
• Total Suspended Solids (TSS) – 25 mg/L; and
• Total Residual Chlorine (TRC) – 0.02 mg/L.
The Wastewater Systems Effluent Regulations (WSER) came into effect in 2012 under the Fisheries Act.
The WSER include the above NPS as well as the following criteria:
• Unionized ammonia – 1.25 mg/L, expressed as nitrogen (N), at 15°C ± 1°C.
The CWS requires that facilities develop site-specific Effluent Discharge Objectives (EDOs) to address
substances not included in the NPS that are present in the effluent. EDOs are the substance
concentrations that can be discharged in the effluent and still provide adequate protection of human
health and the environment. They are established by conducting a site-specific ERA. The ERA includes
characterization of the effluent to determine substances of concern, and characterization of the
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 2
receiving water to determine beneficial water uses, ambient water quality, assimilative capacity, and
available dilution. A compliance monitoring program is then developed and implemented to ensure
adherence to the established EDOs for the facility.
1.3 Facility Description
The proposed Port Morien Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) will be constructed north of Birch
Grove Road and east of Marconi Trail in the community of Port Morien in CBRM, Nova Scotia.
Treated effluent will be discharged either to the Atlantic Ocean at the location of the existing outfall,
or to an unnamed stream running through the community. This assessment will first determine
whether discharge to the stream is feasible, as this option would save a significant length of piping.
If discharge to the stream is determined to not be feasible, treated effluent will be discharged to the
Atlantic Ocean. The service population of Port Morien is 282 people in 162 residential units. See
Figure 1.1 for the site location.
Figure 1.1 Site Location
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 3
Figure 1.2 WWTP Location
The theoretical domestic wastewater flow is an average of 96 m3/day with a peak of 394 m3/day
based on a per capita flow of 340 L/person/day and a peaking factor of 4.1 calculated using the
Harmon formula. The sewer system was flow metered from May 11 to July 3, 2018. The meter
locations are just upstream of the discharge and generally encompass the entire wastewater
system. The average dry weather flow was 260 m3/day (920 L/p/d or 202 IG/p/d). The average daily
flow during the metering period was 496 m3/day (1760 L/p/d or 387 IG/p/d). The maximum daily
flow during the metering period was 2889 m3/day. This occurred during a large rain event (58.6mm
over two days according to Sydney A weather station and 53.8mm over two days according to
Sydney CS weather station).
For the purposes of this ERA, the average daily design flow was assumed to be 475 m3/day. As the
population in this area is declining, accounting for a projected population increase during the life of
the plant was not necessary. The preliminary design report was completed based on an average
design flow of 562 m3/day. However, it also recommended that additional flow monitoring be
completed prior to detailed design of the WWTP. Therefore, the ERA will not be revised at this time.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 4
CHAPTER 2 INITIAL EFFLUENT CHARACTERIZATION
2.1 Substances of Potential Concern
An initial characterization program covering a one-year period is typically required by the Standard
Method to describe the effluent and identify substances of concern. As there is no existing WWTP
for this system, and the ERA is being conducted for the purpose of determining effluent objectives
for the design of a new WWTP, only one sample event was completed of the untreated effluent.
Sample results of the untreated effluent were also available for some of the parameters of potential
concern from three-years of monthly sampling conducted by CBRM from 2015 through 2017.
Substances of potential concern are listed in the Standard Method based on the size category of the
facility. The proposed design capacity of the new WWTP will be finalized during the pre-design
study, but for the purposes of the ERA, an average annual design flow of 475 m3/day will be used.
Therefore, the WWTP is classified as a “very small” facility based on an average daily flow rate that
is less than or equal to 500 m3/day.
The substances of potential concern for a “very small” facility, as per the Standard Method, are detailed
in Table 2.1. There were no additional substances of potential concern identified to be monitored as
there is no industrial input to the wastewater system that exceeds 5% of the total dry weather flow. It
was confirmed that the only discharge to the sewer from the Port Morien Fish Plant is from the
bathroom at the plant.
Table 2.1 Substances of Potential Concern for a Very Small Facility
Substance Group Substances
General Chemistry/ Nutrients
Total Suspended Solids (TSS)
Carbonaceous Biochemical Oxygen Demand (CBOD5)
Total Residual Chlorine (TRC) if chlorination is used
Total Ammonia Nitrogen
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN)
Total Phosphorus (TP)
pH
Temperature
Pathogens E. coli
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 5
2.1.1 Whole Effluent Toxicity
Wastewater effluent potentially contains a variety of unknown or unidentified substances for which
guidelines do not exist. In order to adequately protect against these unknown substances, Whole
Effluent Toxicity (WET) tests are typically conducted to evaluate acute (short-term) and chronic (long-
term) effects.
The Standard Method requires the following toxicity tests be conducted quarterly:
• Acute toxicity – Rainbow trout and Daphnia magna; and
• Chronic Toxicity – Ceriodaphnia dubia and fathead minnow.
A draft for discussion Mixing Zone Assessment and Report Template, dated July 6, 2016 that was
prepared by a committee of representatives of the environment departments in Atlantic Canada noted
that only Ceriodaphnia dubia testing is required for chronic toxicity. If the test does not pass, a fathead
minnow test is required.
As the wastewater in this system is currently untreated, and the purpose of the ERA is to determine
effluent discharge objectives for the design of a new WWTP, no WET tests were conducted at this time.
2.2 Wastewater Characterization Results
The results of the initial untreated wastewater characterization sample collected by HE is provided
in Table 2.2. A summary of the results of the untreated wastewater characterization samples
collected by CBRM from 2015 through 2017 are summarized in Table 2.3.
Table 2.2 Initial Wastewater Characterization Results
Parameter Units 24-Apr-18
CBOD5 mg/L 66
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) mg/L 14
Nitrogen (Ammonia Nitrogen) as N mg/L 5.9
Unionized ammonia(1) mg/L 0.0039
pH pH 7.15
Total Phosphorus mg/L 2.3
Total Suspended Solids mg/L 64
E. coli MPN/ 100mL 240,000
Total Coliforms MPN/ 100mL >240,000
Note: (1) The value of unionized ammonia was determined in accordance with the formula in the WSER, the
concentration of total ammonia in the sample, and the pH of the sample.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 6
Table 2.3 CBRM Wastewater Characterization Samples
Parameter Units Average Maximum Number of Samples
CBOD5 mg/L 227 740 33
Nitrogen (Ammonia Nitrogen) as N mg/L 15.6 40 12
Unionized Ammonia mg/L 0.042 0.12 13
pH units 7.0 7.41 12
Total Suspended Solids mg/L 233 1400 33
As mentioned previously, although the frequency of testing specified by the Standard Method was
not met, the ERA will be completed with the available data.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 7
CHAPTER 3 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY OBJECTIVES
Generic Environmental Quality Objectives (EQOs) are generated from established guidelines, typically
the Wastewater Systems Effluent Regulations (WSER), the Canadian Environmental Quality Guidelines
(CEQGs) and other guidelines specified by jurisdiction. Site-specific EQOs are established by adjusting
the generic EQOs based on site-specific factors, particularly ambient water quality. For example, if the
background concentration of a substance is greater than the guideline value (generic EQO), the
background concentration is used as the site-specific EQO. However, substances where the EQO is
based on the WSER are not adjusted based on ambient water quality. Furthermore, there are some
guidelines that are dependent on characteristics of the receiving water like pH or temperature. Effluent
is required to be non-acutely toxic at the end of pipe and non-chronically toxic at the edge of the mixing
zone.
EQOs can be determined by three different approaches:
• Physical/chemical/pathogenic – describes the substance levels that will protect water quality;
• Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) – describes the proportion of effluent that can enter the receiving
water without causing toxicological effects (both acute and chronic); and
• Biological criteria (bio-assessment) – describes the level of ecological integrity that must be
maintained.
This assessment follows the physical/chemical/pathogenic approach from the Standard Method
outlined in the CCME guidelines. The bio-assessment is not included in the Standard Method as it is still
being developed (CCME, 2008).
3.1 Water Uses
EQOs are numerical values and narrative statements established to protect the receiving water. In this
case, two potential receiving waters will be evaluated – an unnamed stream in Port Morien and Morien
Bay in the Atlantic Ocean. The first step in determining EQOs is to define the potential beneficial uses of
the receiving water.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 8
The following beneficial water uses have been identified for the stream discharge option:
• Direct contact recreational activities like swimming and wading at two downstream beaches in
Port Morien shown on Figure 3.1;
• Secondary contact recreational activities like boating and fishing in the ocean where the stream
discharges; and
• Ecosystem health for aquatic life.
The following beneficial water uses have been identified for the ocean discharge option:
• Direct contact recreational activities like swimming and wading at two beaches in Port Morien
(approximately 550m and 2500m to the southwest of the discharge), shown on Figure 3.2;
• Secondary contact recreational activities like boating and fishing;
• Ecosystem health for aquatic life; and
• Molluscan shellfish harvesting in Port Morien. The harvesting zone boundary is shown on Figure
3.2.
Figure 3.1 Location of Outfall (Stream Discharge Option)
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 9
Figure 3.2 Location of Outfall (Ocean Discharge Option)
3.2 Ambient Water Quality
Generic EQOs are first developed based on existing guidelines and then adjusted based on site-
specific factors, particularly background water quality.
3.2.1 Stream Discharge Option
Water quality data was obtained for the unnamed stream from a July 3, 2018 sampling event
conducted by HE under dry flow conditions. A summary of the ambient water quality data is shown
in Table 3.1.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 10
Table 3.1 Ambient Water Quality Data –Stream Discharge Option
Parameter Units S-BG1
Carbonaceous BOD (CBOD) mg/L 5
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) mg/L 0.48
Nitrogen (Ammonia Nitrogen) mg/L <0.05
Unionized Ammonia mg/L <0.00003
pH pH 6.31
Total Phosphorus (TP) mg/L 0.025
TRC(1) mg/L NM
TSS mg/L <2
E. coli MPN/100mL 10
Total Coliforms MPN/100mL 1500
Note:
(1) NM = Parameter not measured
3.2.2 Ocean Discharge Option
Water quality data was obtained for two locations in the Atlantic Ocean along the coast of Cape
Breton. The locations were chosen in an attempt to be representative of ambient water quality
outside the influence of the existing untreated wastewater discharges in CBRM. Samples were
collected by HIM on May 11, 2018, and the sample locations are summarized as follows and
presented in Figure 3.3:
• BG-1: Near Mira Gut Beach; and
• BG-2: Wadden’s Cove.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 11
Figure 3.3 Ambient Water Quality Sample Locations
A third sample was collected north of Port Morien but the results were not considered
representative of background conditions as sample results indicated the sample was impacted by
wastewater. Samples were collected as grab samples from near shore using a sampling rod. A
summary of the ambient water quality data is shown in Table 3.2.
Table 3.2 Ambient Water Quality Data – Ocean Discharge Option
Parameter Units BG1 BG2 AVG
Carbonaceous BOD (CBOD) mg/L <5.0 <5.0 <5.0
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) mg/L 0.19 0.20 0.20
Nitrogen (Ammonia Nitrogen) mg/L <0.050 <0.050 <0.05
Unionized ammonia mg/L <0.0007 <0.0007 <0.0007
pH pH 7.73 7.68 7.71
Total Phosphorus (TP) mg/L 0.037 0.032 0.035
TRC(1) mg/L NM NM NM
TSS mg/L 58 5.0 32
E. coli MPN/100mL 52 86 69
Total Coliforms MPN/100mL 16000 6900 11450
Note:
(1) NM = Parameter not measured.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 12
3.3 Physical/ Chemical/ Pathogenic Approach
The physical/chemical/pathogenic approach is intended to protect the receiving water by ensuring that
water quality guidelines for particular substances are being met. EQOs are established by specifying the
level of a particular substance that will protect water quality. Substance levels that will protect water
quality are taken from the CEQGs associated with the identified beneficial water uses. If more than one
guideline applies, the most stringent is used. Typically the Canadian Water Quality Guidelines (CWQGs)
for the Protection of Aquatic Life are the most stringent and have been used for this assessment. The
Guidelines for Canadian Recreational Water have also been used to provide limits for pathogens
(E. coli).
The guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life provide recommendations for both freshwater and
marine (including estuarine) environments.
Site-specific EQOs are derived in the following sections for each substance of potential concern. EQOs
for the Stream Discharge Option (freshwater environment) are presented in Section 3.3.1 and EQOs for
the Ocean Discharge Option (marine environment) are presented in Section 3.3.2.
3.3.1 Stream Discharge Option
The following general chemistry and nutrients parameters were identified as substances of potential
concern for a very small facility: CBOD, un-ionized ammonia, total ammonia, total nitrogen, total
Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN), total suspended solids (TSS), total phosphorus, pH, and total residual
chlorine (TRC). EQOs for these substances are established in the following section for the stream
discharge option.
Oxygen Demand
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD5) is a measure of the oxygen required to oxidize organic material
and certain inorganic materials over a given period of time (5 days). It has two (2) components:
carbonaceous oxygen demand and nitrogenous oxygen demand.
Carbonaceous Biochemical Oxygen Demand (CBOD5) measures the amount of biodegradable
carbonaceous material in the effluent that will require oxygen to break down over a given period of
time (5 days). The CBOD5 discharged in wastewater effluent reduces the amount of dissolved
oxygen in the receiving water. Dissolved oxygen is an essential parameter for the protection of
aquatic life; and the higher the CBOD5 concentration, the less oxygen that is available for aquatic
life.
Traditionally performance standards have been set for BOD5; however, the National Performance
Standards established by the Strategy dictate a limit for CBOD5. This is due to the variable effects of
nitrogenous oxygen demand on the BOD5 test.
The WSER requires that CBOD concentrations be less than 25 mg/L in the discharge. There are no
CWQGs for the protection of aquatic life for CBOD5 in freshwater or in marine waters. However,
because CBOD5 affects the concentration of dissolved oxygen, the CWQG for dissolved oxygen
should be considered. The CWQG for freshwater aquatic life dictates that the dissolved oxygen
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 13
concentrations be greater than 9.5 mg/L for early life stages in cold water ecosystems. If the stream
discharge option is otherwise determined to be feasible, additional analysis will be completed to
determine whether an EDO lower than 25 mg/L is required to ensure that dissolved oxygen levels
will not be depleted below 9.5 mg/L.
Total Ammonia and Un-ionized Ammonia
The CWQG for the protection of aquatic life for total ammonia in freshwater is presented as a table
based on pH and temperature. Total ammonia is comprised of un-ionized ammonia (NH3) and
ionized ammonia (NH4+, ammonium). Un-ionized ammonia is more toxic than ionized ammonia and
the toxicity of total ammonia is related to the concentration of un-ionized ammonia present. The
amount of un-ionized ammonia is variable depending on pH and temperature, which is why the total
ammonia guideline is given by pH and temperature. Table 3.3 shows the CWQGs for total ammonia,
as reproduced from the guidelines.
Table 3.3 CWQG for Total Ammonia (mg/L NH3) for the Protection of Aquatic Life
Temp (˚C) pH
6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 8.5 9.0 10
0 231 73.0 23.1 7.32 2.33 0.749 0.250 0.042
5 153 48.3 15.3 4.84 1.54 0.502 0.172 0.034
10 102 32.4 10.3 3.26 1.04 0.343 0.121 0.029
15 69.7 22.0 6.98 2.22 0.715 0.239 0.089 0.026
20 48.0 15.2 4.82 1.54 0.499 0.171 0.067 0.024
25 33.5 10.6 3.37 1.08 0.354 0.125 0.053 0.022
30 23.7 7.5 2.39 0.767 0.256 0.094 0.043 0.021
Notes:
• It is recommended in the guidelines that the most conservative value be used for the pH and temperature
closest to the measured conditions (e.g., the guideline for total ammonia at a temperature of 6.9˚C and pH of 7.9
would be 1.04 mg/L);
• According to the guideline, values falling outside of shaded area should be used with caution; and
• Values in the table are for Total Ammonia (NH3); they can be converted to Total Ammonia Nitrogen (N) by
multiplying by 0.8224.
The CWQG for total ammonia is 15.2 mg/L or 12.5 mg/L NH3 as nitrogen, which is based on a
background pH of 6.31 and an assumed temperature of 20°C.
The federal government adopted changes in June 2012 to the Fisheries Act under the WSER that
require un-ionized ammonia concentrations to be less than 1.25 mg/L at the discharge point. For
the purposes of this study, the EQO for un-ionized ammonia was chosen based on the WSER
(1.25 mg/L at discharge).
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 14
Total Suspended Solids (TSS)
The WSER specifies a limit of 25 mg/L for TSS at the end of the pipe. The CWQG for the protection of
freshwater aquatic life for total suspended solids (TSS) is as follows:
• During periods of clear flow, a maximum increase of 25 mg/L from background levels for any
short-term exposure (e.g., 24-h period). Maximum average increase of 5 mg/L from
background levels for longer term exposures (e.g., inputs lasting between 24 h and 30 d);
and
• During periods of high flow, a maximum increase of 25 mg/L from background levels at any
time when background levels are between 25 and 250 mg/L. Should not increase more than
10% of background levels when background is ≥ 250 mg/L.
The background concentration of TSS was less than the reportable detection limit of 2 mg/L. A
maximum average increase of 5mg/L from background levels would result in an EQO of 5 mg/L.
Application of the WSER criteria at the end of pipe would be the more stringent criteria provided
there is greater than five times dilution. If there was less than 5 times dilution, an EQO of 5 mg/L at
the edge of the mixing zone would be the more stringent criteria.
Total Phosphorus and TKN
There are no CWQGs for the protection of aquatic life for phosphorus or nitrogen. However, in both
freshwater and marine environments, adverse secondary effects like eutrophication and oxygen
depletion can occur. Guidance frameworks have been established for freshwater systems and for
marine systems to provide an approach for developing site-specific water quality guidelines. These
approaches are based on determining a baseline condition and evaluating various effects according
to indicator variables. The approach is generally very time and resource intensive, but can be
completed on a more limited scale to establish interim guidelines.
The CCME document Phosphorus: Canadian Guidance Framework for the Management of Freshwater
Systems recommends that phosphorus concentrations should not (i) exceed predefined ‘trigger ranges’;
and (ii) increase more than 50% over the baseline (reference) levels. The background concentration of
phosphorus measured in the stream was 0.025 mg/L.
The Canadian Guidance Framework for phosphorus provides trigger ranges for total phosphorus, as
shown below:
• Ultra-oligotrophic <4 µg/L
• Oligotrophic 4-10 µg/L
• Mesotrophic 10-20 µg/L
• Meso-eutrophic 20-35 µg/L
• Eutrophic 35-100 µg/L
• Hyper-eutrophic >100 µg/L
The average background concentration of 25 µg/L falls within the mesa-eutrophic trigger range
provided above. Phosphorus concentrations should not exceed the upper limit of 35 µg/L for the
Eutrophic trigger range, and should not increase more than 50% over the baseline level of 25 µg/L
(or 37.5 µg/L). A concentration of 0.035 mg/L will be applied as the EQO for phosphorus.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 15
There was no CWQG for TKN or TN in freshwater found in literature.
pH
The CWQG for the protection for aquatic life for freshwater is 6.5 to 9.0. This pH range will be
applied as the EQO.
Total Residual Chlorine
The WSER requires that TRC concentrations be less than 0.02 mg/L at the point of discharge. For the
purposes of this study, the EQO of 0.02 mg/L for TRC was chosen based on this regulation.
E. coli
Pathogens are not included in the CWQGs for the protection of aquatic life. The Health Canada
Guidelines for Canadian Recreational Water Quality specify a maximum E. coli concentration of
200 E. coli/100 mL for freshwater for primary contact recreation and 1000 E. coli/100 mL for
secondary contact recreation. The background concentration of E. coli was 10 MPN/100mL in the
stream. An EQO of 200 E. coli/ 100mL will apply for primary contact recreation at the beach where
the stream discharges to the ocean. An EQO of 1000 E. coli/ 100mL based on the Canadian
Recreational Water Quality guideline for secondary contact for freshwater will apply in the stream.
Summary
Table 3.4 below gives a summary of the generic and site-specific EQOs determined for parameters of
concern for the stream discharge option. The source of the EQO has been included in the table as
follows:
• WSER – wastewater systems effluent regulations
• CGF, Freshwater – Phosphorus: Canadian Guidance Framework for the Management of
Freshwater Systems
• CWQG Freshwater – CCME Canadian Water Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life
Freshwater
• HC Primary Contact – Health Canada Guidelines for Canadian Recreational Water Quality –
Primary Contact Recreation
• HC Secondary Contact – Health Canada Guidelines for Canadian Recreational Water Quality –
Secondary Contact Recreation
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 16
Table 3.4 EQO Summary – Stream Discharge Option
Parameter Generic
EQO Background Selected EQO Source
CBOD(1)(2) (mg/L) 25 5 25 WSER
TN (mg/L) - 0.48 - -
Nitrogen (Ammonia Nitrogen)
(mg/L) 12.5 <0.05 12.5 CWQG
Freshwater
Unionized Ammonia(1) (mg/L) 1.25 <0.00003 1.25 WSER
pH 6.5 - 9 6.31 6.5 - 9 CWQG
Freshwater
Total Phosphorus (mg/L) 0.035 0.025 0.035 CGF,
Freshwater
Total Residual Chlorine(1)
(mg/L) 0.02 NM 0.02 WSER
Total Suspended Solids(1)
(mg/L) 5 <2 5 WSER
E. coli (Primary Contact) (MPN/
100mL) 200 10 200 HC Primary
Contact
E. coli (Secondary Contact)
(MPN/ 100mL) 1000 10 1000 HC Secondary
Contact
Notes:
(1) EQO applies at end of pipe.
3.3.2 Ocean Discharge Option
The following general chemistry and nutrients parameters were identified as substances of potential
concern for a very small facility: CBOD, un-ionized ammonia, total ammonia, total nitrogen, total
Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN), total suspended solids (TSS), total phosphorus, pH, and total residual
chlorine (TRC). EQOs for these substances are established in the following section for the ocean
discharge option.
Oxygen Demand
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD5) is a measure of the oxygen required to oxidize organic material
and certain inorganic materials over a given period of time (five days). It has two components:
carbonaceous oxygen demand and nitrogenous oxygen demand.
Carbonaceous Biochemical Oxygen Demand (CBOD5) measures the amount of biodegradable
carbonaceous material in the effluent that will require oxygen to break down over a given period of
time (five days). The CBOD5 discharged in wastewater effluent reduces the amount of dissolved
oxygen in the receiving water. Dissolved oxygen is an essential parameter for the protection of
aquatic life; and the higher the CBOD5 concentration, the less oxygen that is available for aquatic
life.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 17
Traditionally performance standards have been set for BOD5; however, the WSER dictate a limit for
CBOD5. This is due to the variable effects of nitrogenous oxygen demand on the BOD5 test.
There are no CWQGs for the protection of aquatic life for CBOD5 in freshwater or in marine waters.
However, because CBOD5 affects the concentration of dissolved oxygen, the CWQG for dissolved
oxygen should be considered. The CWQG for freshwater aquatic life dictates that the dissolved
oxygen concentrations be greater than 9.5 mg/L for early life stages in cold water ecosystems. The
CWQG for marine aquatic life is a minimum of 8 mg/L.
The background dissolved oxygen concentrations were not measured in the receiving water.
However, the concentration of CBOD5 discharged in accordance with the WSER criteria should not
cause the dissolved oxygen (DO) concentration to vary outside of the normal range. Based on an
average annual temperature of 6.9 °C (from Bedford Institute of Oceanography Area 4VN), the
solubility of oxygen in seawater is approximately 9.5 mg/L. Assuming the background concentration
of DO is saturated, there can be a drop of 1.5 mg/L for the DO to be a minimum concentration of 8
mg/L. The average annual temperature was used in this calculation as if the maximum annual
temperature was used, this results in the solubility of oxygen being less than the CWQG for marine
aquatic life. For an ocean discharge, the maximum DO deficit should occur at the point source.
Assuming a deoxygenation rate of 0.33/day based on a depth of approximately 2m at the discharge
location, and assuming a reaeration coefficient of 0.61/day based on a depth of approximately 2m
and an average tidal velocity of 0.1 m/s. The maximum concentration of CBOD that would result in
a drop in DO of 1.5 mg/L can be calculated. The tidal dispersion coefficient has been assumed to be
150 m2/s. The concentration of CBOD potentially affecting DO was calculated to be 20.1 mg/L.
Therefore, the WSER criteria of 25 mg/L CBOD at discharge should not cause the dissolved oxygen
(DO) concentration to vary outside of the normal range as initial dilution would result in a
concentration much lower than 20.1 mg/L CBOD. The background level of CBOD was less than the
detection limit of 5 mg/L.
Total Ammonia and Un-ionized Ammonia
The CWQG for the protection of aquatic life for total ammonia in freshwater is presented as a table
based on pH and temperature. There is no CWQG for ammonia in marine water. Total ammonia is
comprised of un-ionized ammonia (NH3) and ionized ammonia (NH4+, ammonium). Un-ionized
ammonia is more toxic than ionized ammonia and the toxicity of total ammonia is related to the
concentration of un-ionized ammonia present. The amount of un-ionized ammonia is variable
depending on pH and temperature, which is why the total ammonia guideline is given by pH and
temperature. The USEPA saltwater guideline for total ammonia is 2.7 mg/L based on a temperature
of 17.7 °C, a pH of 7.7 and a salinity of 30 g/kg. The USEPA guideline of 2.7 mg/L will be used as the
EQO for total ammonia. As ammonia is a component of total nitrogen (TN), the actual effluent
concentration may be limited by the TN EDO rather than the total ammonia EDO. However, as the
TN EQO is based on concern of eutrophication and not a continuous acceptable concentration for
the protection of aquatic life, both EDOs will be presented separately in the ERA.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 18
The WSER requires that un-ionized ammonia concentrations be less than 1.25 mg/L at the discharge
point. For the purposes of this study, the EQO for un-ionized ammonia was chosen based on the
WSER (1.25 mg/L at discharge).
Total Suspended Solids (TSS)
The WSER specifies a limit of 25 mg/L for TSS at the end of the pipe. The CWQG for the protection of
aquatic life in marine water for total suspended solids (TSS) is as follows:
• During periods of clear flow, a maximum increase of 25 mg/L from background levels for any
short-term exposure (e.g., 24-h period). Maximum average increase of 5 mg/L from
background levels for longer term exposures (e.g., inputs lasting between 24 h and 30 d).
• During periods of high flow, a maximum increase of 25 mg/L from background levels at any
time when background levels are between 25 and 250 mg/L. Should not increase more than
10% of background levels when background is ≥ 250 mg/L.
The background concentration of TSS was an average of 32 mg/L. A maximum average increase of
5mg/L from background levels would result in an EQO of 37 mg/L. As this is greater than the WSER
criteria, the WSER criteria of 25 mg/L at discharge will apply as the EDO. The background TSS
measurement is higher than would typically be expected in a marine environment, which may be
due to the near shore location of the samples. However, in a worst case scenario where the
background TSS concentration was 0 mg/L, application of the WSER criteria at the end of pipe would
always be the more stringent criteria provided there is greater than five times dilution.
Total Phosphorus and TKN/TN
There are no CWQGs for the protection of aquatic life for phosphorus or Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen.
However, in both freshwater and marine environments, adverse secondary effects like
eutrophication and oxygen depletion can occur. Guidance frameworks have been established for
freshwater systems and for marine systems to provide an approach for developing site-specific
water quality guidelines. These approaches are based on determining a baseline condition and
evaluating various effects according to indicator variables. The approach is generally very time and
resource intensive, but can be completed on a more limited scale to establish interim guidelines.
The Canadian Guidance Framework for the Management of Nutrients in Nearshore Marine Systems
Scientific Supporting Document (CCME, 2007) provides a framework as well as case studies for
establishing nutrient criteria for nearshore marine systems. This document provides a Trophic Index
for Marine Systems (TRIX), below.
Table 3.5 Criteria for evaluating trophic status of marine systems (CCME, 2007)
Trophic Status TN
(mg/m3)
TP
(mg/m3) Chlorophyll a (μg/L) Secchi Depth
(m)
Oligotrophic <260 <10 <1 >6
Mesotrophic ≥260-350 ≥10-30 ≥1-3 3-≤6
Eutrophic ≥350-400 ≥30-40 ≥3-5 1.5-≤3
Hypereutrophic >400 >40 >5 <1.5
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 19
The background concentrations of TKN and TP were measured as 0.2 mg/L and 0.035 mg/L,
respectively, which corresponds to a eutrophic status based on the phosphorus concentration. The
uppermost limit for this trophic status is a TN concentration of 0.4 mg/L and a TP concentration of
0.04 mg/L.
This document provides another index (NOAA) to determine the degree of eutrophication of the
marine system, below.
Table 3.6 Trophic status classification based on nutrient and chlorophyll (CCME, 2007)
Degree of
Eutrophication
Total Dissolved N
(mg/L)
Total Dissolved P
(mg/L)
Chl a
(μg/L)
Low 0 - ≤0.1 0 - ≤0.01 0 - ≤5
Medium >0.1 - ≤1 >0.01 - ≤0.1 >5 - ≤20
High >1 >0.1 >20 - ≤60
Hypereutrophic - - >60
However, the concentrations in Table 3.6 are based on dissolved nitrogen and phosphorus and the
background concentrations are for TKN and total phosphorus. For nitrogen, with a background
concentration of 0.2 mg/L for TKN, an assumption that the dissolved nitrogen background
concentration is anywhere between 50 and 100% of the TKN background concentration would result
in classification as “medium” based on Table 3.6. For phosphorus, with a background concentration
of 0.035 mg/L, an assumption that the dissolved background concentration is anywhere between 29
and 100% of the total background concentration would result in classification as “medium” based on
Table 3.6.
To maintain the same degree of eutrophication, the total dissolved nitrogen and total dissolved
phosphorus in the receiving water should not exceed the upper limit of the “medium” classification
which is 1 mg/L for Total Dissolved Nitrogen and 0.1 mg/L for Total Dissolved Phosphorus. In order
to determine the upper limit of the “medium” eutrophication range based on total phosphorus and
TN concentrations, an assumption must be made as to the percentage of the TN and phosphorus
that exists in the dissolved phase, both in the receiving water and in the effluent. As a measure of
conservatism, an assumption was made that 100% of the TN and phosphorus exist in a dissolved
phase. This allows for the upper limits of the “medium” classification to be used directly as the EQO
which results in an EQO of 1 mg/L for TN and 0.1 mg/L for total phosphorus.
The Canadian Guidance Framework for the Management of Nutrients in Nearshore Marine Systems
Scientific Supporting Document (CCME, 2007) presents both of the above criteria for assessing
trophic status and does not provide a recommendation for use of one rather than the other.
However, the framework presents a case study to establish nutrient criteria for the Atlantic
Shoreline of Nova Scotia, and the NOAA index is used. Therefore, that index will be used for the
purpose of this study.
pH
The CWQG for the protection for aquatic life for marine waters is 7.0 to 8.7. This pH range will be
applied as the EQO.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 20
Total Residual Chlorine
The WSER requires that TRC concentrations be less than 0.02 mg/L. For the purposes of this study,
the EQO/EDO of 0.02 mg/L for TRC was chosen based on this regulation.
E. coli
Pathogens are not included in the CCME WQGs for the protection of aquatic life. The Health Canada
Guidelines for Canadian Recreational Water Quality specify a maximum E. coli concentration of
200 E. coli/100 mL for freshwater for primary contact recreation and 1000 E. coli/100 mL for
secondary contact recreation. The Health Canada guideline for Canadian Recreational Water Quality
for primary and secondary contact recreation in marine water is based on enterococci rather than E.
coli. However, historical Nova Scotia Environment has set discharge limits for E. coli rather than
enterococci for marine discharges. The background concentration of E. coli was 69 E. coli/100 mL.
An EQO of 200 E. coli/ 100mL will apply for primary contact recreation at Port Morien Beach. An
EQO of 1000 E. coli/ 100mL based on the Canadian Recreational Water Quality guideline for
secondary contact for freshwater will apply elsewhere in the receiving water.
There is currently a molluscan shellfish closure zone in the immediate vicinity of the outfall (SSN-
2006-007 on Figure 3.2). However, the area is monitored as part of the Canadian Shellfish
Sanitation Program (CSSP) and consideration will have to be given to E. coli concentrations outside
of the closure zone. The CSSP requires that the median of the samples collected in an area in one
survey not exceed 14 E. coli/100 mL, and no more than 10% of the samples can exceed 43 E.
coli/100mL. However, the average measured background concentration for E. coli was 69 E.
coli/100 mL. These background samples were collected from shore and may not be representative
of the actual ambient concentration of E. coli in the area.
Summary
Table 3.7 below gives a summary of the generic and site-specific EQOs determined for parameters of
concern for the ocean discharge option. The source of the EQO has been included in the table as
follows:
• WSER – wastewater systems effluent regulations
• CGF, Marine – Canadian Guidance Framework for the Management of Nutrients in Nearshore
Marine Systems Scientific Supporting Document
• CSSP – Canadian Shellfish Sanitation Program
• HC Primary Contact – Health Canada Guidelines for Canadian Recreational Water Quality –
Primary Contact Recreation
• HC Secondary Contact – Health Canada Guidelines for Canadian Recreational Water Quality –
Primary Contact Recreation
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 21
Table 3.7 EQO Summary – Ocean Discharge Option
Parameter Generic EQO Background Selected EQO Source
CBOD5(1) (mg/L) 25 <5.0 25 WSER
TN (mg/L) 1 0.2 1 CGF, Marine
Nitrogen (Ammonia
Nitrogen) (mg/L)
2.7 <0.05 2.7(2) USEPA Saltwater
Unionized Ammonia (as
N at 15°C)(1) (mg/L)
1.25 <0.0007 1.25 WSER
pH 7.0 – 8.7 7.71 7.0 – 8.7 CWQG Marine
TP (mg/L) 0.1 0.035 0.1 CGF, Marine
TRC(1) (mg/L) 0.02 NM 0.02 WSER
TSS(1) (mg/L) 25 32 25 WSER
E. coli (molluscan
shellfish) (MPN/ 100mL)
14 69 14 CSSP
E. coli (Primary Contact)
(MPN/ 100mL)
200 69 200 HC Primary Contact
E. coli (Secondary
Contact) (MPN/ 100mL)
1000 69 1000 HC Secondary Contact
Notes:
Bold indicates EQO is a WSER requirement.
(1) EQO applies at the end of pipe.
(2) Although the EQO for ammonia has been calculated to be 2.7 mg/L, an EQO of 1 mg/L for total nitrogen would govern.
However, as the EQO for TN is based on eutrophication, EDOs will be developed for all parameters separately.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 22
CHAPTER 4 MIXING ZONE ANALYSIS
4.1 Methodology
4.1.1 Definition of Mixing Zone
A mixing zone is the portion of the receiving water where effluent dilution occurs. In general, the
receiving water as a whole will not be exposed to the immediate effluent concentration at the end-
of-pipe but to the effluent mixed and diluted with the receiving water. Effluent does not
instantaneously mix with the receiving water at the point of discharge. Depending on conditions
like ambient currents, wind speeds, tidal stage, and wave action, mixing can take place over a large
area – up to the point where there is no measureable difference between the receiving water and
the effluent mixed with receiving water.
The mixing process can be characterized into two distinct phases: near-field and far-field. Near-
field mixing occurs at the outfall and is influenced by the configuration of the outfall (e.g. pipe size,
diffusers, etc.). Far-field mixing is influenced by receiving water characteristics like turbulence, wave
action, and stratification of the water column.
Within the mixing zone, EQOs may be exceeded but acutely toxic conditions are not permitted
unless it is determined that un-ionized ammonia is the cause of toxicity. If the un-ionized ammonia
concentration is the cause of toxicity, there may be an exception (under the WSER) if the
concentration of un-ionized ammonia is less than or equal to 0.016 mg/L, expressed as N, at any
point that is 100 m from the discharge point. Outside of the mixing zone, EQOs must be achieved.
The effluent is also required to be non-chronically toxic outside of the mixing zone. The allocation of
a mixing zone varies from one substance to another – degradable substances are allowed to mix in a
portion of the receiving water whereas toxic, persistent, and bio-accumulative substances (such as
chlorinated dioxins and furans, PCBs, mercury, and toxaphene) are not allowed a mixing zone.
A number of general criteria for allocating a mixing zone are recommended in the Strategy, including the
following:
• The dimensions of a mixing zone should be restricted to avoid adverse effects on the designated
uses of the receiving water system (i.e., the mixing zone should be as small as possible);
• Conditions outside of the mixing zone should be sufficient to support all of the designated uses
of the receiving water system;
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 23
• A zone of passage for mobile aquatic organisms must be maintained;
• Placement of mixing zones must not block migration into tributaries;
• Changes to the nutrient status of the water body as a result of an effluent discharge should be
avoided; eutrophication or toxic blooms of algae are unacceptable impacts;
• Mixing zones for adjacent wastewater discharges should not overlap; and
• Adverse effects on the aesthetic qualities of the receiving water system (e.g. odour, colour,
scum, oil, floating debris) should be avoided (CCME, 1996).
The limits of the mixing zone may be defined for the following three categories of aquatic
environments based on their physical characteristics:
• streams and rivers;
• lakes, reservoirs and enclosed bays; and
• estuarine and marine waters.
Where several limits are in place, the first one to be reached sets the maximum extent of the mixing
zone allowed for the dilution assessment. Nutrients and fecal coliforms are not allocated any
maximum dilution. For fecal coliforms, the location of the water use must be considered and
protected by the limits of the mixing zone.
Based on these general guidelines, mixing zone extents must be defined on a case-by-case basis that
account for local conditions. It may also be based on arbitrary mixing zone limits for open water
discharges, e.g. a 100 m (Environment Canada, 2006) or 250 m (NB DOE, 2012) radius from the
outfall and/or a dilution limit. A Draft for Discussion document “Mixing Zone Assessment and
Report Templates” dated July 7, 2016, prepared by a committee of representatives of the
environment departments in Atlantic Canada, provides guidance regarding mixing zones for ERAs in
the Atlantic Provinces. This document recommends that for ocean and estuary receiving waters a
maximum dilution limit of 1:1000 be applied for far-field mixing.
Finally, the assessment shall be based on ‘critical conditions’. For example, in the case of a river
discharge ‘critical conditions’ can be defined as the seven-day average low river flow for a given
return period. The Standard Method provides the following guidance on EDO development:
“…reasonable and realistic but yet protective scenarios should be used. The
objective is to simulate the critical conditions of the receiving water, where
critical conditions are where the risk that the effluent will have an effect on the
receiving environment is the highest – it does not mean using the highest effluent
flow, the lowest river flow, and the highest background concentration
simultaneously.”
As the critical low flow condition is used for the receiving water, the WWTP effluent will be
modelled based on an annual average flow, rather than a maximum daily or hourly flow, as applying
a critical high flow condition for the effluent simultaneously with a critical low flow condition in the
receiving water would result in overly conservative EDOs as this scenario doesn’t provide a
reasonable or realistic representation of actual conditions.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 24
4.1.2 Stream Discharge Option
4.1.2.1 SITE SUMMARY
A model was constructed to determine whether it would be feasible to discharge the treated
effluent to an unnamed stream situated adjacent to the proposed WWTP rather than at the existing
outfall in the Atlantic Ocean (as shown in Figure 3.1).
4.1.2.2 FAR-FIELD MODELING APPROACH AND INPUTS
The proposed average day design flow for the WWTP is 475 m3/day. The Atlantic Canada
Wastewater Guidelines Manual recommend using the 7Q20 flow, or as required by the regulatory
agency having jurisdiction, and the peak hourly effluent discharge rate. However, the Standard
method states that the objective is to simulate critical conditions of the receiving water, which does
not mean using the highest effluent flow, the lowest river flow, and the highest background
concentration simultaneously. It recommends the use of reasonable and realistic worst-case
conditions at a steady state. A Draft for Discussion document “Mixing Zone Assessment and Report
Templates” dated July 7, 2016 by a committee of representatives of the environment departments
in Atlantic Canada recommends use of a low flow of either 7Q10 or 7Q20 for rivers, to be set by the
jurisdiction. As Nova Scotia does not prescribe a specific scenario to be modelled, dilution factors
have been considered at the proposed average day design flow. 7Q10 flows were used to model the
stream low-flow discharge for all parameters with the exception of phosphorus. To determine the
dilution factor for use in calculating an EDO for phosphorus, 7Q2 flows were used to model the
stream, based on discussion with Nova Scotia Environment (NSE).
A numerical volumetric analysis of the receiving stream was performed. This approach is ideally
suited to the study of small streams where uniform mixing across the channel profile can be
assumed, and where dilution is driven by the proportion of effluent discharge with respect to the
stream flow. The calculations were conducted using Lidar data, effluent discharge flow rates, and
stream flow estimations for the area.
4.1.2.3 RIVER FLOW ESTIMATIONS
No existing or historical flow gauging station is located along the stream or within its
watershed. Historical flows along the stream were therefore estimated by carrying out an analysis
of all flow gauging data in the region and prorating the data to the stream watershed. Five (5)
Environment Canada hydrometric stations within 150km of the study area were evaluated to
determine the most representative station for the stream. The stream watershed was delineated
using Lidar data (Figure 4.1) and was compared with the five (5) watersheds based on area, land use
and watershed characteristics. Land use areas were delineated within the watersheds based on
aerial photography and the Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources GIS database for the
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 25
following five (5) land use types: Forest, Rural, Developed, Waterbody and Wetland. Watershed
characteristics were estimated based on aerial photography.
Figure 4.1 Watershed Delineation of Streams at Port Morien
A statistical analysis of 7Q10 and 7Q2 flow values was carried out for each hydrometric station to
compare estimated low flows Station 01DH003 (Fraser Brook) was chosen as the most
representative flow gauging station based on its small area and similar tributary watershed
characteristics.
Statistical models were calculated for the 7Q2 flow rates at each station using several statistical
distributions (Normal, Log-Normal, Three-Parameter-Log-Normal, Gumbel, Fréchet, Weibull and
Log-Pearson III). The most representative distribution for each station was then selected using
statistical hypothesis testing (Chi square test, T-test, correlation and coefficient of determination)
(Figure 4.2). The resultant best-fit statistical model of the most similar station (Figure 4.3) was then
prorated to the stream watershed resulting in a 7Q10 flow of 2x10-4 m3/s and a 7Q2 flow of 3x10-4
m3/s.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 26
Figure 4.2 Comparison of Statistical Distributions of Annual Instantaneous Peak
Flow Rates for Hydrometric Station 01DH003
Figure 4.3 Annual Instantaneous Peak Flow Statistical Distributions for
Hydrometric Station 01DH003
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 27
4.1.3 Ocean Discharge Option
4.1.3.1 SITE SUMMARY
The WWTP was assumed to discharge through an outfall pipe perpendicular to the shoreline in
shallow water, extended to a depth estimated at -1.0 m below low tide. The low tide and -1.0 m
depth contours were estimated based on navigation charts. The total average effluent discharge is
modeled as a continuous point source of 475.2 m3/day.
The major coastal hydrodynamic features of the area are as follows:
• Along-shore currents along the open coastline are in phase with the tide, i.e. the current
speed peaks at high and low tide; and
• At the outfall site, breaking waves and associated longshore currents will contribute to
effluent dispersion during storms. For this assessment, we have assumed calm summer
conditions (i.e. no waves), when effluent dilution would be at a minimum.
4.1.3.2 FAR-FIELD MODELING APPROACH AND INPUTS
The local mixing zone is limited by the water depth at the outfall of approximately -1.0 m Chart
Datum and by the presence of the shoreline. Since the outfall is in very shallow water, the buoyant
plume will always reach the surface upon release from the outfall (Fisher et al., 1979). Far-field
mixing will then be determined by ambient currents, which is best simulated with a hydrodynamic
and effluent dispersion model.
We implemented a full hydrodynamic model of the receiving coastal waters using the Danish
Hydraulic Institute’s MIKE21 model. MIKE21 is ideally suited to the study of outfall discharges in
shallow coastal areas where complex tidal and wind-driven currents drive the dispersion process.
The model was developed using navigation charts, tidal elevations, and wind observations for the
area. A similar model had been used by CBCL for CBRM in the past:
• In 2005 for the assessment of the past wastewater contamination problem at Dominion
Beach, which led to the design of the WWTP at Dominion (CBCL Limited, 2005); and
• In 2014 for ERAs at the Dominion and Battery Point WWTPs.
The hydrodynamic model was calibrated to the following bottom current meter data:
• 1992 current meters (4 locations) located in 10 m-depth for the study by ASA (ASA
Consulting Limited, 1994) on local oceanography and effluent dispersion;
• 2006 current meters (2 locations) off the Donkin peninsula for the CBCL study of mine
effluent dispersion.
Calibration consisted of adjusting the following parameters:
• Bottom friction; and
• Model spatial resolution in the area of the current meters.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 28
Numerical model domain with locations of current meter observations and modeled outfall location
are shown in Figure 4.4. Inputs and calibrated outputs are shown in Figure 4.5. The modelled
current magnitudes at New Waterford, Glace Bay, and Donkin are in relatively good agreement with
observations, which is satisfactory to assess the overall dilution patterns of effluent from the outfall.
The effect of waves was not included in the model, and therefore the modeled effluent
concentration near the outfall is expected to be conservatively high.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 29
Figure 4.4 Numerical Model Domain with Locations of Current Meter Observations
and Modeled Outfall Location
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 30
Figure 4.5 Time-series of Hydrodynamic Model Inputs and Calibration Outputs
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 31
4.2 Modeled Effluent Dilution
4.2.1 Stream Discharge Option
Effluent was modelled at an average annual design flow of 475 m3/day with both 7Q10 and 7Q2 low
stream flows and the dilution results are presented in Table 4.1 and Table 4.2.
Table 4.1 Modelled Dilution Values (7Q10)
Distance from
Outfall
% Effluent under 7Q10 River Flows
475 m3/day
100m 99.996%
250m 99.968%
500m 99.964%
Table 4.2 Modelled Dilution Values (7Q2)
Distance from
Outfall
% Effluent under 7Q2 River Flows
475 m3/day
100m 99.994%
250m 99.951%
500m 99.954%
Under both a 7Q10 and 7Q2 low stream flow condition, the flow would be almost 100% comprised
of effluent. This would require the EQOs to be met at the discharge, with no dilution. As this was
determined to not be practically feasible, the stream discharge option will not be considered
further.
4.2.2 Ocean Discharge Option
Snapshots of typical modeled effluent dispersion patterns are shown on Figure 4.6. Statistics on
effluent concentrations were performed over the 1-month model run, and over a running 7-day and
1-day averaging period. Composite images of maximum and average effluent concentrations are
shown on Figure 4.7.
Effluent concentration peaks at any given location are short-lived because the plume is changing
direction every few hours depending on tides and winds. Therefore, a representative dilution
criteria at the mixing zone limit is best calculated using an average value. We propose to use the
one-day average effluent concentration criteria over the one-month modeling simulation that
includes a representative combination of site-specific tides and winds.
The diluted effluent plume often reaches the shoreline to the west of the outfall as well as the
shoreline farther away to the north and south and within the harbour. Large eddies tend to form
due to the circulation patterns within the region. Maximum concentrations 100 m away from the
outfall are observed North of the outfall and near the diffuser due to the presence of the
breakwater. The 100 m distance from the outfall to the shoreline is within the brackets of mixing
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 32
zone radiuses defined by various guidelines. We propose that this distance be used as mixing zone
limit.
The maximum 1-day average effluent concentration 100 m away from the outfall over the
simulation period is 0.195% (Table 4.3). Therefore, we propose that a 512:1 dilution factor be used
for calculating EDOs (with the exception of bacteria concentrations for primary contact recreation
and molluscan shellfish). Due to the circulation patterns the average effluent concentrations both
100 m and 200 m from the diffuser were very similar.
The bacterial parameter dilution factors for primary contact recreation and molluscan shellfish
harvesting are based on the following considerations. The maximum 1-day average effluent
concentration at the shellfish closure zone boundary is 0.03%, corresponding to a dilution of 3333:1.
The maximum 1-day average effluent concentration at the beach is less than 0.005%, corresponding
to a dilution of 20,000:1.
Table 4.3 Modelled Dilution Values 100 and 200 m away from the Outfall
Distance
away from
the outfall
Hourly maximum
effluent
concentration
Maximum 1-day
average effluent
concentration
Maximum 7-day
average effluent
concentration
1-Month average
effluent
concentration
100 m 1.169 % (85:1
Dilution)
0.195 % (512:1
Dilution)
0.082 % (1219:1
Dilution)
0.079 % (1270:1
Dilution)
200 m 0.695 % (143:1
Dilution)
0.181 % (551:1
Dilution)
0.087 % (1143:1
Dilution)
0.066 % (1506:1
Dilution)
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 33
Figure 4.6 Snapshots of Typical Modeled Effluent Dispersion Patterns
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 34
Figure 4.7 Composite Images of Modeled Maximum 1-Day Average (top)
and Maximum 7-Day Average Effluent Concentrations (middle)
with Concentration Time-Series (bottom)
Note: 100-m radius (black) and 200-m radius (grey) circle shown around outfall, mollusc closure outlined in red
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 35
CHAPTER 5 EFFLUENT DISCHARGE OBJECTIVES
5.1 The Need for EDOs
Effluent Discharge Objectives (EDOs) represent the effluent substance concentrations that will protect
the receiving environment and its designated water uses. They describe the effluent quality necessary
to allow the EQOs to be met at the edge of the mixing zone. The EQOs are established in Chapter 3; see
Table 3.7 for summary of results.
EDOs should be calculated where reasonable potential of exceeding the EQOs at the edge of the mixing
zone has been determined. Typically, substances with reasonable potential of exceeding the EQOs have
been selected according to the simplified approach: If a sample result measured in the effluent exceeds
the EQO, an EDO is determined. As there are a limited number of parameters considered as substances
of potential concern for very small and small facilities, EDOs will be developed for all substances of
potential concern.
5.2 Physical/ Chemical/ Pathogenic EDOs
For this assessment, EDOs were calculated using the dilution values obtained at the proposed
average design flow of 475 m3/day. This resulted in a dilution of 512:1 at the edge of a 100 m
mixing zone based on one-day average effluent concentrations. The model shows a dilution of
3333:1 at the shellfish closure zone boundary based on the maximum 1-day average effluent
concentration. The model shows a dilution of 20,000:1 at the nearby beach based on the 1-day
average effluent concentration.
Parameters for which there is a WSER criteria were not allowed any dilution and therefore the EDO
equals the WSER Criteria. The Standard Method does not allocate any maximum dilution for
nutrients and fecal coliforms. For nutrients, it recommends a case-by-case analysis. For fecal
coliforms, the location of the water use must be protected by the limits of the mixing zone.
The dilution values were used to obtain an EDO by back-calculating from the EQOs. When the
background concentration of a substance was less than the detection limit, the background
concentration was not included in the calculation of the EDO.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 36
5.3 Effluent Discharge Objectives
Substances of concern for which an EDO was developed are listed in Table 5.1 below with the
associated EQO, maximum measured effluent concentration, and the associated EDO.
Table 5.1 Effluent Discharge Objectives at Assumed Average Daily Flow
Parameter
Maximum
Wastewater
Concentration
Background Selected
EQO Source Dilution
Factor EDO
CBOD (mg/L) 740 <5.0 25 WSER - 25
TN (mg/L) 14 0.2 1 CGF,
Marine 512 412
Total NH3-N (mg/L) 40 <0.05 2.7 USEPA
Saltwater 512 1382
Unionized NH3 (mg/L) 0.12 <0.0007 1.25 WSER - 1.25
TP (mg/L) 2.3 0.035 0.1 CGF,
Marine 512 34
Total Residual
Chlorine (mg/L) NM NM 0.02 WSER - 0.02
Total Suspended
Solids (mg/L) 1400 32 25 WSER - 25
E. coli (shellfish)(1)
(MPN/ 100mL) >240,000 69 14 CSSP 3,333 See
Discussion
E. coli (Primary
Contact)(2) (MPN/
100mL)
>240,000 69 200 HC Primary
Contact 20,000 2,620,069
E. coli (Secondary
Contact) (MPN/
100mL)
>240,000 69 1000
HC
Secondary
Contact
512 476,741
Notes:
(1) Dilution at closure zone boundary of 3,333:1.
(2) Dilution at beach of 20,000:1.
Based on the EDOs calculated above, sample results for the following parameters exceeded the EDO
in at least one wastewater sample:
• CBOD5;
• TSS; and
• E. coli.
In terms of an EDO for E. coli for the protection of molluscan shellfish, an EDO could not be
calculated because the measured background concentration was greater than the EQO. The
average measured background concentration for E. coli was 69 E. coli/100mL compared to an EQO
of 14 E. coli/100mL. These background samples were collected from shore and may not be
representative of the actual ambient concentration of E. coli in the area. Therefore, rather than
calculating an EDO using the EQO and background concentration, the concentration in the discharge
will be assumed to be equal to 200 E. coli/100 mL which is the typical design value for UV systems,
and the maximum background concentration that would result in a limit of 14 E. coli/100 mL at the
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 37
edge of the closure zone will be calculated. With a dilution of 3333:1, a concentration of 200 E.
coli/100 mL in the discharge, and an EQO of 14 E. coli/100 mL, the ambient background
concentration would have to be less than or equal to 13.9 E. coli/ 100mL.
The CBOD and TSS concentrations will meet the EDOs at the discharge of the new WWTP through
treatment.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 38
CHAPTER 6 COMPLIANCE MONITORING
The Standard Method utilizes the results of the ERA to recommend parameters for compliance
monitoring according to the following protocol:
• The WSER requirements for TSS, CBOD and unionized ammonia must be monitored to
ensure they are continuously being achieved. Minimum monitoring frequencies are
specified in the guidelines based on the size of the facility. Monitoring of these
substances cannot be reduced or eliminated;
• Nutrients, such as phosphorus and ammonia, and pathogens for which an EDO was
developed should be included in the monitoring program with the same sampling
frequency as TSS and CBOD5;
• For additional substances, the guidelines require that all substances with average effluent
values over 80% of the EDO be monitored;
• If monitoring results for the additional substances are consistently below 80% of the EDO,
the monitoring frequency can be reduced;
• If average monitoring results subsequently exceed 80% of the EDO, monitoring frequency
must return to the initial monitoring frequency; and
• If monitoring results are below 80% of the EDO for at least 20 consecutive samples spread
over a period of at least one-year, monitoring for that substance can be eliminated.
Although the Standard Method results in recommending parameters for compliance monitoring, the
provincial regulator ultimately stipulates the compliance monitoring requirements as part of the
Approvals to Operate. In New Brunswick, the New Brunswick Department of Environment and Local
Government has been using the results of the ERA to update the compliance monitoring program
listed in the Approval to operate when the existing Approvals expire. At this time, it is premature to
use the results of this ERA to provide recommendations on parameters to monitor for compliance,
as the purpose of this ERA was to provide design criteria for design of a new WWTP.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 39
CHAPTER 7 REFERENCES
ASA Consulting Limited (1994). “Industrial Cape Breton Receiving Water Study, Phase II”. Prepared
for The Town of Glace Bay.
CBCL Limited (2005). Dominion Beach Sewer Study. Prepared for CBRM.
CCME (2008). Technical Supplement 3. Canada-wide Strategy for the Management of Municipal
Wastewater Effluent. Standard Method and Contracting Provisions for the Environmental Risk
Assessment.
CCME (2007). Canadian Guidance Framework for the Management of Nutrients in Nearshore
Marine Systems Scientific Supporting Document.
CCME Canadian Environmental Quality Guidelines Summary Table. Water Quality Guidelines for the
Protection of Aquatic Life.
Environment Canada (2006). Atlantic Canada Wastewater Guidelines Manual for Collection,
Treatment, and Disposal
Environment Canada (1999). Canadian Environmental Protection Act Priority Substances List II –
Supporting document for Ammonia in the Aquatic Environment. DRAFT –August 31, 1999.
Fisheries Act. Wastewater Systems Effluent Regulations. SOR/2012-139.
Fisher et al. (1979). Mixing in Inland and Coastal Waters. Academic Press, London.
Health Canada (2012). Guidelines for Canadian Recreational Water Quality. Retrieved from:
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ewh-semt/pubs/water-eau/guide_water-2012-guide_eau/index-eng.php
NB Department of Environment & Local Government, (2012). Memo
Thomann, Robert V. and Mueller, John A. (1987). Principles of Surface Water Quality Modeling and
Control.
USEPA. National Recommended Water Quality Criteria for Saltwater. Retrieved from:
http://water.epa.gov/scitech/swguidance/standards/criteria/current/index.cfm
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Port Morien WWTP ERA 40
Prepared by: Reviewed by:
Holly Sampson, M.A.Sc., P.Eng. Karen March, M.Sc.
Intermediate Chemical Engineer Environmental Scientist
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Appendices
APPENDIX A
Laboratory Certificates
HEJV Port Morien Wastewater System Pre‐Design Summary Report Appendices
APPENDIX D
Port Morien Wastewater Treatment
Facility Site Geotechnical Reviews
301 Alexandra Street, Sydney, NS B1S 2E8
t: 902.562.2394 f: 902.564.5660 www.exp.com
October 23, 2018 SYD-00245234-A0/60.2
Mr. Terry Boutilier
Dillon Consulting Limited
275 Charlotte Street
Sydney, NS B1P 1C6
Re: Wastewater Treatment Plant Geotechnical Desktop Study
Port Morien Site
Dear Mr. Boutilier:
It is the pleasure of EXP Services Inc. (EXP) to provide Dillon Consulting Limited (Dillon) with this letter
report summarizing the preliminary review completed by EXP on the potential site for the
construction of a wastewater treatment facility in Port Morien, Nova Scotia.
Background
A geotechnical desktop study is an essential tool used by engineers to identify and gather as much
information as possible pertaining to the probable ground conditions at a proposed construction site
without commissioning an intrusive ground investigation. The information obtained from the desktop
study will identify potential problems, hazards and/or constraints associated with the probable ground
conditions in the proposed area of construction, as well as provide geotechnical recommendations for
new construction activities. When a walkover survey is completed in conjunction with the desktop
study it will allow engineers to refine and enhance their understanding of each of the sites in relation
to the topography, earth exposures, drainage conditions, etc. When completed together (the desktop
study and the walkover survey), the findings will provide invaluable information in the early stages of
the design at a negligible cost. It is the intent of the desktop study and walkover survey not only to look
at the site, but also at its surroundings. Noted below are the key findings to be reported in any desktop
study and walkover assessment:
• site topography;
• geology (surficial ground cover, probable overburden soil and bedrock type);
• geotechnical problems and parameters;
• previous land use (aerial photographs);
Dillon Consulting Limited
Wastewater Treatment Plant Geotechnical Desktop Study – Port Morien Site
SYD-00245234-A0
October 23, 2018
2
M:\SYD-00245234-A0\60 Project Execution\60.2 Reports\Port Morien\PortMorien_Site.docx
• underground/surface mining activities; and
• proposed supplemental ground investigation methods (test pits and/or boreholes).
Subject Site Description and Topography
The proposed site for the new wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) is located at a vacant lot off of
Birch Grove Road in Port Morien, Nova Scotia and is identified by Property Identification Number (PID)
15524945. The subject property is relatively level, but slightly sloped towards the southeast. The
property is surrounded by densely wooded and marshy areas to the north, east and west and
residential buildings and Birch Grove Road to the south. Figure 1 depicted below outlines the proposed
location of the site.
Figure 1: Proposed location of the new WWTP in Port Morien.
Published Geological Mapping (Surficial and Bedrock)
Review of the surficial geological mapping of the study area is found to be on a boundary between two
types of surficial cover. The southern portion of the site is underlain by a layer of till that is generally
comprised of a stony, sandy matrix material with varying amounts of cobbles and boulders and can vary
in thickness from 2 to 20 metres. Typically, these materials were released from the base of ice sheets
during the melting process of the ice sheet. The northern portion of the site is covered by rolling
forested bedrock terrain overlain by thin to discontinuous veneers of till. Areas of glacier erosion and/or
non-deposition may be encountered.
A review of the existing bedrock mapping for the area indicates that the site is underlain by materials
from the late carboniferous period, which are identified in this area as material from the Sydney Mines
Formations of the Morien Group. These formations are comprised of fluvial and lacustrine mudstone,
shale, siltstone, limestone and coal.
Dillon Consulting Limited
Wastewater Treatment Plant Geotechnical Desktop Study – Port Morien Site
SYD-00245234-A0
October 23, 2018
3
M:\SYD-00245234-A0\60 Project Execution\60.2 Reports\Port Morien\PortMorien_Site.docx
A review of historical mapping and online reference documents indicated that mining activities have
been carried out extensively to the area approximately 100 metres south-southwest of the proposed
construction area. These workings were the standard room and pillar coal extraction process. It should
be noted that pillars may have been mined at some point. Mapping indicates that the site is north
(approximately 800 metres) of the Tunnelshed Seam outcroppings.
Existing Ground Conditions
At the time of the investigation, the site was primarily covered in either marshy boggy areas or dense
wooded areas. The underlying bedrock and till materials were not observed during the site visit.
However, the till should provide satisfactory bearing stratum for the support of shallow foundations
with bearing capacities between 150 and 200 kPa. The underlying bedrock would provide a higher
capacity for allowable bearing.
Geotechnical Problems and Parameters
Summarized below are the key geotechnical problems of the site.
• The area to the south-southwest of the site was undermined due to historical coal mining
activities and there is a potential for undocumented bootleg pits/mines in the subject area.
• There is the potential for a layer of limestone to be present underlying the surficial ground and
alternating layers of bedrock below the site. Limestone is water soluble and has the potential
to develop karsts voids (sinkholes).
• It is anticipated that the overburden soil will be in a very moist to wet condition near the
surface, in particular near the marshy/boggy areas. This will create some problems during site
preparation and construction. A Surficial and Groundwater Control Plan should be developed
for the site.
Previous Land Use
Aerial photographs from 1931 to 2018 have been reviewed and summarized below.
• An aerial photograph taken in 1931 depicts the site void of any structures. Several small
buildings are visible along Birch Grove Road to the south of the site. The area is covered in low
lying shrubs, marshy areas and densely forested areas.
• Aerial photographs taken in 1947 and 2018 depict no change to the site since 1931. The
surrounding properties show evidence of increased development.
Proposed Supplemental Ground Investigation Methods
It is also recommended that a preliminary geotechnical investigation (land based drilling program) be
completed at the site to verify the presence or absence of authorized and/or bootleg mining activities
undertaken in these areas, as well as the potential of future subsidence that could impact structures
constructed on the site.
Dillon Consulting Limited
Wastewater Treatment Plant Geotechnical Desktop Study – Port Morien Site
SYD-00245234-A0
October 23, 2018
4
M:\SYD-00245234-A0\60 Project Execution\60.2 Reports\Port Morien\PortMorien_Site.docx
Ultimately, the goal of the supplemental geotechnical ground investigation is to collect pertinent
information pertaining to the subsurface conditions within the footprint of the proposed new facility.
This information will then be used to develop geotechnical recommendations for use in the design and
construction of the new facility.
Borehole locations should be selected based upon the location of buried infrastructure (sewer, water,
electrical and fiber optic lines); the required distance needed from overhead power lines to
accommodate drilling operations; and to provide adequate coverage of the site. It is proposed that
representative soil samples be collected continually throughout the overburden material of each of the
three boreholes advanced at each site. Additionally, it is recommended that during the investigation
samples of the bedrock should be collected continuously to a depth of at least 30.5 metres or more,
depending upon the elevation to underground mine working within the subject area, in two of the
three boreholes. The intent of the bedrock coring is to:
• verify the presence or absence of underground mine workings (both authorized commercial
activities and/or bootleg pits).
• increase the odds of advancing the borehole through the roof of any mine working (to
determine the potential void space) and not into a supporting pillar.
• accurately characterize the bedrock for design of either driven or drilled piles, if needed.
It is recommended that the third borehole be terminated either at 12 metres depth below ground
surface or once refusal on assumed bedrock is encountered (whichever comes first). It should be noted
that if pillar extraction took place, fractures will likely extend 20 metres above mine workings. If this is
the case, drill return water may be lost and rock wedges may be encountered. This will inhibit coring
and an alternative method of drilling through fractured rock may have to be pursued.
A Geotechnical Engineer should oversee the advancement of each of the boreholes. A CME 55 track
mounted geotechnical drill rig (or equivalent), equipped with bedrock coring equipment and a two man
crew (driller and helper), should be used to advance each of the boreholes. Representative soil samples
should be attained from a 50 mm diameter standard split spoon sampler during Standard Penetrating
Tests (SPT) conducted ahead of the casing and/or auger equipment. A preliminary assessment of each
recovered sample should be completed for particle size, density, moisture content and color. The SPT
should continue until refusal or contact with assumed bedrock. Bedrock should be confirmed through
coring of the material using coring equipment and drill casing. Each core sample should be removed
from the core barrel and placed into core boxes for identification.
Upon completion of the intrusive portion of the program, all boreholes are to be plugged (at various
depths within the borehole) using a bentonite plug and backfilled to grade using silica sand. It should
be noted that continuous grouting (with neat cement and/or bentonite) may be required to backfill the
boreholes to grade. The continuous grouting will protect water supplies from contamination sources;
it can prevent the movement of water between aquifers; and prevent and stabilize the water soluble
bedrock that may be present on the site. Following the installation and backfilling activities, the location
Dillon Consulting Limited
Wastewater Treatment Plant Geotechnical Desktop Study – Port Morien Site
SYD-00245234-A0
October 23, 2018
5
M:\SYD-00245234-A0\60 Project Execution\60.2 Reports\Port Morien\PortMorien_Site.docx
and elevations are to be determined using Real Time Kinematic (RTK) survey equipment in the AST 77
coordinate system.
This letter report is prepared for the Port Morien site. Should you have any questions or concerns,
please contact John Buffett or Gary Landry at 902.562.2394.
Sincerely, Sincerely,
John Buffett, P.Eng., B.Sc., RSO Gary Landry, P.Eng., B.Sc.
Project Engineer Project Manager
EXP Services Inc.
Dillon Consulting Limited
Geotechnical Investigation – WWTP Port Morien
Type of Document:
Final (Revision 1)
Project Name:
Seven Wastewater Treatment Plant Geotechnical Desktop Study
and Investigations
Project Number:
SYD-00245234-A0
Prepared By:
John Buffett, B.Sc., P.Eng., RSO
Jamie Harper, P.Eng, ARSO
Reviewed By:
Gary Landry, B.Sc., P.Eng.
EXP Services Inc.
301 Alexandra Street
Sydney, NS B1S 2E8
Canada
T: +1.902.562.2394
F: +1.902.564.5660
www.exp.com
Date Submitted:
May 2019
Geotechnical Investigation – WWTP Port Morien
Dillon Consulting Limited
Type of Document:
Final (Revision 1)
Project Name:
Seven Wastewater Treatment Plant Geotechnical Desktop Study and Investigation
Project Number:
SYD-00245234-A0
Prepared By:
John Buffett, P.Eng., B.Sc., RSO
Jamie Harper, P.Eng., ARSO
Reviewed By:
Gary Landry, P.Eng., B.Sc.
EXP Services Inc.
301 Alexandra Street, Suite A
Sydney, Nova Scotia B1S 2E8
Canada
T: +1.902.562.2394
F: +1.902.564.5660
www.exp.com
Date Submitted:
2019-05-15
Dillon Consulting Limited
Geotechnical Investigation – WWTP Port Morien
SYD-00245234-A0
May 15, 2019
i
Legal Notification
This report was prepared by EXP Services Inc. for the account of Dillon Consulting Limited.
Any use which a third party makes of this report, or any reliance on or decisions to be made based
on it, are the responsibility of such third parties. EXP Services Inc. accepts no responsibility for
damages, if any, suffered by any third party as a result of decisions made or actions based on
this report.
EXP Quality System Checks
Project No.: SYD-00245234-A0 Date: May 15, 2019
Type of Document: Final Revision No.: 1
Prepared By: John Buffett, B.Sc., P.Eng., RSO
Jamie Harper, P.Eng., ARSO
Reviewed By: Gary Landry, B.Sc., P.Eng.
Dillon Consulting Limited
Geotechnical Investigation – WWTP Port Morien
SYD-00245234-A0
May 15, 2019
TOC-i
Table of Contents
1 Introduction ..............................................................................................................................1
2 Site Description .........................................................................................................................1
3 Field Work.................................................................................................................................2
4 Surface and Sub-Surface Conditions...........................................................................................4
4.1 Summary of Conditions.....................................................................................................................4
4.2 Organics ............................................................................................................................................4
4.3 Glacial Till..........................................................................................................................................4
4.4 Bedrock.............................................................................................................................................4
4.5 Groundwater and Surface Water......................................................................................................5
4.6 Geological Mapping ..........................................................................................................................5
5 Discussion and Recommendations.............................................................................................5
5.1 Site Development..............................................................................................................................6
5.2 Excavations........................................................................................................................................7
5.3 Geotechnical Parameters..................................................................................................................7
5.4 Structural Fill.....................................................................................................................................8
6 Limitations.................................................................................................................................9
Appendix 1 Materials Testing Results
Appendix 2 Borehole Logs
List of Tables Page No.
Table 1 Summary of Borehole Locations and Ground Surface Elevations 3
Table 2 Summary of Laboratory Testing Results 3
Table 3 Summary of Sub-Surface Stratigraphy 4
Table 4 Recommended Geotechnical Parameters for Retaining Structures 8
List of Figures Page No.
Figure 1 Proposed Locations of the New WWTP in Port Morien, Nova Scotia 1
Figure 2 Borehole Locations and Ground Surface Elevation 2
Dillon Consulting Limited
Geotechnical Investigation – WWTP Port Morien
SYD-00245234-A0
May 15, 2019
1
1 Introduction
EXP Services Inc. (EXP) was retained by Dillon Consulting Limited (Dillon) to carry out a geotechnical
investigation for the construction of a new wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) at the proposed site
in Port Morien, Nova Scotia.
Ultimately, the goal of this project was to provide information pertaining to the sub-surface conditions
in the vicinity of the proposed facility. This information was used to develop geotechnical
recommendations for use in the design and construction of the new facility. A geotechnical desktop
study of the site was completed by EXP in October 2018. Based on the information obtained from the
study, a preliminary geotechnical drilling program was recommended in order to verify the presence
or absence of authorized and/or bootleg mining activities undertaken in the proposed subject area,
as well as the potential of future subsidence that could impact structures proposed to be constructed
on the site. The scope of the project included the following components.
Assess the subsurface soil conditions in three boreholes.
Characterize native soils and bedrock within the proposed development footprint.
Determine the ground elevations and locations at each borehole location.
Collect representative soil and bedrock samples for laboratory testing.
Prepare a geotechnical report, including borehole logs and geotechnical recommendations
for design.
2 Site Description
The proposed site for the new WWTP is located on a vacant lot off of Birch Grove Road in Port Morien,
Nova Scotia and is identified by Property Identification Number (PID) 15524945. The subject property
is relatively level, but slightly sloped towards the southeast. The property is surrounded by densely
wooded and marshy areas to the north, east and west, and residential buildings and Birch Grove Road
to the south. Figure 1 outlines the proposed location of the site.
Figure 1: Proposed Locations of the New WWTP in Port Morien, Nova Scotia
Dillon Consulting Limited
Geotechnical Investigation – WWTP Port Morien
SYD-00245234-A0
May 15, 2019
2
3 Field Work
The field work took place between 14 and 16 January 2019. The geotechnical investigation consisted
of three boreholes at the proposed site. The investigation was carried out using a CME 75 track-
mounted drill rig, supplied and operated by 692691 NB Inc. O/A Lantech Drilling (2016) out of their
operation in Moncton, New Brunswick.
Borehole locations were selected to provide adequate coverage of the site. The borehole locations
were adjusted slightly in the field to avoid marshy and/or ponded water areas. EXP understands that
minor adjustments to the WWTP locations may occur as plans are finalized.
The boreholes were advanced using casing and coring equipment. Representative soil samples were
attained continuously from the 50 mm diameter split spoon sampler during Standard Penetration
Tests (SPTs) conducted ahead of the casing equipment. A preliminary assessment of particle size,
density, moisture and colour was recorded for each soil sample. Rock coring was conducted using HQ
sized (63.5 mm diameter) coring equipment and drill casing. Bedrock was collected continuously in
each of the boreholes to a depth of between 10.9 and 12.7 metres below existing grade.
All boreholes were backfilled to the existing surface grade to prevent possible tripping hazards. Sand
and bentonite were used for backfilling to mitigate the potential for surface waters to flow into the
groundwater system at the borehole locations.
The general site locations and the locations of the boreholes are shown on Figure 2.
Figure 2: Borehole Locations and Ground Surface Elevations
Dillon Consulting Limited
Geotechnical Investigation – WWTP Port Morien
SYD-00245234-A0
May 15, 2019
3
The borehole location information and ground surface elevations are summarized in Table 1;
coordinates are referenced to the NAD83 (CSRS 2010) System.
Table 1: Summary of Borehole Locations and Ground Surface Elevations
Borehole Location Northing (m)Easting (m)Elevation (m)
BH#1 5111703 24624759 24.5
BH#2 5111768 24624712 25.0
BH#3 5111733 24624662 25.3
m – metres
Recovered samples from the field investigation were reviewed in the laboratory by an EXP Engineer
to confirm soil boundaries and descriptions. Representative samples from different soil strata were
selected for laboratory analysis. The following tests were carried out:
Moisture Content testing was conducted on five soil samples;
Gradational Analysis testing was conducted on five soil samples to classify soil strata;
Atterberg Limits testing was conducted on one sample; and
Compressive Strength testing was conducted on four core samples.
The results of all geotechnical laboratory tests are summarized in Table 2. Copies of all laboratory
testing plots and detailed test sheets have been included in Appendix 1.
Table 2: Summary of Laboratory Testing Results
Borehole
Location
Split Spoon
ID
Percent
Gravel
Percent
Sand Percent Fines Moisture Content
(%)
BH#1 SS#3 29.8 41.0 29.1 11.0
BH#1 SS#5 34.1 46.1 19.8 13.0
BH#2 SS#5 32.3 33.3 34.4 10.1
BH#2 SS#6 17.4 25.5 57.1 14.5
BH#5 SS#5 28.0 47.6 24.4 12.1
Borehole
Location
Split Spoon
ID Liquid Limit Plastic
Limit Plastic Index Soil Symbol
BH#2 SS#5 26 22 4 ML (Silt)
Borehole
Location Rock Core ID Depth Below Grade
(m)
Load
(kN)
Compressive
Strength
(MPa)
BH#1 RC#9 6.4 117.9 37.2
BH#2 RC#7 5.5 88.8 28.0
BH#2 RC#10 10.9 87.3 27.6
BH#3 RC#13 11.1 245.8 77.6
Dillon Consulting Limited
Geotechnical Investigation – WWTP Port Morien
SYD-00245234-A0
May 15, 2019
4
4 Surface and Sub-Surface Conditions
4.1 Summary of Conditions
The general stratigraphy encountered on the sites included the following:
Organics
Glacial Till
Sedimentary Bedrock
A summary of the thicknesses of the various strata encountered during the investigation is provided
in Table 3. Detailed borehole logs are provided in Appendix 2 and summary descriptions of the soil
are given below in subsequent sections.
Table 3: Summary of Sub-Surface Stratigraphy
Borehole ID Thickness of Organics
(m)
Thickness of Till
(m)
Elevation to Bedrock
(m)
BH#1 0.3 3.2 21.1
BH#2 0.3 4.7 20.0
BH#3 0.3 4.0 21.0
4.2 Organics
A layer of organic topsoil material was encountered in all the boreholes drilled at the site. Visually the
organic material was described as ‘Silty SAND with Organics (wood, rootmat, roots, moss)’. The
organic layer was found to be in very loose state of relative density, very wet to saturated in terms of
moisture content, and black in colour. It should be noted that varying amounts of cobbles were
observed within the material.
4.3 Glacial Till
A layer of Glacial Till was found in all the boreholes drilled at the site. Visually the till material was
described as being a ‘Silt SAND and GRAVEL with trace cobbles’. Under the Unified Soil Classification
System (USCS) the glacial till was classified as ‘Silty SAND with GRAVEL’ (SM) for the samples tested in
Table 2.
The glacial till was found to be in a compact to very dense state of relative density, moist to wet in
terms of moisture content and brown to reddish brown in colour. It should be noted that varying
amounts of cobbles were encountered within the till materials.
4.4 Bedrock
Alternating layers of sedimentary bedrock (siltstone/sandstone/mudstone) was observed in each of
the boreholes drilled across the site. Review of the bedrock core samples indicated that the material
was slightly weathered and highly fractured in areas. However, based on Rock Quality Designation
Dillon Consulting Limited
Geotechnical Investigation – WWTP Port Morien
SYD-00245234-A0
May 15, 2019
5
(RQD), the quality of the bedrock was generally found to range from very poor to poor with some
pockets of fair to good quality bedrock. Compressive strength testing on bedrock core samples
classified the bedrock as being medium strong to strong.
4.5 Groundwater and Surface Water
Groundwater and/or surface water was encountered in each borehole installed on the site in
significant amounts. During the site investigation the groundwater was observed just at or within the
organic layer. It should be noted that groundwater conditions vary seasonally and in response to
recent precipitation events. The boreholes advanced during this investigation represent a limited
sampling of the sites. It should be noted that more substantial amounts of groundwater may be
encountered in mass excavation for construction.
4.6 Geological Mapping
Review of the surficial geological mapping of the study area found the site to be on a boundary
between two types of surficial cover. The southern portion of the site is underlain by a layer of till
generally comprised of a stony, sandy matrix material with varying amounts of cobbles and boulders
and can vary in thickness from 2 to 20 metres. Typically, these materials were released from the base
of ice sheets during the melting process of the ice sheet. The northern portion of the site is covered
by rolling forested bedrock terrain overlain by thin to discontinuous veneers of till. Areas of glacier
erosion and/or non-deposition may be encountered.
A review of the existing bedrock mapping for the area indicated that the site is underlain by materials
from the late carboniferous period, which are identified in this area as material from the Sydney Mines
Formations of the Morien Group. These formations are comprised of fluvial and lacustrine mudstone,
shale, siltstone, limestone and coal.
A review of historical mapping and online reference documents indicated that coal mining activities
of the Old Gowrie Mine (1863 to 1891) have been carried out extensively in the area approximately
100 metres south-southwest of the proposed construction area. No available records indicated that
any coal mining activities took place directly below the footprint of the proposed WWTP. These coal
mine workings involved the standard room and pillar coal extraction process. It should be noted that
pillars may have been mined at some point. Mapping indicated that the site is north (approximately
800 metres) of the Tunnelshed Seam outcroppings.
5 Discussion and Recommendations
The following geotechnical recommendations are based on the information obtained through the
advancement of three boreholes across the subject property. Given the information available at the
time of this report, the key geotechnical considerations for the development of the site include the
following.
Effluent ponds should be constructed using an engineered liner comprised of either a high-
density polyethylene (HDPE) liner system; low permeable earthen (till) liner and/or composite
Dillon Consulting Limited
Geotechnical Investigation – WWTP Port Morien
SYD-00245234-A0
May 15, 2019
6
earthen and HDPE systems to prevent the release of organic material and pathogens into the
groundwater/surface waters found on the site.
Significant volumes of groundwater and surficial water were observed during the intrusive
portion of the project. Additional care/control should be planned for during construction to
avoid either uplifting of HDPE liners, softening of the native glacial till and/or any backfill
materials to be placed on site. Careful inspection of the base of the excavations and proof
rolling with appropriately sized equipment will be important to confirm the suitability of the
bearing and low permeability material. Similarly, protection of exposed sub-grade and
compacted fill surfaces against freezing and thawing should be planned for.
The native glacial till deposits encountered at site will provide a suitable bearing stratum for
shallow foundations.
As previously stated, historical mining records indicated that extensive coal mining activities
were completed 100 metres south-southwest of the proposed construction. No available
records indicated that any coal mining activities took place directly below the footprint of the
proposed WWTP. As such, the risk for ground surface settlement due to historical mining
activities below the site is considered to be low. It should be noted that any decisions made
based on parameters outlined on the coal mine working drawings used by EXP in this
evaluation will have a relatively high degree of uncertainty for the following reasons:
there is no information available on the accuracy of the original survey completed;
paper drawings can stretch over time and change the dimensions of the working
depending on the humidity levels where the original underground coal mining maps were
stored;
there is no information on the quality of the scanners that were used by Nova Scotia
Department of Natural Resources (NSDNR) to scan the original drawings (all optical
scanners have an inherent error associated with them);
there is very limited (if any) coordinated information available on the historical records;
and
the techniques used for georeferencing is dependent on the geographic features on the
maps (i.e., roadways, watercourses, coastal feature), which can change over time.
5.1 Site Development
Any surficial rootmat, topsoil and organics should be stripped from the new WWTP footprint,
roadways and parking lot areas in order to expose the underlying native till layer. The surface of the
till should be proof rolled with a larger vibratory roller compactor (and/or equivalent) to identify any
potential soft areas. Any areas that exhibit excessive displacement should be over excavated and
backfilled with an engineered fill in compacted lifts. It is recommended that during the placement of
backfills a Geotechnical Engineer or their designate should be on-site to oversee the placement
methods used by the Contractor.
Select portions of the excavated till may be suitable for use as an engineered fill in building the sub-
grade beneath paved roads or in parking lot areas, subject to approval by the Engineer. However,
these materials can be very difficult to work with in wet or cold conditions and are not compactable
above their optimum moisture content with standard equipment.
Dillon Consulting Limited
Geotechnical Investigation – WWTP Port Morien
SYD-00245234-A0
May 15, 2019
7
It may not be possible to use vibration during construction of the sub-grade or fills until the surface
being compacted is well above the level of the groundwater. The vibratory action has the potential to
draw water towards the surface and lower the workability of the sub-grade/fill material. The level at
which vibration may be used to assist in compaction will need to be determined in the field during
compaction activities on the basis of the results of proof rolling and compaction testing. The
Geotechnical Engineer or their designate should be on-site to observe the placement and compaction
methods of fills for new construction.
Construction activities should be carried out in accordance with Nova Scotia Environment’s “Erosion
and Sedimentation Control: Handbook for Construction Site”. Due to the fine-grained nature of the
glacial till encountered during the investigation, the control of site construction water will be
important. Exposed soil surfaces will be susceptible to erosion. Hydro-seeding, the installation of sod
or other erosion control measures should be constructed on permanent excavated slopes and
stripped non-traffic areas to combat soil erosion.
The grade of the completed ground surface on-site should be sloped such that any and all surface
waters will be diverted away from the completed structure.
5.2 Excavations
If temporary excavations exceeding 1.2 metres depth are required for construction, a maximum
temporary side slopes of 1:1 (Horizontal:Vertical) should be maintained, and the excavation should
be benched, or engineered shoring installed. Flatter slopes may be required for stability if
groundwater is encountered.
The ground around excavations should be graded to prevent infiltration of surface water into the
excavations. Groundwater was encountered at shallow depth and a groundwater management plan
should be developed and implemented to keep the base of excavation dry for construction. At a
minimum, standard dewatering techniques, such as the sloping of the base of the excavation to allow
for gravity drainage to sumps for pumping operations should be planned for construction. The ground
surface around the excavation should be graded to direct the flow of any surface water away from
the excavation.
It should be noted that the native till layer is fine-grained and susceptible to softening on exposure to
wet or freeze-thaw conditions. Wherever possible, construction activities should be planned to
prevent softening of till/till-fill layer.
5.3 Geotechnical Parameters
5.3.1 Bearing Capacity
Footings founded directly on engineered fill and/or native till may be designed using a net
geotechnical bearing reaction at Serviceability Limit States (SLS) of 150 kPa. Total and differential
settlements of the structure are expected to be less than 25 mm and 15 mm, respectively, at this level
of applied bearing pressure. A factored net geotechnical bearing resistance at Ultimate Limit States
(ULS) of 200 kPa may be used. This includes a geotechnical resistance factor of 0.5. For footings on
native glacial till deposit, a minimum of a 300 mm thick layer of structural fill (150 mm or 100 mm
Dillon Consulting Limited
Geotechnical Investigation – WWTP Port Morien
SYD-00245234-A0
May 15, 2019
8
minus well graded, quarried material) should be considered below the footings. The structural fill will
provide a stable working area for footing construction. This should be reviewed during construction.
A 100 mm thick mud slab could be used as an alternative to the 300 mm thick granular layer.
Footings should be founded at least 1.2 metres below finished exterior grades for frost protection.
Alternatively, foundation depths may be reduced if an insulation detail is incorporated in the design.
EXP would be pleased to establish an insulation detail upon request.
5.3.2 Geotechnical Parameters for Retaining Structures
The recommended geotechnical parameters for design of elements acting as retaining structures are
summarized in Table 4. These parameters are given assuming that the finished surface behind
retaining structures will be horizontal, and that compacted granular fill will be used as backfill within
the zone of active pressure behind retaining structures. If different types of backfill or inclined slopes
behind structures are planned, the Geotechnical Engineer should be consulted for the appropriate
earth pressure coefficients for design.
Table 4: Recommended Geotechnical Parameters for Retaining Structures
Parameter Compacted Structural (Granular) Fill
Total Unit Weight, kN/m3 21.5
Buoyant Unit Weight, kN/m3 11.5
Effective Friction Angle, degrees 36
Coefficient of Active Earth Pressure, Ka 0.26
Coefficient of Passive Earth Pressure, Kp 3.90
Coefficient of Earth Pressure at Rest, Ko 0.4
Ultimate Friction Coefficient – concrete on granular fill 0.55
Ultimate Friction Coefficient – concrete on sound rock 0.7
Care should be taken not to damage walls when performing backfilling and compaction operations.
Compaction within 1.5 metres of retaining structures should be carried out with a walk behind
vibratory plate roller or plate tamper rather than a large vibratory drum roller.
5.3.3 Site Class for Seismic Response
We recommend that designers use a site class of C for seismic considerations, in accordance with
Table 4.1.8.4.A (Site Classification for Seismic Site Response) in the 2015 National Building Code of
Canada. Note that the site class is based on the average conditions of the ground profile in the upper
30 metres of the site. The presence of more than 3 metres of soil between bedrock and the underside
of footings precludes the use of Site Class A and B.
5.4 Structural Fill
Structural fills should consist of a well-graded, compactable granular material with less than 12% fines
and should be free of organics, soft or elongated particles and other deleterious materials. Typical
suitable structural fills for construction are consistent with Nova Scotia Transportation and
Dillon Consulting Limited
Geotechnical Investigation – WWTP Port Morien
SYD-00245234-A0
May 15, 2019
9
Infrastructure Renewal, Division 3 – Granular Materials for a Type 1, Type 2, and Fill Against Structure.
Other types of fill may be suitable for use, pending approval by the Geotechnical Engineer prior to
use.
All engineered fills should be compacted to a minimum of 98% of the Maximum Dry Density as
determined in a Standard Proctor Test (ASTM D698). The compacted lift thickness should not exceed
200 mm for fills compacted with a large vibratory drum roller or walk-behind vibratory roller. If a plate
tamper is used for compaction, the lift thickness should be reduced to 100 mm.
6 Limitations
This report has been prepared for the sole use of the Dillon Consulting Limited and their agents. The
material within reflects EXP’s best judgement in light of the information available at the time of
preparation. Any use which a third party makes of this report, or any reliance on or decision to be
made based on it, are the responsibility of such third parties. EXP accepts no responsibility for
damages, if any, suffered by any third party as a result of decisions made or actions based on this
report.
If conditions differ from those detailed on the borehole logs are noted during construction, the
engineer should be notified to allow reassessment of any design assumptions, if necessary.
Appendix 1 –
Materials Testing Results
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
#200 #100 #60 #40 #10
SAMPLE D10D30D60 %Gravel %Sand %Fines
DEPTH( m)
DEPTH( m)
BH#1
BH#1
BH#2
BH#3
Till
Till
Till
Till
SAND
fine coarse coarse
GRAVEL COBBLES
U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS
LL Cu
SILT OR CLAY medium fine
HYDROMETER U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES
P
ERC
ENT
F
INE
R
B
Y
W
EIGHT
GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION
#20 #4 3/8" 3/4" 1.5" 6"3"
PISAMPLEClassification (USCS)PLWC%Cc
BH
BH
BH#1
BH#1
BH#2
BH#3
11.0
13.0
10.1
12.1
SS - 3
SS - 5
SS - 5
SS - 5
1.5
2.7
2.9
2.7
1.5
2.7
2.9
2.7
SS - 3
SS - 5
SS - 5
SS - 5
Soil Deposit
26.0 22.2
SILTY SAND with GRAVEL SM
SILTY SAND with GRAVEL SM
SILTY SAND with GRAVEL SM
SILTY SAND with GRAVEL SM
3.8
40.6
45.5
32.8
47.0
29.1
19.8
34.4
24.4
0.081
0.186
0.120
1.58
3.10
2.11
1.75
30.3
34.7
32.8
28.6
AD
I
H
A
L
I
F
A
X
D
O
U
B
L
E
G
R
A
I
N
S
I
Z
E
D
I
S
T
R
.
I
W
R
e
v
:
5
/
2
4
/
1
2
P
O
R
T
M
O
R
I
E
N
S
I
T
E
.
G
P
J
D
A
T
A
E
N
T
R
Y
.
G
D
T
2
/
7
/
1
9
P
r
i
n
t
e
d
b
y
:
B
u
f
f
e
t
t
J
LOCATION Birch Grove Road, Port Morien
PROJECT No.SYD-00245234-A0
CLIENT Dillon Consulting Ltd.
ADI LimitedThe new identity of
t: +1.902.453.5555 | f: +1.902.453.6325
7071 Bayers Road, Suite 2002
Halifax, NS B3L 2C2
CANADA
http://www.exp.com
Appendix 2 –
Borehole Logs
Descriptive Terms - Borehole and Test Pit Logs
Grain Size Clay&Silt Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder
Compactness N, Range 0 - 4 4 - 10 10 - 30 30 - 50 >50
Soils (gravel, sand, tills)Density V. Loose Loose Compact Dense V. Dense
Consistency S, KPa < 12.5 12.5 - 25 25 - 50 50 - 100 100 - 200
(silt, clay)Consistency V. Soft Soft Firm Stiff V. Stiff
RQD Overall Quality Fracture Spacing
0 - 25 Very Poor < 50 mm Very Close
25 - 50 Poor 50 - 300 mm Close
50 - 75 Fair 0.3 - 1 m Moderate
Rock 75 - 90 Good 1 - 3 m Wide
90 - 100 Excellent > 3 m Very Wide
F M C
0.075 0.425 2.0 4.76 76.4 200
0.01 0.1 1.0 10 100 1000 (mm)
(mm)
y
Comp. Str., MPa 0.25 - 1 1 - 5 5 - 25 25 - 50 50 - 100 100 - 250 > 250
Sample Types (location to scale on log)
SS Split Spoon B Shovel (bulk)
T Shelby Tube H Carved Block
P Piston V In Situ Vane
F Auger NR No Recovery
W Wash
Rock Cores: BQ (36.5mm), NQ (47.6mm), HQ (63.5mm)
Notation and Symbols
N - N-value from standard penetration test; blows by 475 J drop hammer to advance
std. 50mm O.D. split spoon sampler 0.3m
RQD - percent of core consisting of hard, sound pieces in excess of 100mm long (excluding
machine breaks)
Recovery - sample recovery expressed as percent or length
S - shear strength, kPa PL - plastic limit, percent
Sr - shear strength, remoulded LL - liquid limit, percent
Dd - dry density, t/m3 - groundwater level
W - natural moisture content, percent - seepage
Very
Strong
Extremely
StrongDescriptionWeakExtremely
Weak
Very
Weak
Medium
Strong Strong
F M C
0.075 0.425 2.0 4.76 76.4 200
0.01 0.1 1.0 10 100 1000 (mm)
(mm)
SYMBOLS AND TERMS USED ON THE BOREHOLE AND TEST PIT RECORDS
Soil Description
Behavioral properties (i.e., plasticity, permeability) take precedence over particle gradation in
describing soils.
Terminology Describing Soil Structure
Desiccated Having visible signs of weathering by oxidation of clay minerals,
Fissured Having cracks and, hence, a blocky structure
Varved Composed of regular alternating layers of silt and clay
Stratified Composed of alternating layers of different soil type, e.g., silt and sand
Well Graded Having wide range in grain size and substantial amounts of all
Uniformly Graded Predominantly of one grain size
Terminology used for describing soil strata based upon the proportion of individual particle sizes
present:
Trace, or occasional Less than 10%
Some 10–20%
Adjective (e.g., silty or sandy)20–35%
And (e.g., silt and sand)35–50%
The standard terminology to describe cohesionless soils includes the relative density, as
determined by laboratory test or by the Standard Penetration Test “N”-value: the number of blows
of 140 pound (64 kg) hammer falling 30 inches (760 mm), required to drive a 2-inch (50.8 mm) O.D.
splitspoon sampler one foot (305 mm) into the soil.
Relative Density “N” Value Relative Density %
Very Loose <4 <15
Loose 4–10 15–35
Compact 10–30 35–65
Dense 30–50 65–85
Very Dense 50 >85
The standard terminology to describe cohesive soils includes the consistency, which is based on
undrained shear strength as measured by in-situ vane tests, penetrometer tests, unconfined
compression tests, or occasionally by standard penetration tests.
Undrained Shear Strength
Consistency kips/sq. ft. kPa “N” Value
Very Soft <0.25 <12.5 <2
Soft 0.25–.50 12.5–25 2–4
Firm 0.5–1.0 25–50 4–8
Stiff 1.0–2.0 50–100 8–15
Very Stiff 2.0–4.0 100–200 15–30
Hard >4.0 >200 >30
ORGANICS:
Silty SAND with ORGANICS
(wood, rootmat, roots, moss),
trace cobbles, very wet to
saturated, very loose (black)
TILL:
Silty SAND with GRAVEL (SM),
angular, wet, compact (brown).
BEDROCK:
Sedimentary, alternating layers of
sandstone and siltstone, thin bands
of mudstone, very poor to poor
quality, medium strong to strong,
highly fractured and weathered in
areas, horizontal fractures (grey to
red brown).
24.2
21.1
13.5
25
381
356
356
406
559
80%
100%
100%
100%
100%
0
11
18
14
27
5, 22, 50
for 100
mm
17
20
47
82
47
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
DESCRIPTION
SAMPLES
OT
H
E
R
TE
S
T
S
20 40 60 80
BOREHOLE RECORD
Unconfined Compression Test
Water Content & Atterberg Limits
Undrained Shear Strength, kPa
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Wp W Wl
24.5
DE
P
T
H
(
m
)
t: +1.902.453.5555 | f: +1.902.453.6325
7071 Bayers Road, Suite 2002
Halifax, NS, B3L 2C2
Canada
http://www.exp.com
LOCATION Birch Grove Road, Port Morien
CLIENT Dillon Consulting Ltd.
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
EL
E
V
.
(
m
)
PROJECT No.SYD-00245234-A0
BOREHOLE No.BH#1
DATUMWATER LEVELDATES of BORING Jan 16, 2019The new identity of ADI Limited
GE
O
T
E
C
H
N
I
C
A
L
L
O
G
R
e
v
:
6
/
2
7
/
1
1
P
O
R
T
M
O
R
I
E
N
S
I
T
E
.
G
P
J
D
A
T
A
E
N
T
R
Y
.
G
D
T
2
/
7
/
1
9
P
r
i
n
t
e
d
b
y
:
B
u
f
f
e
t
t
J
RemouldedField Vane Test
N-
V
A
L
U
E
OR
R
Q
D
Standard Penetration Test, blows/0.3mRE
C
O
V
E
R
Y
mm
ST
R
A
T
A
P
L
O
T
TY
P
E
NU
M
B
E
R
WA
T
E
R
L
E
V
E
L
ORGANICS:
Silty SAND with Organics (wood,
rootmat, roots, moss), trace
cobbles, very wet to saturated,
very loose (black)
TILL:
Silty SAND with GRAVEL (SM),
angular, very moist to moist,
compact to very dense (brown).
BEDROCK:
Sedimentary, alternating layers of
sandstone and siltstone, thin bands
of mudstone, poor to fair quality,
medium strong to strong, highly
fractured and weathered in areas,
horizontal fractures (grey to red
brown).
24.7
20.0
12.4
25
305
457
305
559
50
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
3
25
44
24
55
50/
2, 0, 0 ,0
43
53
37
70
65
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
DESCRIPTION
SAMPLES
OT
H
E
R
TE
S
T
S
20 40 60 80
BOREHOLE RECORD
Unconfined Compression Test
Water Content & Atterberg Limits
Undrained Shear Strength, kPa
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Wp W Wl
25.0
DE
P
T
H
(
m
)
t: +1.902.453.5555 | f: +1.902.453.6325
7071 Bayers Road, Suite 2002
Halifax, NS, B3L 2C2
Canada
http://www.exp.com
LOCATION Birch Grove Road, Port Morien
CLIENT Dillon Consulting Ltd.
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
EL
E
V
.
(
m
)
PROJECT No.SYD-00245234-A0
BOREHOLE No.BH#2
DATUMWATER LEVELDATES of BORING Jan 15, 2019The new identity of ADI Limited
GE
O
T
E
C
H
N
I
C
A
L
L
O
G
R
e
v
:
6
/
2
7
/
1
1
P
O
R
T
M
O
R
I
E
N
S
I
T
E
.
G
P
J
D
A
T
A
E
N
T
R
Y
.
G
D
T
2
/
7
/
1
9
P
r
i
n
t
e
d
b
y
:
B
u
f
f
e
t
t
J
RemouldedField Vane Test
N-
V
A
L
U
E
OR
R
Q
D
Standard Penetration Test, blows/0.3mRE
C
O
V
E
R
Y
mm
ST
R
A
T
A
P
L
O
T
TY
P
E
NU
M
B
E
R
WA
T
E
R
L
E
V
E
L
>>
ORGANICS:
Silty SAND with Organics (wood,
rootmat, roots, moss), trace
cobbles, very wet to saturated,
very loose (black)
TILL:
Silty SAND, trace gravel, moist,
loose (olive brown)
TILL:
Silty SAND with Gravel (SM),
angular, moist, compact to very
dense (reddish brown)
BEDROCK:
Sedimentary sandstone,
alternating layers of siltstone and
mudstone, very poor to fair
quality, medium strong to strong,
highly fractured and weathered in
areas (dark grey).
25.0
24.1
21.0
12.8
51
406
356
330
406
356
457
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
0
9
18
21
19
68
66
17
25
0
0
17
52
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
DESCRIPTION
SAMPLES
OT
H
E
R
TE
S
T
S
20 40 60 80
BOREHOLE RECORD
Unconfined Compression Test
Water Content & Atterberg Limits
Undrained Shear Strength, kPa
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Wp W Wl
25.3
DE
P
T
H
(
m
)
t: +1.902.453.5555 | f: +1.902.453.6325
7071 Bayers Road, Suite 2002
Halifax, NS, B3L 2C2
Canada
http://www.exp.com
LOCATION Birch Grove Road, Port Morien
CLIENT Dillon Consulting Ltd.
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
EL
E
V
.
(
m
)
PROJECT No.SYD-00245234-A0
BOREHOLE No.BH#3
DATUMWATER LEVELDATES of BORING Jan 14, 2019The new identity of ADI Limited
GE
O
T
E
C
H
N
I
C
A
L
L
O
G
R
e
v
:
6
/
2
7
/
1
1
P
O
R
T
M
O
R
I
E
N
S
I
T
E
.
G
P
J
D
A
T
A
E
N
T
R
Y
.
G
D
T
2
/
7
/
1
9
P
r
i
n
t
e
d
b
y
:
B
u
f
f
e
t
t
J
RemouldedField Vane Test
N-
V
A
L
U
E
OR
R
Q
D
Standard Penetration Test, blows/0.3mRE
C
O
V
E
R
Y
mm
ST
R
A
T
A
P
L
O
T
TY
P
E
NU
M
B
E
R
WA
T
E
R
L
E
V
E
L
HEJV Port Morien Wastewater System Pre‐Design Summary Report Appendices
APPENDIX E
Port Morien Wastewater System
Archaeological Resources Impact
Assessment
HEJV Port Morien Wastewater System Pre‐Design Summary Report Appendices
APPENDIX F
Port Morien Wastewater Treatment Facility
Site Phase 1 Environmental Assessment
187116 ●June 18, 2019
Environmental Risk Assessments & Preliminary
Design of Seven Future Wastewater Treatment
Systems in CBRM
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (Revised Draft
Report)Birch Grove Road, Port Morien, Nova Scotia
Parcel Identification Designation Number (PID No.)
15524945
Prepared by: NJWPrepared for: CBRM
Port Morien Phase I
Environmental Site
Assessment (Revised Draft
Report)
June 18, 2019 Nadine Wambolt,
B.Tech., CET
Andrew Blackmer,
M.Sc., P.Geo.
Darrin McLean, MBA,
FEC., P.Eng.
Darrin McLean, MBA,
FEC., P.Eng.
Issue or Revision Date Prepared By:Reviewed By:Issued By:
This document was prepared
for the party indicated herein.
The material and information in
the document reflects the
opinion and best judgment of
Harbour Engineering Joint
Venture (HEJV) based on the
information available at the
time of preparation. Any use of
this document or reliance on its
content by third parties is the
responsibility of the third party.
HEJV accepts no responsibility
for any damages suffered as a
result of third party use of this
document.
182402.00
275 Charlotte Street
Sydney, Nova Scotia
Canada
B1P 1C6
Tel: 902-562-9880
Fax: 902-562-9890
_________________
PHASE I ESA PORT MORIEN_REVISED DRAFT REPORT_18JUNE2019/wu
ED: 24/06/2019 10:21:00/PD: 25/06/2019 10:34:00
June 18, 2019
Cape Breton Regional Municipality
320 Esplanade
Sydney, Nova Scotia
B1P 7B9
ATTENTION: Matthew D. Viva, P.Eng.
Manager of Wastewater Operations
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (Revised Draft Report)
Birch Grove Road, Port Morien, Nova Scotia
Parcel Identification Designation Number (PID No.) 15524945
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture (HEJV) is pleased to provide you with this
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) for the property (i.e., PID No.
15524945) located on Birch Grove Road in Port Morien, Nova Scotia. Should you
have any questions or comments, please contact the undersigned at (902) 562-
9880 extension 5206.
Sincerely,
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture
Nadine J. Wambolt, CET, B.Tech.Darrin McLean, MBA, FEC., P.Eng.
Lead Assessor Project Manager
Andrew J. Blackmer, M.Sc., P.Geo.
Senior Reviewer
NJW:kme
Project No: 187116 (Dillon) and 182402.00 (CBCL)
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Phase I ESA Birch Grove Road, Port Morien PID No. 15524945 i
Contents
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................... i
CHAPTER 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Purpose .................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Background .............................................................................................................. 1
1.3 Standards and Limiting Conditions ............................................................................ 1
CHAPTER 2 Methodology ........................................................................................................... 2
2.1 Records Review ........................................................................................................ 2
2.2 Site Reconnaissance ................................................................................................. 3
2.3 Interviews ................................................................................................................ 3
CHAPTER 3 Phase I ESA Findings ................................................................................................ 4
3.1 Site Location and General Description ...................................................................... 4
3.2 Regional Geology/Hydrogeology............................................................................... 4
3.3 Chain-of-Title-Search ................................................................................................ 5
3.4 City Directories ......................................................................................................... 5
3.5 Aerial Photographs ................................................................................................... 5
3.6 Fire Insurance Plans and Inspection Reports ............................................................. 6
3.7 A.F. Church Mapping ................................................................................................ 7
3.8 Previous Environmental Reports/Client File Review .................................................. 7
3.9 Regulatory Agency and Database Files ...................................................................... 9
3.9.1 Department of Environment ......................................................................... 9
3.9.2 Environment and Climate Change Canada ..................................................... 9
3.10 Site Visit ................................................................................................................... 9
3.10.1 Site Description ........................................................................................... 9
3.10.2 Site Services and Utilities .......................................................................... 10
3.10.3 Storage Tanks ........................................................................................... 10
3.10.4 Mechanical Equipment ............................................................................. 10
3.10.5 Drains and Sumps ..................................................................................... 10
3.10.6 Special Attention Items ............................................................................. 10
3.10.6.1 Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) ................................................ 10
3.10.6.2 Lead ............................................................................................ 11
3.10.6.3 Noise .......................................................................................... 11
3.10.6.4 Magnetic Fields ........................................................................... 11
3.10.6.5 Radon ......................................................................................... 11
3.10.7 Chemical and Hazardous Materials Management ...................................... 11
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Phase I ESA Birch Grove Road, Port Morien PID No. 15524945 ii
3.10.8 Pesticides .................................................................................................. 11
3.10.9 Unidentified Substances ........................................................................... 11
3.10.10 Solid Waste Management ....................................................................... 12
3.10.11 Fill Materials ........................................................................................... 12
3.10.12 Spills, Stained Areas and Stressed Vegetation.......................................... 12
3.10.13 Pits and Lagoons ..................................................................................... 12
3.10.14 Watercourses, Ditches or Standing Water ............................................... 12
3.10.15 Air Emissions and Odours ........................................................................ 12
3.10.16 Observation of Adjoining Properties........................................................ 12
CHAPTER 4 Summary and Recommendations .......................................................................... 13
CHAPTER 5 Limitations ............................................................................................................. 14
CHAPTER 6 Closing ................................................................................................................... 15
CHAPTER 7 References ............................................................................................................. 16
Appendices
Appendix A – Figures
Appendix B – Site Photographs
Appendix C – Historical Reports
Appendix D –Regulatory Correspondence
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Phase I ESA Birch Grove Road, Port Morien PID No. 15524945 i
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The site consists of a vacant property denoted by Parcel Identification Number (PID No.) 15524945
located along the northwest side of Birch Grove Road in Port Morien, Nova Scotia. The site has an
approximate area of 41.32 acres and is designated as both “residential” and “resource” zoning based
on the Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations Property Online database (accessed February
2019). The site owner is currently registered as Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, Public
Works and Government Services Canada. The Phase I ESA is being completed prior to potential
purchase of the property and future development of a Waste Water Treatment Plant (WWTP) on the
site.
This Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) was conducted in accordance with the guidelines
and principles established by the Canadian Standard Association (CSA) Standard Z768-01 for Phase I
ESAs CSA, 2001 (updated April 2003 and reaffirmed in 2016) and included a records review, site visit,
interviews with knowledgeable persons and reporting of the findings.
The following is a summary of the findings and potential sources of environmental contamination
identified during the Phase I ESA conducted at the site and the associated recommendations:
®The site is currently and, based on available information, has historically been vacant forested
land. The former Gowrie Mines were located approximately 40 meters (m) southwest and
west of the site. Metals impacts in surface and subsurface soil, which exceeded the Canadian
Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME) and background reference concentrations
were identified on the former mine property. Guideline exceedances were reported at a
former Beehive Coke Ovens location and in multiple separate areas identified as isolated coal
fine dump areas. Based on a review of the available information, the nearest impacts to the
site consist of two isolated areas located approximately 80 m southwest and west of the site
exhibiting metals (i.e., arsenic and/or thallium) concentrations in surface soil in excess of the
CCME commercial guidelines and/or background reference concentrations. Additional areas
of impact were also identified further west and southwest of the site. It is noted that based
on the location of the former Gowrie Mine relative to the proposed WWTP location, and the
available descriptions of where metals impacts were identified on the former mine site, the
potential for impacts to extend onto the site (i.e., PID No. 15524945) is considered low;
however, testing would be required to confirm.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Phase I ESA Birch Grove Road, Port Morien PID No. 15524945 ii
®Vegetation (i.e., grass) covered mounds and construction debris (i.e., concrete, painted wood,
metal, glass) were observed on the southwest corner of the site near Birch Grove Road.
Construction debris should be removed for disposal at a licenced facility. The nature of the
mounds is unknown.
®Painted window frames were observed on the southwest portion of the site near Birch Grove
Road. It is unknown if this paint is lead containing. Testing would be required to
confirm/refute the presence of lead.
®No known pesticide application has occurred on-site. There is potential for pesticide use, as a
means of vegetation control, to have occurred southwest of the site in relation to the former
railway.
Based on the findings of this Phase I ESA, no further recommendations, other than those noted above,
are made at this time.
This report was prepared by Harbour Engineering Joint Venture (HEJV) for the sole benefit of our
client, the Cape Breton Regional Municipality (CBRM). The conclusions reflect HEJV’s judgment in light
of the information available to it at the time of preparation. Any use which a third party makes of this
report or any reliance on or decisions made based on it are the responsibilities of such third parties.
HEJV accepts no responsibilities for damages, if any, suffered by any third party as a result of decisions
made or actions based on this report.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Phase I ESA Birch Grove Road, Port Morien PID No. 15524945 1
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Purpose
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture (HEJV) has been engaged by the Cape Breton Regional Municipality
(CBRM) to conduct a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) on the property denoted by Parcel
Identification Designation Number (PID No.): 15524945 located on Birch Grove Road in Port Morien,
Nova Scotia (herein referred to as “the site” or “subject property”). The Phase I ESA is being
undertaken prior to potential purchase of the property and future development of a Waste Water
Treatment Plant (WWTP) on the site.
1.2 Background
The objective of the Phase I ESA was to assess whether sources or potential sources of contamination
are present. Contamination is defined as “the presence of a substance of concern, or a condition, in
concentrations above appropriate pre-established criteria in soil, sediment, surface water,
groundwater, air, or structures” (CSA, 2016).
To fulfill the objective of the Phase I ESA, the following scope of work was agreed to:
®Review of records that were reasonably attainable for the site and surrounding area;
®A site visit to observe the site and surrounding property (as could be viewed from the site and
surrounding public lands);
®Interviews of available persons knowledgeable with respect to past and current uses of the
site; and,
®Evaluation of the findings and reporting.
1.3 Standards and Limiting Conditions
This Phase I ESA was performed in accordance with the Phase I ESA guideline document produced by
the Canadian Standards Association (CSA Z768-01 - reaffirmed in 2016). As such, this report is based
on limited visual observations made during the site visit, interviews with available persons, a review
of available historical records, and requests for information filed with government or other regulatory
agencies. This ESA did not include sample collection, analysis or measurements, and is not intended
to be a definitive investigation of contamination or other environmental concerns at the site. It is
noted that approximately 15 centimeters (cm) of snow cover was present on the site grounds at the
time of the site visit.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Phase I ESA Birch Grove Road, Port Morien PID No. 15524945 2
CHAPTER 2 METHODOLOGY
This section describes the methods used to conduct the historical records review, site visits and
interview activities.
2.1 Records Review
The records review consisted of requesting and reviewing information available from the client,
government, public and other agencies or parties. Information was reviewed from the following
sources:
Agencies, Information, Source Documents and Publications:
®Nova Scotia Environment (NSE) Information Access and Privacy Environmental Registry;
®National Air Photo Library (NAPL) (via Environmental Risk Information Services (ERIS));
®Access Nova Scotia;
®Environment and Climate Change Canada;
®Review of a Partial Report: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment of Cape Breton
Development Corporation Properties, Cape Breton County, Nova Scotia, Group A and Group
D Properties, Rev. 1; prepared for Public Works and Government Services Canada by Neill and
Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited in January 2005 (Final).
®Review of Report: Cape Breton Development Corporation Phase II and Phase III
Environmental Site Assessment, Former Gowrie No. 2 and No. 3 Mines (G234), PID 15372220
and 15524960, Port Morien, Nova Scotia Final; prepared for Public Works and Government
Services Canada by Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited, December 2005.
®CBRM Public Works Department;
®The Beaton Institute (local archives);
®Surficial and bedrock geology mapping;
®Topographic mapping;
®Provincial Landscape Viewer (accessed online: https://nsgi.novascotia.ca/plv/)
®Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations Registry and Information Management Services;
and,
®Canadian Standard Association (CSA) Standard Z768-01 for Phase I ESAs CSA, 2001 (reaffirmed
in 2016).
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Phase I ESA Birch Grove Road, Port Morien PID No. 15524945 3
2.2 Site Reconnaissance
HEJV conducted a site visit on January 16, 2019. Activities conducted during the site visit included:
®Observation of the surrounding land at the site; and,
®Observation of the properties adjacent and nearby the site (to the extent possible) to assess
use, as could be viewed from the site and adjoining public lands.
2.3 Interviews
The interview portion of the Phase I ESA consisted of interviewing Mr. Glenn MacLeod, a former Cape
Breton Development Corporation (CBDC) employee, via phone and email. Information obtained
through the interviews has been incorporated into the following report sections.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Phase I ESA Birch Grove Road, Port Morien PID No. 15524945 4
CHAPTER 3 PHASE I ESA FINDINGS
This section presents and discusses the findings of the Phase I ESA. A summary of the significant
environmental issues that were identified is presented in Section 4.0. Report figures are presented in
Appendix A. Photographs taken during the site visit are presented in Appendix B.
3.1 Site Location and General Description
The site consists of a vacant property (i.e., PID No. 15524945) located along the northwest side of
Birch Grove Road in Port Morien, Nova Scotia. The site has an approximate area of 41.32 acres and is
designated as both “residential” and “resource” zoning based on the Service Nova Scotia and
Municipal Relations Property Online database (accessed February 2019). The site is located in a mixed
resource (forested) and residential area. The site location is illustrated on Figure 1,Appendix A.
3.2 Regional Geology/Hydrogeology
To describe the regional physiography and expected hydrogeological conditions in association with
the property, the following documents were reviewed:
®Grant, D.R., 1988: Surficial Geology, Cape Breton Island, Nova Scotia; Geological Survey of
Canada, Map 1631A, scale 1:125,000; and,
®Bujak, J.P. and Donohoe, H.V., Jr., 1980. Geological Highway Map of Nova Scotia. Atlantic
Geoscience Society, Special Publications Number 1.
The surficial geology of the south portion of the site is mapped as consisting of till, generally sandy
and stony; discontinuous veneer less than 2 meters (m) thick, with numerous undifferentiated rock
outcrops and interspersed rock areas. The central and north portions of the site are mapped as rolling
forested rock terrain with little or no till cover except in depressions, interspersed with up to 40% bare
glaciated outcrop. Bedrock geology mapping for the area indicates the site is underlain by the Morien
Group, which consists of sandstone, siltstone, shale, conglomerate and coal. The site is relatively flat,
with slight sloping to the south and southeast. The topographic gradient suggests that the regional
shallow groundwater flow direction could be to the southeast toward the Atlantic Ocean. Historical
assessment activities undertaken at the former Gowrie Mine site, located west and southwest of the
site, also indicated groundwater flow was interpreted to be to the southeast.
The local shallow groundwater flow direction below the site may vary from the regional context and
be influenced by underground structures and utilities, which may be present in the vicinity of the site.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Phase I ESA Birch Grove Road, Port Morien PID No. 15524945 5
Such features are typically back-filled with coarse grain materials, which may provide a more
permeable conduit for groundwater flow when compared to the lower permeability of the native
soils.
3.3 Chain-of-Title-Search
A chain-of-title search for the site was not requested as part of this assessment. Historical information
was derived from aerial photography and additional sources as noted. Review of available information
on Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations Registry and Information Management Services
(accessed February 2019) included the following:
®An indenture, dated March 1974, between grantors Julia MacAulay and John Alexander
MacAulay and Grantee Cape Breton Development Corporation;
®A deed of conveyance, dated December 2009, between grantor Cape Breton Development
Corporation and grantee DARR (Cape Breton) Limited; and,
®A deed of conveyance, dated March 2012, between grantor DARR (Cape Breton) Limited and
grantee Enterprise Cape Breton Corporation.
3.4 City Directories
City directories were not available through the Beaton Institute (local archives) for the site or
surrounding properties.
3.5 Aerial Photographs
Aerial photographs obtained from NAPL (via ERIS) included photographs for the years 1931, 1947,
1953, 1963, 1975, 1983 and 1993. Google Earth images for 2002, 2003, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2017
and 2018 were also reviewed. A summary of the review of the available aerial photographs and images
is presented in the following table. It is noted that the scale and resolution of the photographs varied
and did not always allow for a detailed evaluation of the surface conditions at the site or adjacent
properties.
Aerial Photograph Review Summary
Year Observations
1931 AND 1947 The site is visible as undeveloped forested land.A water course is visible intersecting
the site. In the 1947 aerial photograph a clearing is visible on what appears to be the
southeast corner of the site. Adjoining property to the north and east is visible as
undeveloped forested land. A railway track is visible stopping just before the west
site boundary (Gowrie Mines). A building is visible southwest of the site, adjacent to
the railway track. Railway tracks and remnants of former Beehive Coke Ovens
(Gowrie Mines) are visible west and southwest of the site. Birch Grove Road is visible
immediately southeast and south of the site. Railway tracks are visible southwest of
the site, across Birch Grove Road (Gowrie Mines). Eleven buildings, which appear to
be residential dwellings, and numerous smaller unidentifiable structures/objects, are
visible south of the site along Birch Grove Road and Gowrie Street (Gowrie Street is
located southeast of Birch Grove Road). A clearing (possibly a field), several
additional buildings and railway tracks are visible further south. A building is also
visible southeast of the site, on the southeast side of Birch Grove Road.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Phase I ESA Birch Grove Road, Port Morien PID No. 15524945 6
Aerial Photograph Review Summary
Year Observations
1953 The site remains visible as undeveloped forested land.What appears to be a branch
of railway track, crossing Birch Grove Road and continuing southeast, is visible
southwest of the site. The clearing, on what appeared to be the southeast corner of
the site, in the 1947 aerial photograph is no longer visible. Two of the residential
buildings previously visible south of the site along Birch Grove Road and Gowrie
Street have been removed along with many (approximately half) of the associated
structures/objects. The building formerly visible southeast of the site, across Birch
Grove Road, has been removed. What appears to be a commercial building (school)
is now visible further southeast.
1963 The site remains visible as undeveloped forested land.Railway tracks previously
visible at the southwest site boundary appear to have been removed, with the track
crossing Birch Grove Road remaining. The building previously visible at near the west
site boundary, adjacent to the railway tracks, has been removed. An oval shaped
track is visible west and southwest of the site and north of the Beehive Coke Oven
remnants. What appears to be a residence is visible immediately northeast of the
northeast corner of the site. A second building (possible residence) is also visible
further northeast. Three more of the residential buildings previously visible south of
the site along Birch Grove Road and Gowrie Street have been removed. What
appears to be one new residence and one new outer building are also visible. A man
made pond is visible southwest of the site, across Birch Grove Road. The commercial
building (school) further southeast appears to have been expanded.
1975 What appears to be an access road, running southwest to northeast, is visible running
across the southwest portion of the site near Birch Grove Road. The road extends
from the oval shaped track further west and southwest of the site. Railway tracks are
now visible in the center of the oval shaped road (north of the Beehive Coke Oven
remnants). One of the residences and outer buildings visible in the 1963 aerial
photograph south of the site, along Birch Grove Road and Gowrie Street, have been
removed. A trailer is now visible south of the site along Birch Grove Road. What
appears to be an elevated area is now visible on the commercial property (school)
located further southeast of the site, across Birch Grove Road.
1983 AND 1993 An access road (possible ATV trail) is visible running north to south (from Birch Grove
Road) on-site and ending in a small clearing (the clearing appears to be located on-
site in the area of the proposed WWTP location). Although the tracks and oval shaped
road remain visible to the west and southwest, they appear to have vegetation cover.
A second oval shaped track is visible further west. Further redevelopment has
occurred along Birch Grove Road and Gowrie Street, with property use remaining
residential. The elevated area previously visible on the commercial property (school)
located further southeast of the site, across Birch Grove Road, has been removed.
2002 AND 2003 In the 2002 image, the access road running north to south and the clearing are no
longer visible on-site.
2010, 2011,
2012, 2013,
2017 and 2018
The oval shaped road and track visible west and southwest of the site, and the second
oval shaped track is visible further west of the site, are covered by heavier
vegetation. The surrounding area appears much as it does today.
3.6 Fire Insurance Plans and Inspection Reports
No fire insurance plans of inspection reports were available for the site.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Phase I ESA Birch Grove Road, Port Morien PID No. 15524945 7
3.7 A.F. Church Mapping
A.F. Church Mapping, dated March 1864, was reviewed for the site. The site mapped as Gowrie Mines.
3.8 Previous Environmental Reports/Client File Review
Mr. MacLeod provided HEJV with portions (i.e., the full reports, including the majority of report
appendices, were not available) of the below historical reports for review. Subsequently, Public
Services and Procurement Canada provided the client with the full below noted Phase II and Phase III
ESA report. Copies of the reports (as provided for review) are presented in Appendix C.
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment of Cape Breton Development Corporation Properties, Cape
Breton County, Nova Scotia, Group A and Group D Properties, Rev. 1; prepared for Public Works and
Government Services Canada by Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited; January 2005 (Final).
In association with the site closure program for the former Cape Breton Coal Fields, Neil and Gunter
completed a Phase I ESA on six CBDC properties comprised of twenty individual PID Nos., one of which
is the site (i.e., PID No. 15524945). In the report, the site, identified as Port Morien Undeveloped (PID
No. 15524945), was assessed in conjunction with Gowrie #4, Morien Branch Railway and Gowrie #2
and #3 Mine properties. Gowrie #4 (PID Nos. 15808181, 15808165, 15808132, 15808124, 15808140,
15808173, 15808157) was located approximately 1 kilometer (km) west of the site. Due to the
distance from the site, historical mining activities in this location are not expected to result in an
environmental concern for the site. A summary of the Neill and Gunter 2005 Phase I ESA findings that
are relevant to the current assessment site as follows:
®The report describes the site (i.e., PID No. 15524945), as consisting of undeveloped woodland.
Review of available aerial photographs indicated no evidence of buildings or structures to
have been present. Scrap metal and wood debris was observed on the south portion of the
site. No environmental concerns related to this waste were identified for the site. Adjoining
properties to the north, northeast, east and northwest of the site consisted of woodland; to
the southeast and south of the site is described as woodland and residential; to the west of
the site is described as woodland and CBDC property; and to the southwest of the site is
described as Gowrie #2 and #3 Mine, coke ovens (potential environmental concern relative
to the site).
®Morien Branch Railway (former PID No. 15758253, see Figure 2,Appendix A): located
approximately 0.5 km southwest of the site and consisting of an overgrown rail bed right-of-
way that ran between Gowrie #2 and Gowrie #3. Visible coal fines were observed along the
rail bed at the time of the Neil and Gunter site visit. A Phase II ESA was recommended to
assess for potential metals and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) impacts to soil from
coal fines observed on this property; and,
®Gowrie #2 and #3 Mine (located approximately 40 m west and southwest of the site) (former
PID Nos. 15524960 and 15372220, currently PID Nos. 15886070 and 15372220, see Figure 2,
Appendix A). Commercial coal mining ceased at the Gowrie mines in 1897. A review of
“Dominion Coal Company Ltd., District No. 2 Insurance Plan of Buildings, Port Morien,
Blockhouse and Washplant” gave an indication of buildings that appeared to be located on
these properties during operation and included an engine and boiler house, a forge, a fuel
storage shed, locomotive shed, patent fuel works, twelve Beehive Coke Ovens and a briquette
plant. Remnants of the twelve Beehive Coke Ovens, which were located just north of Birch
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Phase I ESA Birch Grove Road, Port Morien PID No. 15524945 8
Grove Road, were observed at the time of the Phase I ESA. CBDC personnel indicated that the
Beehive Coking Ovens were destroyed and buried in 2001 due to safety concerns. Two former
mine shafts (#2 Mine Site and Odiorne Shaft) were located on PID No. 15372220. When
commercial mining ceased a replica train station was constructed in the area of the Odiorne
Shaft mine site. The tourist site included the replica train station, a miniature golf course north
of Birch Grove Road, an oval shaped race track (north of the golf course) and a hockey rink
built on a pond/reservoir south of Birch Grove Road. The replica train station was since
demolished and the miniature golf course abandoned. The Odiorn Pit reportedly collapsed in
2001 and was in-filled by CBDC. The small pond, formerly utilized as an outdoor hockey rink,
was observed to be present on the south side of Birch Grove Road at the time of the Neil and
Gunter Phase I ESA site visit. Visible coal fines were also observed in the areas of abandoned
rail lines or cart paths and evidence of illegal dumping of waste was observed on the
properties. A Phase II ESA was recommended to assess for potential total petroleum
hydrocarbons, metals and PAH impacts to soil and groundwater from former buildings and
structures, solid waste and fill materials.
Cape Breton Development Corporation Phase II and Phase III Environmental Site Assessment,
Former Gowrie No. 2 and No. 3 Mines (G234), PID 15372220 and 15524960, Port Morien, Nova Scotia
Final; prepared for Public Works and Government Services Canada Environmental Services by Neill
and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited, December 2005.
Neill and Gunter was commissioned by Public Works and Government Services Canada to conduct a
Phase II and III ESA at the former Gowrie #2 and #3 Mines (located approximately 40 m west and
southwest of the site). The Phase II and III ESA were conducted to investigate and document the
sources and nature of possible environmental impacts related to past land use. The Phase II ESA
included assessment of surface and subsurface soil in areas of concern identified during the Phase I
ESA (Neill and Gunter, 2005). Soil samples from the Phase II ESA were submitted for metals, metals
leachate, petroleum hydrocarbons and PAHs. Phase II ESA findings indicated metals impacts in soil at
concentrations exceeding the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME) guidelines
and background reference concentrations in the area of the former Beehive Coke Ovens and in areas
of isolated coal fine deposits. A Phase III ESA was subsequently completed to further assess the former
Beehive Coke Ovens and isolated coal fine deposit areas, which included soil and groundwater
assessment for metals, PAHs, dissolved metals (groundwater), general chemistry (groundwater) and
metals leachate.
Findings of the Phase II and III ESA indicated arsenic in 48 surface/subsurface soil samples exceeded
the CCME commercial guidelines, with several samples also exceeding the Urban Background
Reference Concentrations (as published by JDAC Environment Ltd. in 2001). Soil samples with
elevated arsenic concentrations generally also exhibited concentrations of selenium and/or thallium
above CCME commercial guidelines. Guideline exceedances were reported at the former Beehive
Coke Ovens location and in multiple separate areas identified as isolated coal fine dump areas. Metals
leachate analysis indicated little potential for leaching of metals. Petroleum hydrocarbon
concentrations were below the then applicable Atlantic RBCA (Risk-Based Corrective Action)
Guidelines (i.e., for a commercial property with coarse-grained soil and non-potable groundwater
use). One sub-surface soil sample exceeded the CCME commercial guidelines for PAHs. Metals
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Phase I ESA Birch Grove Road, Port Morien PID No. 15524945 9
concentrations in groundwater did not exceed the Guidelines for Use at Contaminated Sites in Ontario
(1997) (non-potable groundwater use). Local groundwater flow direction was calculated to be to the
southeast.
Metals impacts in soil were associated with background till geochemistry, with extensive fill material,
and with isolated areas where coal fines were encountered at surface. The former Beehive Coke
Ovens and associated fill material were located on PID 15372220, north of Birch Grove Road
(approximately 40 m west and southwest of the site). Isolated areas of coal fines were also located
on PID No. 15372220, north and south of Birch Grove Road. North of Birch Grove Road, the isolated
coal fines were located on the western and eastern section of PID No. 15372220. South of Birch Grove
Road, isolated coal fine areas were identified on the southeast section of PID No. 15372220. Coal fines
identified on PID No. 155524960 (located approximately 40 m west of the site) were located on both
the eastern and western sections of the property parcel.
Based on a review of this report, the nearest impacts to the site consist of two isolated areas located
approximately 80 m southwest and west of the site exhibiting metals (i.e., arsenic and/or thallium)
concentrations in surface soil in excess of the CCME commercial guidelines and/or the background
reference concentrations. Additional areas of impact in excess of the then applicable criteria were
also identified further west and southwest of the site.
3.9 Regulatory Agency and Database Files
3.9.1 Department of Environment
NSE Information Access and Privacy was contacted on January 8, 2019 to request an Environmental
Registry Search for historical information regarding environmental infractions, including reported
spills, approvals and/or orders issued at the site or on the immediately surrounding property, and if
the lands have been used for waste disposal. On January 17, 2019, NSE responded that no information
was located through the Environmental Registry with regard to the site or the surrounding properties
searched. NSE correspondence is presented in Appendix D.
3.9.2 Environment and Climate Change Canada
Environment and Climate Change Canada was contacted on January 9, 2019 to request a search under
the Access to Information Act. On January 30, 2019, Environment and Climate Change Canada
responded that no records were found. Environment and Climate Change Canada correspondence is
presented in Appendix D.
3.10 Site Visit
The site visit was conducted on January 16, 2019 to identify visual or other physical evidence of actual
or potential sources of environmental impact from current or historical site use, as well as surrounding
land uses. At the time of the site visit, the site grounds had approximately 15 cm of snow cover.
3.10.1 Site Description
The site consists of a vacant property located on the northwest side of Birch Grove Road in Port
Morien, Nova Scotia (i.e., PID No. 15524945). Based on interview information provided by Mr. Glenn
MacLeod, there is 110 to 135 m of cover over the Phalen Seam at the site. There are reportedly no
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Phase I ESA Birch Grove Road, Port Morien PID No. 15524945 10
documented mine workings beneath the proposed location of the WWTP. Gowrie Mine workings
reportedly do extend beneath the southern end of the site, with a depth of cover ranging from
approximately 75 to 95 m. Reportedly, there are no other seams beneath the site. Currently the site
is vacant and forested. A watercourse intersects the site and several small wetland/marsh areas were
observed at the time of the site visit. Additionally, an access road, from Birch Grove Road to the central
portion of the site, was observed on-site. The access road had been recently constructed as part of a
geotechnical assessment.
Vegetation covered mounds were observed on the southwest corner of the site near Birch Grove
Road. Debris (i.e., concrete, painted wood, metal, glass) was also observed in this area. A driveway
was observed on this portion of the site with access from Birch Grove Road.
It is noted that the site grounds had approximately 15 cm of snow cover at the time of the site visit.
The subject and surrounding properties are illustrated on Figure 2 and the site plan is illustrated on
Figure 3,Appendix A.
3.10.2 Site Services and Utilities
Discussions with the CBRM Public Works Department indicate that surrounding area to the site is
serviced by municipal water and sewer; however, there are no municipal services currently present
on-site, which is currently vacant. Overhead power lines were observed adjacent to Birch Grove Road.
3.10.3 Storage Tanks
No underground or aboveground storage tanks were observed on-site.
3.10.4 Mechanical Equipment
A CME drill rig was observed on-site at the time of the site visit. The drill rig was present as part of
geotechnical assessment activities that were occurring as part of the proposed WWTP preliminary
design efforts.
3.10.5 Drains and Sumps
No buildings are located on-site; therefore, no floor drains or sumps are present.
3.10.6 Special Attention Items
Materials such as asbestos, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), lead, ozone depleting substances (ODS),
mercury, urea formaldehyde foam insulation (UFFI), radon, excess noise and electric/magnetic fields
may be of special significance, if present, because of the heightened public concern regarding their
use. As the site is currently, and has historically (based on available information), been vacant,
asbestos, ODS, mercury and UFFI are not expected to be a concern for the site. The following
paragraphs address remaining special attention items relative to the site.
3.10.6.1 POLYCHLORINATEDBIPHENYLS (PCBS)
PCBs are commonly associated with dielectric fluids within electrical equipment manufactured in
Canada prior to approximately 1979. No potential sources of PCBs were identified on-site.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Phase I ESA Birch Grove Road, Port Morien PID No. 15524945 11
Pole-mounted transformers, which may be PCB containing, were observed along the south side of
Birch Grove Road. The pole-mounted transformers are the property of Nova Scotia Power
Incorporated (NSPI). These transformers are not expected to result in an environmental concern for
the site.
3.10.6.2 LEAD
Paint manufacturers historically added heavy metals, including lead, to paint, because of their
desirable property such as rust prevention or as a bactericide. In 1976, Canadian regulators
established the Hazardous Materials Product Act - Liquid Coating that limited the amount of lead in
interior paint to 0.5%. In 1990, an industry agreement ceased the use of lead in exterior paint in
Canada. Subsequent to this, the Surface Coating Materials Regulations were promulgated (in 2005),
reducing the allowable lead content of paints to 0.06% (600 ppm). Other historical uses of lead in
buildings include, but are not limited to, water pipes, pipe fitting solder, roof flashings, equipment
and column base pads and concrete anchors.
Stacked painted window frames were observed on the southwest portion of the site near Birch Grove
Road. It is unknown if this paint is lead containing. Testing would be required to confirm/refute the
presence of lead.
3.10.6.3 NOISE
No issues related to noise were identified.
3.10.6.4 MAGNETIC FIELDS
No issues related to magnetic fields were identified.
3.10.6.5 RADON
Radon is produced due to the natural decay of radium from some soil and rock types. Radon gas may
be a concern in buildings if there is an unventilated space for gas to accumulate, such as a basement
or crawlspace. Due to the local geology, radon is not suspected. Testing of radon was not completed
as part of this Phase I ESA. Testing would be required to confirm the presence/absence of radon. It is
noted that the site is currently vacant.
3.10.7 Chemical and Hazardous Materials Management
No chemicals or hazardous materials were observed on-site.
3.10.8 Pesticides
No known pesticide application has occurred on-site. There is potential for pesticide use, as a means
of vegetation control, to have occurred southwest of the site in relation to the former railway.
3.10.9 Unidentified Substances
No unidentified substances were observed on-site.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Phase I ESA Birch Grove Road, Port Morien PID No. 15524945 12
3.10.10 Solid Waste Management
As the site is vacant, there is no solid waste generation currently occurring on-site. Debris (i.e.,
concrete, painted wood, glass) was observed on the southwest portion of the site near Birch Grove
Road.
3.10.11 Fill Materials
Vegetated covered mounds were observed on the southwest portion of the site near Birch Grove
Road. No other potential sources of fill were identified or observed on-site. It is noted that the site
grounds had approximately 15 cm of snow cover at the time of the site visit.
3.10.12 Spills, Stained Areas and Stressed Vegetation
At the time of the site visit, the site grounds were snow covered, preventing observation of potential
spills, stained areas or stressed vegetation.
3.10.13 Pits and Lagoons
No pits or lagoons were observed.
3.10.14 Watercourses, Ditches or Standing Water
A watercourse intersects the central portion of the west site boundary and flows across the site to
the southeast. Ditches are located on the north and south sides of Birch Grove Road. The ditches were
snow covered at the time of the site visit. Standing water and areas of frozen standing water were
observed across the site. Review of the Provincial Landscape Viewer relative to the site indicates the
presence of wetlands on, or partially on, the south and central portions of the site. Wetland and/or
watercourse alteration approvals/permits may be required as part of the proposed WWTP
construction activities.
3.10.15 Air Emissions and Odours
No air emissions or odours were noted on-site at the time of the site visit.
3.10.16 Observation of Adjoining Properties
This site is surrounded to the north and west by densely forested lands with marshy areas. East of the
site, along Birch Grove Road, is a residential property. A wooden cabin was observed at the east site
boundary, north of the residence. Birch Grove Road borders the site to the south. Residential
properties are located across Birch Grove Road.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Phase I ESA Birch Grove Road, Port Morien PID No. 15524945 13
CHAPTER 4 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The following is a summary of the findings and potential sources of environmental contamination
identified during the Phase I ESA conducted at the site and the associated recommendations:
®The site is currently and, based on available information, has historically been vacant forested
land. The former Gowrie Mines were located approximately 40 m southwest and west of the
site. Metals impacts in surface and subsurface soil, which exceeded the CCME and background
reference concentrations were been identified on the former mine property. Guideline
exceedances were reported at a former Beehive Coke Ovens location and in multiple separate
areas identified as isolated coal fine dump areas. Based on a review of the available
information, the nearest impacts to the site consist of two isolated areas located
approximately 80 m southwest and west of the site exhibiting metals (i.e., arsenic and/or
thallium) concentrations in surface soil in excess of the CCME commercial guidelines and/or
background reference concentrations. Additional areas of impact were also identified further
west and southwest of the site. It is noted that based on the location of the former Gowrie
Mine relative to the proposed WWTP location, and the available descriptions of where metals
impacts were identified on the former mine site, the potential for impacts to extend onto the
site (i.e., PID No. 15524945) is considered low; however, testing would be required to confirm.
®Vegetation (i.e., grass) covered mounds and construction debris (i.e., concrete, painted wood,
metal, glass) were observed on the southwest corner of the site near Birch Grove Road.
Construction debris should be removed for disposal at a licenced facility. The nature of the
mounds is unknown.
®Painted window frames were observed on the southwest portion of the site near Birch Grove
Road. It is unknown if this paint is lead containing. Testing would be required to
confirm/refute the presence of lead.
®No known pesticide application has occurred on-site. There is potential for pesticide use, as a
means of vegetation control, to have occurred southwest of the site in relation to the former
railway.
Based on the findings of this Phase I ESA, no further recommendations, other than those noted above,
are made at this time.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Phase I ESA Birch Grove Road, Port Morien PID No. 15524945 14
CHAPTER 5 LIMITATIONS
This report was prepared exclusively for the purposes, project and site location outlined in the report.
The report is based on information provided to, or obtained by HEJV as indicated in the report, and
applies solely to site conditions existing at the time of the site investigation. Although a reasonable
investigation was conducted by HEJV, HEJV’s investigation was by no means exhaustive and cannot
be construed as a certification of the absence of any contaminants from the site. Rather, HEJV 's report
represents a reasonable review of available information within an agreed work scope, schedule and
budget. It is therefore possible that currently unrecognized contamination or potentially hazardous
materials may exist at the site, and that the levels of contamination or hazardous materials may vary
across the site. Further review and updating of the report may be required as local and site conditions,
and the regulatory and planning frameworks, change over time.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Phase I ESA Birch Grove Road, Port Morien PID No. 15524945 15
CHAPTER 6 CLOSING
This report was prepared by HEJV for the sole benefit of our client, CBRM. The material in the report
reflects HEJV's judgment in light of the information available to HEJV at the time of preparation. Any
use which a third party (i.e. a party other than our Client) makes of this report, or any reliance on or
decisions made based on it, are the responsibilities of such third parties. HEJV accepts no
responsibility for damages, if any, suffered by any third party as a result of decisions made or actions
based on this report.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Phase I ESA Birch Grove Road, Port Morien PID No. 15524945 16
CHAPTER 7 REFERENCES
®Nova Scotia Environment (NSE) Information Access and Privacy Environmental Registry.
®National Air Photo Library (NAPL) (via Environmental Risk Information Services (ERIS).
®The Beaton Institute (archive records).
®Phase I Environmental Site Assessment of Cape Breton Development Corporation Properties,
Cape Breton County, Nova Scotia, Group A and Group D Properties, Rev. 1; prepared for Public
Works and Government Services Canada by Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited in January
2005 (Final).
®Cape Breton Development Corporation Phase II and Phase III Environmental Site Assessment,
Former Gowrie No. 2 and No. 3 Mines (G234), PID 15372220 and 15524960, Port Morien, Nova
Scotia Final; prepared for Public Works and Government Services Canada by Neill and Gunter
(Nova Scotia) Limited, December 2005.
®Grant, D.R., 1988: Surficial Geology, Cape Breton Island, Nova Scotia; Geological Survey of
Canada, Map 1631A, scale 1:125,000; and,
®Bujak, J.P. and Donohoe, H.V., Jr., 1980. Geological Highway Map of Nova Scotia. Atlantic
Geoscience Society, Special Publications Number 1.
®Provincial Landscape Viewer (accessed online: https://nsgi.novascotia.ca/plv/)
®Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations Registry and Information Management Services.
®Canadian Standard Association (CSA) Standard Z768-01 for Phase I ESAs CSA, 2001 (updated
April 2003 and reaffirmed in 2016).
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Phase I ESA Birch Grove Road, Port Morien PID No. 15524945 17
APPENDIX A
Figures
MAP/DRAWING INFORMATIONNational Topographic System Mapsheets 11J/04.SITE LOCATION MAPFIGURE 1 CREATED BY: TLRCHECKED BY: NJWDESIGNED BY: NJW
PROJECT: 18-7116 DATE: MARCH 2019
1000m500
SCALE 1:50,000
0
N
S
EW250
SITE LOCATION
CAPE BRETON REGIONAL
MUNICIPALITY
PHASE I ESA
PROPOSED WWTP SITE
BIRCH GROVE ROAD
PORT MORIEN, NS
N O V A S C O T I A
NOVA SCOTIA KEY MAP
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Phase I ESA Birch Grove Road, Port Morien PID No. 15524945 18
APPENDIX B
Site Photographs
1. Overview of the south portion of the site looking
northwest.
3. Overview of the central portion of the site looking west.
2. Overview of the recently constructed on-site access road
looking north.
4. Overview of the general location of the proposed WWTP
looking north.
5. View of mounds observed on the southwest portion of the
site looking northwest.
7. View of debris observed on the southwest portion of the
site looking northeast.
6. View of the (frozen) water course that intersects the site
looking south.
8. View of the south portion of the site looking northwest
from Birch Grove Road.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Phase I ESA Birch Grove Road, Port Morien PID No. 15524945 20
APPENDIX C
Historical Reports
Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited January 2005
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
of
Cape Breton Development Corporation Properties
Cape Breton County, Nova Scotia
Group A and Group D Properties
REV. 1
Prepared for:
Public Works and Government Services Canada
Environmental Services
1713 Bedford Row
PO Box 2247
Halifax, NS B3J 3C9
Prepared by:
Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited
130 Eileen Stubbs Ave, Suite 1 South
Dartmouth, Nova Scotia B3B 2C4
PWGSC Project # 312354
NGNS Job No. 18497
Rev. 1
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Cape Breton Development Corporation Properties, Cape Breton County, NS
FINAL
Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.0 INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................1
1.1 Objectives..............................................................................................................1
1.2 Regulatory Framework..........................................................................................1
1.3 Scope of Work.......................................................................................................1
1.4 Methodology..........................................................................................................1
1.4.1 Records Review.........................................................................................2
1.4.2 Interviews...................................................................................................2
1.4.3 Site Visit.....................................................................................................2
1.5 Description of Report.............................................................................................3
2.0 SITE 1: PORT MORIEN – GOWRIE WATER LEVEL......................................................5
2.1 Site Description – GOWRIE WATER LEVEL (PID 15525017)..............................5
2.1.1 Subject Property Description.....................................................................5
2.1.2 Water Supply/Groundwater Usage............................................................5
2.1.3 Soil, Topography, Drainage.......................................................................5
2.1.4 On-site Buildings & Structures...................................................................6
2.1.5 Adjacent Properties ...................................................................................6
2.2 Historical Land Use ...............................................................................................6
2.2.1 Subject Property........................................................................................6
2.2.2 Former Buildings and Structures...............................................................7
2.2.3 Adjacent Properties – Historical Land Use................................................7
2.3 Evaluation of Findings...........................................................................................8
2.3.1 Fuel Storage and Handling........................................................................8
2.3.2 Spill and Stain Areas .................................................................................8
2.3.3 Dangerous Goods Handling and Storage..................................................8
2.3.4 Asbestos Containing Materials (ACM).......................................................9
2.3.5 Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB)...............................................................9
2.3.6 Ozone Depleting Substances (ODS).........................................................9
2.3.7 Lead/Mercury.............................................................................................9
2.3.8 Urea Formaldehyde Foam Insulation (UFFI).............................................9
2.3.9 Wastewater................................................................................................9
2.3.10 Water Courses, Ditches or Standing Water...............................................9
2.3.11 Pesticides/Herbicides ..............................................................................10
2.3.12 Radon......................................................................................................10
2.3.13 Electromagnetic Fields ............................................................................10
2.3.14 Sewage Disposal.....................................................................................10
2.3.15 Solid Waste..............................................................................................10
2.3.16 Stressed Vegetation ................................................................................10
2.3.17 Air Emissions...........................................................................................10
2.3.18 Fill Material ..............................................................................................11
2.4 Conclusions – Gowrie Water Level (PID 15525017)...........................................11
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Cape Breton Development Corporation Properties, Cape Breton County, NS
FINAL
Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited ii
3.0 SITE 2: PORT MORIEN – UNDEVELOPED (PID 15524978)........................................13
3.1 Site Description – Port Morien Undeveloped (PID 15524978)............................13
3.1.1 Subject Property Description...................................................................13
3.1.2 Water Supply/Groundwater Usage..........................................................13
3.1.3 Soil, Topography, Drainage.....................................................................13
3.1.4 On-site Buildings and Structures.............................................................14
3.1.5 Adjacent Properties .................................................................................14
3.2 Historical Land Use .............................................................................................14
3.2.1 Subject Property......................................................................................14
3.2.2 Former Buildings and Structures.............................................................15
3.2.3 Adjacent Properties – Historical Land Use..............................................15
3.3 Evaluation of Findings.........................................................................................16
3.3.1 Fuel Storage and Handling......................................................................16
3.3.2 Spill and Stain Areas ...............................................................................16
3.3.3 Dangerous Goods Handling and Storage................................................16
3.3.4 Asbestos Containing Materials (ACM).....................................................16
3.3.5 Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB).............................................................16
3.3.6 Ozone Depleting Substances (ODS).......................................................16
3.3.7 Lead / Mercury.........................................................................................16
3.3.8 Urea Formaldehyde Foam Insulation (UFFI)...........................................17
3.3.9 Wastewater..............................................................................................17
3.3.10 Water Courses, Ditches or Standing Water.............................................17
3.3.11 Pesticides / Herbicides ............................................................................17
3.3.12 Radon......................................................................................................17
3.3.13 Electromagnetic Fields ............................................................................17
3.3.14 Sewage Disposal.....................................................................................17
3.3.15 Solid Waste..............................................................................................17
3.3.16 Stressed Vegetation ................................................................................18
3.3.17 Air Emissions...........................................................................................18
3.3.18 Fill Material ..............................................................................................18
3.4 Conclusions – Port Morien Undeveloped (PID 15524978)..................................18
4.0 SITE 3: PORT MORIEN – GOWRIE #4 MINE, MORIEN BRANCH RAILWAY, GOWRIE
#2 AND #3 MINE, AND PORT MORIEN UNDEVELOPED............................................19
4.1 Site Description – Gowrie #4 (PID 15808181, 15808165, 15808132, 15808124,
15808140, 15808173, 15808157), Morien Branch Railway (PID 15758253),
Gowrie #2 and #3 Mine (PID 15524960, 15372220), and Port Morien
Undeveloped (PID 15524945).............................................................................19
4.1.1 Subject Property Description...................................................................19
4.1.2 Water Supply/Groundwater Usage..........................................................20
4.1.3 Soil, Topography, Drainage.....................................................................20
4.1.4 On-site Buildings & Structures.................................................................21
4.1.5 Adjacent Properties .................................................................................22
4.2 Historical Land Use .............................................................................................25
4.2.1 Subject Property......................................................................................25
4.2.2 Former Buildings and Structures.............................................................27
4.2.3 Adjacent Properties – Historical Land Use..............................................28
4.3 Site Visit and Evaluation of Findings...................................................................32
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Cape Breton Development Corporation Properties, Cape Breton County, NS
FINAL
Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited iii
4.3.1 Fuel Storage and Handling......................................................................32
4.3.2 Spill and Stain Areas ...............................................................................32
4.3.3 Dangerous Goods Handling and Storage................................................32
4.3.4 Asbestos Containing Materials (ACM).....................................................32
4.3.5 Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB).............................................................32
4.3.6 Ozone Depleting Substances (ODS).......................................................32
4.3.7 Lead / Mercury.........................................................................................32
4.3.8 Urea Formaldehyde Foam Insulation (UFFI)...........................................33
4.3.9 Wastewater..............................................................................................33
4.3.10 Water Courses, Ditches or Standing Water.............................................33
4.3.11 Pesticides / Herbicides ............................................................................33
4.3.12 Radon......................................................................................................33
4.3.13 Electromagnetic Fields ............................................................................33
4.3.14 Sewage Disposal.....................................................................................34
4.3.15 Solid Waste..............................................................................................34
4.3.16 Stressed Vegetation ................................................................................36
4.3.17 Air Emissions...........................................................................................36
4.3.18 Fill Materials.............................................................................................36
4.4 Conclusions.........................................................................................................37
5.0 SITE 4: PORT MORIEN – MORIEN JUNCTION............................................................39
5.1 Site Description – Morien Junction (PID 15691611, 15758238)..........................39
5.1.1 Subject Property Description...................................................................39
5.1.2 Water Supply/Groundwater Usage..........................................................39
5.1.3 Soil, Topography, Drainage.....................................................................39
5.1.4 On-site Buildings and Structures.............................................................40
5.1.5 Adjacent Properties .................................................................................40
5.2 Historical Land Use .............................................................................................41
5.2.1 Subject Property......................................................................................41
5.2.2 Former Buildings and Structures.............................................................42
5.2.3 Adjacent Properties – Historical Land Use..............................................43
5.3 Site Visit and Evaluation of Findings...................................................................44
5.3.1 Fuel Storage and Handling......................................................................44
5.3.2 Spill and Stain Areas ...............................................................................44
5.3.3 Dangerous Goods Handling and Storage................................................45
5.3.4 Asbestos Containing Materials (ACM).....................................................45
5.3.5 Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB).............................................................45
5.3.6 Ozone Depleting Substances (ODS).......................................................45
5.3.7 Lead / Mercury.........................................................................................45
5.3.8 Urea Formaldehyde Foam Insulation (UFFI)...........................................45
5.3.9 Wastewater..............................................................................................45
5.3.10 Water Courses, Ditches or Standing Water.............................................45
5.3.11 Pesticides/Herbicides ..............................................................................46
5.3.12 Radon......................................................................................................46
5.3.13 Electromagnetic Fields ............................................................................46
5.3.14 Sewage Disposal.....................................................................................46
5.3.15 Solid Waste..............................................................................................46
5.3.16 Stressed Vegetation ................................................................................47
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Cape Breton Development Corporation Properties, Cape Breton County, NS
FINAL
Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited iv
5.3.17 Air Emissions...........................................................................................47
5.3.18 Fill Material ..............................................................................................47
5.4 Conclusions – Morien Junction (PID 15691611, 15758238)...............................48
6.0 CATALONE – ABANDONED RAILWAY.......................................................................49
6.1 Site Description - Abandoned Railway (PID 15688930)......................................49
6.1.1 Subject Property Description...................................................................49
6.1.2 Water Supply/Groundwater Usage..........................................................49
6.1.3 Soil, Topography, Drainage.....................................................................49
6.1.4 On-site Buildings & Structures.................................................................50
6.1.5 Adjacent Properties .................................................................................50
6.2 Historical Land Use .............................................................................................50
6.2.1 Subject Property......................................................................................50
6.2.2 Former Buildings and Structures.............................................................51
6.2.3 Adjacent Properties – Historical Land Use..............................................51
6.3 Site Visit and Evaluation of Findings...................................................................52
6.3.1 Fuel Storage and Handling......................................................................52
6.3.2 Spill and Stain Areas ...............................................................................52
6.3.3 Dangerous Goods Handling and Storage................................................52
6.3.4 Asbestos Containing Materials (ACM).....................................................52
6.3.5 Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB).............................................................52
6.3.6 Ozone Depleting Substances (ODS).......................................................52
6.3.7 Lead / Mercury.........................................................................................52
6.3.8 Urea Formaldehyde Foam Insulation (UFFI)...........................................52
6.3.9 Wastewater..............................................................................................53
6.3.10 Water Courses, Ditches or Standing Water.............................................53
6.3.11 Pesticides / Herbicides ............................................................................53
6.3.12 Radon......................................................................................................53
6.3.13 Electromagnetic Fields ............................................................................53
6.3.14 Sewage Disposal.....................................................................................53
6.3.15 Solid Waste..............................................................................................53
6.3.16 Stress Vegetation ....................................................................................54
6.3.17 Air Emissions...........................................................................................54
6.3.18 Fill Material ..............................................................................................54
6.4 Conclusions – Catalone Abandoned Railway (PID 15525017)...........................55
7.0 LOUISBOURG – RAILWAY LANDFILL ........................................................................57
7.1 Site Description – Railway Landfill (PIDs 15322043, 15818412, 15818404)......57
7.1.1 Subject Property Description...................................................................57
7.1.2 Water Supply/Groundwater Usage..........................................................57
7.1.3 Soil, Topography, Drainage.....................................................................57
7.1.4 On-site Buildings & Structures.................................................................58
7.1.5 Adjacent Properties .................................................................................58
7.2 Historical Land Use .............................................................................................59
7.2.1 Subject Property......................................................................................59
7.2.2 Former Buildings and Structures.............................................................60
7.2.3 Adjacent Properties – Historical Land Use..............................................60
7.3 Site Visit and Evaluation of Findings...................................................................61
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Cape Breton Development Corporation Properties, Cape Breton County, NS
FINAL
Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited v
7.3.1 Fuel Storage and Handling......................................................................61
7.3.2 Spill and Stain Areas ...............................................................................62
7.3.3 Dangerous Goods Handling and Storage................................................62
7.3.4 Asbestos Containing Materials (ACM).....................................................62
7.3.5 Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB).............................................................62
7.3.6 Ozone Depleting Substances (ODS).......................................................62
7.3.7 Lead / Mercury.........................................................................................62
7.3.8 Urea Formaldehyde Foam Insulation (UFFI)...........................................63
7.3.9 Wastewater..............................................................................................63
7.3.10 Water Courses, Ditches or Standing Water.............................................63
7.3.11 Pesticides / Herbicides ............................................................................63
7.3.12 Radon......................................................................................................63
7.3.13 Electromagnetic Fields ............................................................................63
7.3.14 Sewage Disposal.....................................................................................64
7.3.15 Solid Waste..............................................................................................64
7.3.16 Stressed Vegetation ................................................................................65
7.3.17 Air Emissions...........................................................................................65
7.3.18 Fill Material ..............................................................................................65
7.4 Conclusions – Railway Landfill (PIDs 15322043, 15818412, 15818404)............65
8.0 CLOSURE.......................................................................................................................67
9.0 REFERENCES................................................................................................................69
Figures
Figure 1-1 Group A Properties – Site Location Plan
Figure 1-2 Group A Properties – Overall Site Plan
Figure 1-3 Group D Properties – Overall Site Plan
Figure 2-1 Group A Properties – Site 1 Gowrie Water Level, Port Morien – Site Plan and
Photo Locations
Figure 2-2 Group A Property – Gowrie Water Level, Port Morien - Areas of Potential
Environmental Concern
Figure 2-3.1 Aerial Photograph 1930 PID #15525017
Figure 2-3.2 Aerial Photograph 1950 PID #15525017
Figure 2-3.3 Aerial Photograph 1969 PID #15525017
Figure 2-3.4 Aerial Photograph 1983 PID #15525017
Figure 2-3.5 Aerial Photograph 1999 PID #15525017
Figure 3-1 Group A Properties – Site 2, Undeveloped, (PID: 15524978) Port Morien, Nova
Scotia – Site Plan and Photo Locations
Figure 3-2 Group A Properties – Site 2, Undeveloped, (PID: 15524978), Port Morien, Nova
Scotia – Areas of Potential Environmental Concern
Figure 3-3.1 Aerial Photograph 1930 PID #15524978
Figure 3-3.2 Aerial Photograph 1950 PID #15524978
Figure 3-3.3 Aerial Photograph 1969 PID #15524978
Figure 3-3.4 Aerial Photograph 1983 PID #15524978
Figure 3-3.5 Aerial Photograph 1999 PID #15524978
Figure 4-1.1 Group A Properties, Site 3a Gowrie #4 Mine, Port Morien – Site Plan and Photo
Locations
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Cape Breton Development Corporation Properties, Cape Breton County, NS
FINAL
Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited vi
Figure 4-1.2 Group A Properties – Site 3b, Morien Branch Railway, Port Morien – Site Plan
and Photo Locations
Figure 4-1.3 Group A Properties, Site 3c – Gowrie #2 and #3 Mine, Port Morien – Site Plan
and Photo Locations
Figure 4-1.4 Group A Properties, Site 3d – Port Morien Undeveloped, Port Morien – Site Plan
and Photo Locations
Figure 4-2.1 Group A Properties, Site 3a – Gowrie #4 Mine, Port Morien – Areas of Potential
Environmental Concern
Figure 4-2.2 Group A Properties, Site 3b, Morien Branch Railway, Port Morien – Areas of
Potential Environmental Concern
Figure 4-2.3 Group A Properties, Site 3c, Gowrie #2 and #2 Mine, Port Morien – Areas of
Potential Environmental Concern
Figure 4-2.4 Group A Property, Site 3d, Port Morien Undeveloped, Port Morien – Areas of
Potential Environmental Concern
Figure 4-3.1 Aerial Photograph 1930 Various PID Numbers
Figure 4-3.2 Aerial Photograph 1950 Various PID Numbers
Figure 4-3.3 Aerial Photograph 1969 Various PID Numbers
Figure 4-3.4 Aerial Photograph 1983 Various PID Numbers
Figure 4-3.5 Aerial Photograph 1999 Various PID Numbers
Figure 5-1.1 Group A Properties, Site 4, Morien Junction (PID 15691611), Port Morien – Site
Plan and Photo Locations
Figure 5-1.2 Group A Property, Site 4, Morien Junction (PID: 1578238) – Site Plan and Photo
Locations
Figure 5-2.1 Group A Property, Site 4, Morien Junction (PID: 15691611), Port Morien – Areas
of Potential Environmental Concern
Figure 5-2.2 Group A Property, Site 4, Morien Junction (PID: 15758238), Port Morien – Areas
of Potential Environmental Concern
Figure 5-3.1 Aerial Photograph 1930 PID #15691611 and 15758238
Figure 5-3.2 Aerial Photograph 1950 PID #15691611 and 15758238
Figure 5-3.3 Aerial Photograph 1969 PID #15691611 and 15758238
Figure 5-3.4 Aerial Photograph 1983 PID #15691611 and 15758238
Figure 5-3.5 Aerial Photograph 1999 PID #15691611 and 15758238
Figure 6-1 Group D Property, Site 5, Catalone Abandoned Railway, Catalone – Site Plan
and Photo Locations
Figure 6-2 Group D Property, Site 5, Catalone Abandoned Railway, Catalone - Areas of
Potential Environmental Concern
Figure 6-3.1 Aerial Photograph 1983 PID #15688930
Figure 6-3.2 Aerial Photograph 1998 PID #15688930
Figure 7-1.1 Group D Properties, Site 6, Louisbourg Railway Landfill (PID: 15322043),
Louisbourg – Site Plan and Photo Locations
Figure 7-1.2 Group D Properties, Site 6, Louisbourg Railway Landfill (PID: 15322043),
Louisbourg - Site Plan and Photo Locations
Figure 7-2.1 Group D Property, Site 6, Louisbourg (PID: 15322043), Louisbourg - Areas of
Potential Environmental Concern
Figure 7-2.2 Group D Properties, Site 6, Louisbourg Railway Landfill (PID: 15322043),
Louisbourg - Areas of Potential Environmental Concern
Figure 7-3.1 Aerial Photograph 1960 PID #15322043, 15818412 and 15818040
Figure 7-3.2 Aerial Photograph 1983 PID #15322043, 15818412 and 15818040
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Cape Breton Development Corporation Properties, Cape Breton County, NS
FINAL
Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited vii
Tables
Table 2.1 Current Adjacent Property Usage .........................................................................9
Table 2.2 Historical Adjacent Property Usage.....................................................................10
Table 2.3 Summary of Findings – Pre 1967 Site 75............................................................13
Table 3.1 Current Adjacent Property Usage .......................................................................15
Table 3.2 Summary of Findings – Undeveloped PID 15524978 .........................................18
Table 4.1 Pre 1967 Site 59 (#4 Gowrie Mine).....................................................................19
Table 4.2 Current Adjacent Property Usage .......................................................................22
Table 4.3 Summary of Findings ..........................................................................................33
Table 5.1 Current Adjacent Property Use ...........................................................................37
Table 5.2 Summary of Findings – Morien Junction (PID 15691611, 15758238).................42
Table 6.1 Summary of Surrounding Properties...................................................................44
Table 6.2 Summary of Findings – Undeveloped PID 15524978 .........................................48
Table 7.1 Surrounding Adjacent Land Use .........................................................................51
Table 7.2 Conclusions – Railway Landfill (PIDs 15322043, 15818412, 15818404)............56
Appendices
Appendix A Environmental Registry Inquiry Results
Appendix B Property Screening and Summary Tables of Site Features
Appendix C Record of Conversation
Appendix D MGI Historical Research Text
Appendix E Assessor Qualifications
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Cape Breton Development Corporation Properties, Cape Breton County, NS
FINAL
Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited ix
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Neill and Gunter (NG) was commissioned by Public Works and Government Services Canada
(PWGSC) to conduct a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) of Cape Breton
Development Corporation (CBDC) owned properties located in the former Cape Breton Coal
Fields.
The Phase I ESA’s were conducted to document the environmental condition of the property
and identify any potential existing or historic environmental concerns through a historical
records search, site visit, and interviews. If any environmental issues were identified the
requirement for further assessment would be recommended depending on the significance of
the concern.
The site investigation was conducted by MGI Ltd. personnel in spring 2004. The historical
review was also conducted by MGI Ltd. personnel during fall 2004. Interviews were conducted
by NG with CBDC Environmental officials on October 07 2004. NG also conducted interviews
with persons knowledgeable of the subject properties which included representatives of the
former Town of Louisbourg, Cape Breton Regional Municipality (CBRM) and Nova Scotia
Department of Environment and Labour (NSDEL).
The Phase I ESA findings are summarized in the following tables, divided into six sites
comprised of contiguous properties. Phase II ESA’s are recommended for part of each site,
with varying levels of effort, as outlined in the following summary tables.
Site 1: Gowrie Water Level
PID
Potential
Concern Description Degree of Risk Media
Contaminants of
Concern
15525017
Spill and
Stained
Areas
Gowrie mine
water outfall to
beach. Heavy
rust coloured
staining on
beach rocks
near outfall.
Medium
Sediment,
Surface
Water
ARD, metals, pH
Site 2: Port Morien – Undeveloped
PID
Potential
Concern Description
Degree of
Risk Media
Contaminants of
Concern
15524978 Solid Waste
Discarded
900L domestic
oil tank
Low to
Medium
Soil,
Groundwater
(depending on
volume of
product, if any)
Petroleum
hydrocarbons
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Cape Breton Development Corporation Properties, Cape Breton County, NS
FINAL
Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited x
Site 3: Port Morien –Gowrie #4, Morien Branch Railway, Gowrie #2 and #3 Mine, and Port
Morien Undeveloped
PID
Potential
Concern Description
Degree of
Risk Media
Contaminants
of Concern
Gowrie #4 Mine
Former
buildings
and
structures
Former structures may
have used lead / mercury
based paints, lube
oils/fuels. Exact
locations of these
structures are unknown.
Medium/Low Soil Metals, PAHs,
TPH.
15808132
Laydown
area
Three (3) large laydown
areas located on
property. All exhibit
pyritic characteristics.
Medium Soil ARD
pH
Staining Rust coloured staining in
stream Medium Surface
water, soil ARD, metals
15808140
Fill
Material
Grass covered fill area
located on western
portion of property.
Possible building
location.
Medium to
low
Soil,
Groundwater
Metals, PAHs,
TPH
Solid
waste Coal fines – Class 3 Low Soil Metals, PAHs
15808181 Waste
rock
Visible waste rock –
Class 3 Low Soil ARD, metals,
pH
Solid
waste
Coal fines mixed with
waste rock Low Soil Metals, PAHs
15808173
Waste
rock Visible waste rock Low Soil ARD, metals
5808124 Solid
Waste
Discarded domestic fuel
oil tank Low
Soil,
groundwater
(depending on
volume of
product, if
any)
TPH
Morien Branch Railway
15808253 Solid
Waste Coal fines – Class 3 Low Soil Metals, PAHs
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Cape Breton Development Corporation Properties, Cape Breton County, NS
FINAL
Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited xi
Site 3 continued
PID
Potential
Concern Description
Degree of
Risk Media
Contaminants of
Concern
Gowrie #2 and #3 Mine
Former
buildings
and
structures
Former structures
may have used
lead / mercury
based paints, lube
oils/fuels. Exact
locations of these
structures are
unknown.
Medium/Low Soil Metals, PAHs,
TPH.
Solid Waste
Four (4) areas of
coal fines
identified. – Class
3
Low Soil Metals, PAHs
15372220
Fill material
Two (2) areas of
infilling located
near former
Beehive coking
ovens.
Medium Soil,
Groundwater
Metals, PAHs,
TPH.
15524960 Solid Waste
Two (2) areas of
coal fines identified
– Class 3
Low Soil Metals, PAHs
Site 4: Port Morien – Morien Junction
PID
Potential
Concern Description
Degree of
Risk Media
Contaminants
of Concern
Former
buildings
and
structures
Former structures
may have used
lead / mercury
based paints, lube
oils/fuels. Exact
locations of these
structures are
unknown.
Low Soil Metals, PAHs,
TPH
Solid Waste
Coal fines – two (2)
areas identified –
Class 3
Low Soil PAH, Metals
15758238
Solid waste
Dumpsites -two (2)
areas containing
ash and asphalt
(North of Birch
Grove Road)
Low
Soil.
Possible
leaching of
ash material
into surface
soils.
TPH, PAHs,
Metals
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Cape Breton Development Corporation Properties, Cape Breton County, NS
FINAL
Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited xii
Site 4: Port Morien – Morien Junction continued
Solid Waste
Coal fines – two (2)
areas identified –
Class 3
Low Soil Metals, PAHs
15691611
Solid Waste
Dumpsites – two
(2) areas
containing ash,
asphalt, scrap
metal and domestic
debris
Low Soil TPH, PAHs,
Metals
Site 5: Catalone – Abandoned Railway
PID
Potential
Concern Description
Degree of
Risk Media
Contaminants
of Concern
15688930 Solid waste
Property is site of
extensive dumping.
Ten (10) specific
locations identified.
Medium Soil,
Groundwater
Metals, TPH,
PAH, VOCs
Site 6: Louisbourg – Railway Landfill
PID
Potential
Concern Description
Degree of
Risk Media
Contaminants
of Concern
Solid waste Extensive dumpsite
(17 locations) High
Soil,
Groundwater,
Surface
water
Lead, mercury,
TPH, VOC, PAH,
landfill leachate,
PCB
Fill area Landfill area High
Soil,
Groundwater,
Surface
water
Lead, mercury,
TPH, VOC, PAH,
landfill leachate,
PCB
15322043
Solid waste Coal Fines – Class
3 Low Soil Metals, PAHs
15818412 Solid waste Extensive dumpsite
(2 locations) High
Soil,
Groundwater,
Surface
water
Lead, mercury,
TPH, VOC, PAH,
landfill leachate,
PCB
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Cape Breton Development Corporation Properties, Cape Breton County, NS
FINAL
Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited 1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Objectives
The objective of the following Phase I Environmental Site Assessments (ESA) is to
document the environmental condition of Cape Breton Development Corporation
(CBDC) properties in association with the site closure program for the former Cape
Breton Coal Fields. A total of 20 individual PID’s were allocated to NG by PWGSC on
behalf of CBDC. The CBDC Site Closure Program subdivides the subject properties into
specific geographical areas, of which NG was allocated properties in areas A and D
(near the communities of Port Morien, Catalone and Louisbourg). Properties within
these geographical areas were further subdivided into 6 contiguous groups of properties
called sites, for which a Phase I ESA was conducted for each. The site location and
properties are identified in Figures 1-1 and 1-2, and 1-3.
The purpose of the site inspection and Phase I ESA is to identify and document any
potential, existing, or historic environmental concerns. The objectives of the project
would be to also recognize any environmental regulatory non-conformity that could
possibly affect the environment associated with the property. If any environmental
issues were identified, the requirement for further assessment would be recommended
dependant upon the significance of the concern. General “housekeeping” or minor
remedial measures may also have been recommended at this stage.
1.2 Regulatory Framework
This Phase I ESA was guided by the requirements of the Canadian Standards
Association (CSA) Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Protocol Z768-94.
1.3 Scope of Work
The purpose of the Phase I ESA is to document the environmental condition of the
subject properties and to identify any potential existing or historic environmental
concerns, in general conformance with CSA Standard Z768-01 Phase I Environmental
Site Assessment, November 2001. MGI Limited conducted a Property Screening
Program on the subject properties in 2004 to identify and categorize potential and/or
observed environmental liabilities, as well as potential and/or observed health and safety
liabilities and risks. Other observed features deemed to have significance in the
screening of properties (i.e. encroachment, subsidence, etc…) were also assessed. All
features were recorded using “Pro XRB” GPS units and digital photography. This
information is available on the CBDC Property GIS website. A detailed description of the
Property Pre-screening Program is included in Appendix B.
1.4 Methodology
The methodology of the Phase I ESA was divided into 3 groups: Records Review,
Interviews, and the Site Visit. The methodology of each section is provided below.
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Cape Breton Development Corporation Properties, Cape Breton County, NS
FINAL
Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited 2
1.4.1 Records Review
Record review of the building/site history includes the following:
• Historical / Property Use Records (MGI Ltd research);
• Department of Environment and Labour Environmental Registry Search (Appendix
A);
• Aerial photographs (PWGSC/CBDC GIS Website);
• Company Records (MGI Ltd research);
• Geological and/or topographical maps, water well information, and climate data;
• Interviews with persons knowledgeable about subject properties; and
• Department of Natural Resources reports (provided by MGI Ltd.).
1.4.2 Interviews
Interviews with CBDC environmental personnel were conducted on October 7, 2004 at
the Phalen Mine Administrative Building in New Waterford, Nova Scotia. Representing
CBDC were Mr Alan Kehoe – Environmental Coordinator, Mr. Donald Peckham –
Environmental Coordinator, and Mr. Bruce Clyburn – Director, CBDC Environmental
Department. Also in attendance was Mr. John Kalbahn of MGI Ltd., who conducted
many of the site inspections as well as the historical research. A summary of interviews
is included in Appendix C.
1.4.3 Site Visit
The site visit was conducted by MGI Ltd. personnel in May and June of 2004 as part of
the CBDC Property Screening Program coordinated by PWGSC in 2004. Field data
from the screening program was incorporated into a GIS website from which NG
obtained field data used to compile the Phase I ESA’s. Data obtained from the Property
Screening Program from the GIS website consisted of:
• Colour photographs of the subject site;
• Colour photographs of all environmental concerns with GPS coordinates and
locations noted on site plans;
• General site characteristics such as site geology, surface and groundwater, soils,
sediment, utilities, services, setting, and adjacent land usage;
• Inspection of air dischargers, water quality, indoor air quality, septic systems, waste
management and disposal, and wastewater emissions;
• Inspection of hazardous building materials (PCBs, asbestos, UFFI, lead, mercury,
ozone depleting substances, pesticides, and various chemicals);
• Fuel storage and usage inspection (USTs, ASTs, spills or stain areas, and
generators);
• Inspection of any other concerns (e.g. mould, radon, electromagnetic fields, noise,
and vibration).
• During site inspection conducted by MGI Limited in Spring 2004, a number of areas
were observed to be illegal dumpsites. These dumpsites were classified as either
environmental concerns or housekeeping issues (health and safety) depending on
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Cape Breton Development Corporation Properties, Cape Breton County, NS
FINAL
Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited 3
the type of debris observed. Dumpsites which contained paint cans, fuel storage
tanks/containers, engines, or any other debris deemed likely to impact the
surrounding media were classified as dumpsites or areas of potential environmental
concern. Those sites which contained debris such as scrap metal, wood, tires or any
other debris deemed unlikely to impact surrounding media were classified as
housekeeping issues. Housekeeping issues are presented on figures illustrating
areas of potential environmental concern. Summary tables presenting site features
are located in Appendix B.
1.5 Description of Report
This report contains the background, methodology, and findings of the Phase I ESA as
well as pertinent conclusions and recommendations. The report is divided into sections,
each of which presents a distinct component of the project. The objectives, scope of
work and methodology are presented in Section 1.0. The Phase I ESAs are presented
separately in sections 2.0 through 7.0 for each of the six contiguous properties. The
report limitations are presented in Section 8.0.
Tables are presented within the relevant section of the text to facilitate reading. Figures
are presented at the end of each relevant section. Appendices follow the text portion of
the report and include: Environmental Registry Inquiry Summary of Findings, Summary
Tables of Site Features and Interview Summaries, and historical information provided to
NG by MGI Ltd. as part of the historical research. Assessor qualifications are included in
Appendix E.
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Cape Breton Development Corporation Properties, Cape Breton County, NS
FINAL
Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited 19
4.0 SITE 3: PORT MORIEN – GOWRIE #4 MINE, MORIEN BRANCH RAILWAY, GOWRIE
#2 AND #3 MINE, AND PORT MORIEN UNDEVELOPED
4.1 Site Description – Gowrie #4 (PID 15808181, 15808165, 15808132, 15808124,
15808140, 15808173, 15808157), Morien Branch Railway (PID 15758253), Gowrie #2
and #3 Mine (PID 15524960, 15372220), and Port Morien Undeveloped (PID
15524945)
4.1.1 Subject Property Description
Subject properties identified as Gowrie #4, Morien Branch Railway, Gowrie #2 and #3,
and Port Morien Undeveloped are located in the community of Port Morien, Cape Breton
Regional Municipality, Nova Scotia. The subject properties extend from PID 15524945
in the east to PID 15808124 in the west. Due to the number of sites and the geographic
spread, the property descriptions and relevant figures have been broken into four
sections, based on Pre 1967 divisions and geographic location.
Gowrie #4 Mine (PID 15808165, 15808132, 15808124, 15808140, 15808157 and
15808173)
The subject property identified as Gowrie #4 Mine is comprised of PID 15808181,
15808165, 15808132, 15808124, 15808140, 15808157 and 15808173. These PIDS are
grouped adjacent to each other and are located at the western end of the Morien Branch
Railway described below. DNR reports completed in 1999 refer to the site as Pre 1967
Site 59. The following Table 4.1 describes each property according to PID, property
type and civic address (if applicable).
TABLE 4.1: #4 GOWRIE MINE – PID SUMMARY
PID Community Type Location, Lot # Area (ha)
15808140 Port Morien Railway N/A 0.50
15808157 Port Morien Railway Birch Grove Road, Lot# 493-A 0.38
15808181 Port Morien Railway Birch Grove Road, Lot# 490 0.97
15808124 Port Morien Undeveloped Birch Grove Road, Lot# 492 1.67
15808132 Port Morien Undeveloped Birch Grove Road, Lot# 495 2.23
15808165 Port Morien Undeveloped N/A 1.27
15808173 Port Morien Undeveloped Birch Grove Road, Lot# 491 0.65
The area surrounding the #4 Gowrie Mine included in this Phase I ESA encompasses a
total area of approximately 7.7 hectares. Access to the Gowrie #4 Mine is from
Prendergast Lane and Birch Grove Road. Pre-screening by MGI identified all Gowrie
Mine #4 PID as being primarily wooded lots, with 15808173 being wooded with open
areas. Figure 4-1.1 presents the site plan and photo locations for the Gowrie #4 Mine
site.
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Cape Breton Development Corporation Properties, Cape Breton County, NS
FINAL
Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited 20
Morien Branch Railway (PID 15758253)
The subject property identified as the Morien Branch Railway PID 15758253 is a narrow
rail bed right of way which runs between Gowrie #2 and #3 Mines described above, and
Gowrie #4 Mine described below. The rail bed, now overgrown in areas, is adjacent and
parallel to Birch Grove road and traverses through a residential neighbourhood. The
subject PID covers an area of approximately 1.9 hectares. The CBDC Property website
references the civic address of the property as Lot# 491-A Birch Grove Road. Figure 4-
1.2 presents the site plan and photo locations for PID 15758253.
Gowrie #2 and #3 Mine (PID 15524960, 15372220)
PID 1552960, assigned civic address Lot# 486, is located north of Birch Grove Road,
and covers an area of approximately 3.9 hectares. PID 1537220, assigned civic address
Lot# 487, is located both north and south of Birch Grove Road, and covers an area of
approximately 6.3 hectares. For the purpose of this assessment these two PID will be
described as Gowrie #2 and #3 Mines. DNR reports completed in 1999 refer to the site
as Pre 1967 Site 57. At the time of site inspection conducted in Spring 2004, PID
15524960 was accessible through ATV trails, and 15372220 was easily accessible from
Birch Grove Road. Figure 4-1.3 presents the site plan and photographs for Gowrie #2
and #3 Mines.
Port Morien Undeveloped (PID 15524945)
The subject property identified as PID 15524945 is adjacent to Pre 1967 Site 57
(described below). 15524945 covers and area of approximately 16.7 hectares, and is
located on, and accessible from Birch Grove Road. At the time of site inspection in
Spring 2004 the property was described as undeveloped woodland. Figure 4-1.4
presents the site plan and photo log for PID 15524945.
4.1.2 Water Supply/Groundwater Usage
All properties are currently undeveloped or idle in status; subsequently there is no water
supply to these properties. Surrounding residential properties would be supplied by a
central municipal water supply provided by Cape Breton Regional Municipality (CBRM),
and drawn from Sand Lake located approximately 1.0 to 2.0km northwest. No
groundwater wells were identified through the MGI screening program conducted in
Spring 2004.
4.1.3 Soil, Topography, Drainage
Typically, the soils in the area of Port Morien and the subject properties as belonging to
the Economy soil series which is characterized s being derived from pale brown to
greyish brown sandy loam till. Economy soils in this area typically exhibit poor drainage
and are moderately stony (Cann, 1963).
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Cape Breton Development Corporation Properties, Cape Breton County, NS
FINAL
Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited 21
Some soils in the area of railway PID 15758253 and #4 Gowrie Mine are described as
belonging to the Springhill soil series which is characterized as being derived from pale
brown to greyish brown sandy loam till. Springhill soils typically exhibit imperfect
drainage and are moderately stony (Cann, 1963).
The Nova Scotia Department of Mines and Energy Surficial Geology Map of Nova Scotia
(1992) describes the surficial geology of this area as silty glacial till and/or exposed
bedrock.
The Nova Scotia Department of Mines and Energy Geological Map of the Sydney Basin
(Boehner, 1986) describe the underlying bedrock of the subject property area to be of
the Morien Group, Sydney Mines Formation which consists of grey mudstone, shale,
siltstone and sandstone with minor red mudstone, siltstone, diagenetic carbonate, algal
limestone and major economic coal seams. Of particular interest in the area of the
subject property is the Gowrie seam which was the subject of mining operations in the
area during the 19th Century.
#4 Gowrie Mine site is relatively flat with elevations ranging from 48-50 meters above
mean sea level, based on a review of topographical mapping.
Topography of the Morien Branch Railway, PID 15758253, ranges from 27 meters above
mean sea level in the east to approximately 48 meters above mean sea level in the
west.
Review of topographical mapping indicates the topography in the vicinity of Gowrie #2
and #3 Mine is gently rolling, with elevations ranging from 25 – 30 meters above mean
sea level, and land sloping gradually towards the east. Review of topographical
mapping also indicated the eastern section and northeastern section of PID 15524960
and PID 15372220 respectively are swampy or poorly drained areas.
The Port Morien Undeveloped property, PID 15524945, is relatively flat to gently
undulating with elevations ranging from 22-30 metres above mean sea level, and sloping
gradually towards the east. Review of topographical mapping also indicated that
sections of the eastern portion of PID 15524945 are swampy or poorly drained.
Mapping also indicates that a stream transverses the property in a west to east direction.
4.1.4 On-site Buildings & Structures
#4 Gowrie Mine
During the site inspection conducted in Spring 2004 there were no buildings or
structures observed on PID 15808165, 15808132, 15808124, 15808140, 15808157 or
15808173.
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Cape Breton Development Corporation Properties, Cape Breton County, NS
FINAL
Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited 22
Morien Branch Railway
During the site inspection conducted in Spring 2004 there were no buildings or
structures present on PID 15758253 except for encroaching adjacent residential
properties.
Gowrie #2 and #3 Mine
During the site inspection conducted in Spring 2004 there were no buildings or
structures present on PID 15372220 except some remnants of twelve (12) beehive
coking ovens which were located just north of Birch Grove Road on PID 15372220.
Interviews with CBDC personnel indicated that these Beehive Coking ovens were
destroyed and buried by DEVCO in August 2001 citing safety concerns.
Port Morien Undeveloped PID 15524945
During the site inspection conducted in Spring 2004 there were no buildings or
structures observed.
4.1.5 Adjacent Properties
Table 4.2 below is a summary of current properties adjacent to Gowrie #4 Mine, Morien
Branch Railway, Gowrie #2 and#3 Mine, and Port Morien Undeveloped.
TABLE 4.2: CURRENT ADJACENT PROPERTY USAGE
PID Direction Land Use
Potential Environmental
Impacts
Gowrie #4 Mine
North Residential None suspected nor observed
Northeast Residential / Woodland None suspected nor observed
East Woodland None suspected nor observed
Southeast Woodland / CBDC None suspected nor observed
South Woodland / CBDC None suspected nor observed
Southwest Woodland / CBDC None suspected nor observed
West Woodland / CBDC None suspected nor observed
15808140
Northwest Residential /Woodland None suspected nor observed
North Woodland None suspected nor observed
Northeast Woodland None suspected nor observed
East CBDC / Residential None suspected nor observed
Southeast CBDC / Residential None suspected nor observed
South Woodland / Residential None suspected nor observed
Southwest CBDC / Residential None suspected nor observed
West CBDC / Residential None suspected nor observed
15808181
Northwest CBDC / Residential None suspected nor observed
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Cape Breton Development Corporation Properties, Cape Breton County, NS
FINAL
Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited 23
TABLE 4.2 continued
North Woodland / CBDC None suspected nor observed
Northeast Woodland None suspected nor observed
East Woodland / CBDC None suspected nor observed
Southeast Woodland / CBDC None suspected nor observed
South Woodland / CBDC None suspected nor observed
Southwest Woodland / CBDC None suspected nor observed
West Woodland / CBDC None suspected nor observed
15808157
Northwest Woodland / CBDC None suspected nor observed
North Woodland None suspected nor observed
Northeast Woodland / Residential None suspected nor observed
East Woodland / Residential None suspected nor observed
Southeast Woodland / CBDC None suspected nor observed
South Woodland / CBDC None suspected nor observed
Southwest Woodland / CBDC None suspected nor observed
West Woodland / CBDC None suspected nor observed
15808124
Northwest Woodland / CBDC None suspected nor observed
North Woodland / CBDC Coal laydown areas
Northeast Woodland /Residential None suspected nor observed
East
Woodland / Residential
/ CBDC None suspected nor observed
Southeast Woodland / Residential None suspected nor observed
South Woodland / Residential None suspected nor observed
Southwest Woodland / Residential None suspected nor observed
West Woodland None suspected nor observed
15808132
Northwest Woodland / CBDC None suspected nor observed
North Woodland / CBDC None suspected nor observed
Northeast Woodland / CBDC None suspected nor observed
East Woodland / CBDC None suspected nor observed
Southeast Woodland / Residential None suspected nor observed
South Woodland / Residential None suspected nor observed
Southwest Woodland / Residential None suspected nor observed
West Woodland / CBDC Coal laydown areas
15808165
Northwest Woodland / CBDC Coal laydown areas
North Woodland None suspected nor observed
Northeast Woodland / CBDC None suspected nor observed
East Woodland / CBDC None suspected nor observed
Southeast Woodland / CBDC None suspected nor observed
South Woodland / Residential None suspected nor observed
Southwest Woodland None suspected nor observed
West Woodland / CBDC None suspected nor observed
15808173
Northwest Woodland / CBDC None suspected nor observed
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Cape Breton Development Corporation Properties, Cape Breton County, NS
FINAL
Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited 24
TABLE 4.2 continued
Morien Branch Railway
North Woodland None suspected nor observed
Northeast Woodland / CBDC Coal fines, dumpsites, fill areas
East Woodland / CBDC
Coal fines, dumpsites, former
coke ovens
Southeast
Woodland / CBDC /
Residential Gowrie #2 and #3 Mine
South Woodland / Residential None suspected nor observed
Southwest Woodland / Residential None suspected nor observed
West Woodland / CBDC None suspected nor observed
15758253
Northwest Woodland None suspected nor observed
Gowrie #2 and #3 Mine
North Woodland / CBDC None suspected nor observed
Northeast Woodland / CBDC None suspected nor observed
East Woodland / CBDC None suspected nor observed
Southeast
Woodland / CBDC /
Residential None suspected nor observed
South Woodland / CBDC
Gowrie #2 and #3 Mine, coke
ovens
Southwest Woodland / CBDC None suspected nor observed
West Woodland None suspected nor observed
15524960
Northwest Woodland None suspected nor observed
North Woodland / CBDC None suspected nor observed
Northeast Woodland / CBDC None suspected nor observed
East Woodland / Residential None suspected nor observed
Southeast Woodland / Residential None suspected nor observed
South Woodland None suspected nor observed
Southwest Woodland / Residential None suspected nor observed
West Woodland / CBDC None suspected nor observed
15372220
Northwest Woodland None suspected nor observed
Port Morien Undeveloped
North Woodland None suspected nor observed
Northeast Woodland None suspected nor observed
East Woodland None suspected nor observed
Southeast Woodland / Residential None suspected nor observed
South Woodland / Residential None suspected nor observed
Southwest Woodland / CBDC
Gowrie #2 and #3 Mine, coke
ovens
West Woodland / CBDC None suspected nor observed
15524945
Northwest Woodland None suspected nor observed
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Cape Breton Development Corporation Properties, Cape Breton County, NS
FINAL
Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited 25
4.2 Historical Land Use
4.2.1 Subject Property
Port Morien, formerly named Cow Bay, has been the site of coal mining activities dating
back to the 18th Century and the French Mine / Blockhouse mine. Some of the old
French workings were also used in the 19th Century as part of the Gowrie Mine. Circa
1862 an adit or small exploratory tunnel was driven at the shoreline (PID 15525017)
which connected to the French workings. As the workings advanced further inland, it
became less feasible to transport the coal to the shore; consequently, another shaft,
located 35 chains (approximately 700 metres) from the shoreline (on PID 15372220
south of Birch Grove Road), was driven in 1864 to a depth of approximately 75 feet (25
metres). This second shaft was aptly named #2 Mine Site. The #2 shaft failed to yield
sufficient coal supply; therefore, a new shaft was driven to a depth of 208 feet (68
meters) and called the #3 or Odiorne Shaft (PID 15372220 north of Birch Grove Road)
site. The shafts at this location were worked with a 25 horsepower steam engine
capable of lifting coal out of the shaft or pumping water. Also located on or near the
Odiorne Shaft site were Beehive coking ovens, a briquette plant containing a Yeadon
Briquette machine, and a Copala furnace which drew air from the underground workings
and initiated ventilation. The initial adit driven at the shoreline was by this time used as
a gravity drainage tunnel for the newer workings. Once brought to surface, coal was
transported by light rail to the shipping pier on Cow (Morien) Bay (MGI, 2004).
PID 15758253 was the right of way for the Morien Branch of the Sydney & Louisbourg
Railway which ran from the shipping pier at the shore of Cow (Morien) Bay to the initial
#2 and #3 mine sites, and to the newer #4 Mine Site located further west. Initially, the
rail line was light gauge with little in the form of rail bed fill. With the formation of the
Dominion Coal Company circa 1893 came the construction of Sydney & Louisbourg
Railway (S&L) (MGI, 2004). This heavy gauge railway ran in a north south direction to
the west of the Gowrie Mines. The Morien Branch of the S&L was built at Morien Station
to service the Gowrie Mines. It is assumed that PID 15758253 was the right of way used
for the newer heavy gauge rail line.
The site of the Gowrie #4 (PID 15808124, 15808132, 15808140, 15808157, 15808165,
15808173, and 15808181) was operated between approximately 1877 until the mine
closure in 1897. Review of historical insurance plans for the Morien Branch Railway
indicated that during operation Gowrie #4 Mine site contained mining and railway
infrastructure which included an engine and boiler house, bank head, oil house, forge,
stable, and rail house. There would also have been coal laydown areas for stockpiles.
These large laydown areas are still present today. A small circular storage or setting
pond is also evident in aerial photos from 1930.
Commercial coal mining ceased in the Port Morien area in 1897. Subsequently, other
endeavours were pursued to spur economic activity in rural Cape Breton. This included
the construction of a replica train station in the area of the Odiorne Shaft/mine site.
Construction is evident between aerial photos taken between 1969 and 1983. The
tourist site included a replica train station; a miniature golf course north of Birch Grove
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Cape Breton Development Corporation Properties, Cape Breton County, NS
FINAL
Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited 26
Road (PID 18372220); an oval shaped race track north of the miniature golf course; and
a hockey rink built on a pond / reservoir just south of Birch Grove Road (PID 15372220)
(DNR Site 57, 1999). The replica train station has since been demolished, and the
miniature golf course abandoned. The Odiorne Pit collapsed in 2001 and was filled by
CBDC. Historical research conducted by MGI Limited revealed that fill materials used
included 15 truck loads of concrete and 23 truck loads of shale. In conversation with
Graham McMullin, MGI Limited also learned that the Beehive Coke Ovens were
demolished and buried in August 2001.
An inquiry into the NSDEL Environmental Registry revealed no record of reported
environmental issues regarding PID 15372220, 15524960, 15808157, 15808181,
15782353, 15808124, 15808132, or 15808173.
Aerial photographs provided views of the subject properties for 1930, 1950, 1969, 1983,
and 1999. A summary of the aerial photograph review is presented in Table 4.3 below.
Aerial photographs for 1930, 1950, 1969, 1983 and 1999 are presented as Figures 4-3.1
through 4-3.5 respectively.
TABLE 4.3: SUBJECT PROPERTY AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH REVIEW SUMMARY
Aerial
Photograph
Year
PID Subject Property Land Usage
1930
Mainly unforested / small reservoir / laydown areas related
to former workings
1950
Mainly unforested / small reservoir / laydown areas related
to former workings
1969
Reforestation progressing / laydown areas related to
former workings
1983
Reforestation progressing / laydown areas related to
former workings
1999
15808116
15808124
15808132
15808140
15808157
15808165
15808173
15808181 Reforestation progressing / laydown areas related to
former workings
1930 Abandoned railway
1950 Abandoned railway
1969 Abandoned railway
1983 Abandoned railway
1999
15758253
Abandoned railway
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Cape Breton Development Corporation Properties, Cape Breton County, NS
FINAL
Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited 27
TABLE 4.3 continued
Aerial
Photograph
Year
PID Subject Property Land Usage
1930
Mostly forested / remnants of Beehive coke ovens /
abandoned railway, reservoir
1950
Mostly forested / remnants of Beehive coke ovens /
abandoned railway, reservoir
1969
Mostly forested / remnants of Beehive coke ovens /
abandoned railway / oval racetrack development /
reservoir
1983
Mostly forested / remnants of Beehive coke ovens /
abandoned railway / oval racetrack development / mini
putt / reservoir / hockey rink
1999
15524960 and
15372220
Mostly forested / remnants of beehive coke ovens /
abandoned railway / remnants of race track and mini
putt development
4.2.2 Former Buildings and Structures
Building structures in the area of Gowrie mines during the 19th century were mainly of
wooden construction. Chimneys and foundations would likely have been laid with brick.
Machinery housing in production related buildings would have been of forged iron and
likely contained lubricating oil of some kind. Materials of environmental concern
including asbestos, and UFFI would not have been utilized during the 19th Century.
Lead based paints may have been utilized in some building structures.
#4 Gowrie Mine
Review of the “Dominion Coal Company Ltd., District No. 2 Insurance Plan of Buildings,
Port Morien, Blockhouse and Washplant,” (from the late 19th Century) gave an indication
of buildings that were likely located on the subject properties during the period when the
#4 Gowrie Mine was operational. Buildings appeared to be mainly located on or near
PID 15808132 and the #4 Gowrie Mine shaft and included an engine and boiler house,
bank head, oil house, forge, stable, and what appear to be two (2) housing structures.
Morien Branch Railway (PID 15758253)
Review of the “Dominion Coal Company Ltd., District No. 2 Insurance Plan of Buildings,
Port Morien, Blockhouse and Washplant,” (from the late 19th Century) gave no indication
of former buildings or structures located on the railway right of way. Initially, the rail bed
would have consisted of a light gauge (15 – 20 pounds per foot) rail line. Fill for the
initial rail bed would have been minimal with rail ties being cut from the surrounding
forest. The formation of the Dominion Coal Company in 1893 resulted in the
construction of a heavy gauge (80 pound per foot) rail line to the Gowrie Mines at Cow
Bay (Port Morien). Fill for the replacement rail bed came from beach materials at Mira
Gut and Catalone, with records also indicating that some fill in some areas may have
come from mine rock waste and slag from the Steel Plant. Railway ties were typically
cedar with creosote preserve and laid every two feet (MGI 2004).
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Cape Breton Development Corporation Properties, Cape Breton County, NS
FINAL
Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited 28
Gowrie #2 and #3 Mine
Review of the “Dominion Coal Company Ltd., District No. 2 Insurance Plan of Buildings,
Port Morien, Blockhouse and Washplant,” (from the late 19th Century) gave an indication
of buildings that were likely located on the subject properties during the time when the
Gowrie (Odiorne) Mines were in production. Buildings which appeared to be located on
15372220 near the old Gowrie mine shaft included an engine and boiler house (records
indicate a 25 hp stream engine which could lift coal or pump water), a forge, a fuel
storage shed (fuels types may have included coal, wood, whale oil), locomotive shed
and patent fuel works. Also located on PID 15372220 were 12 Beehive Coke Ovens
and a briquette plant. The southern section of 15372220 also appeared to be the site of
approximately 8 housing structures, likely for miners. Conversation with John Kalbhenn
of MGI also indicated the former presence of a steam powered Copala furnace used to
ventilate the mine.
Undeveloped (PID 15524945)
Historical land use for PID 15524945 is unknown. Review of historical mapping and
documents revealed no indication of buildings or structures present on the subject
property in the past.
4.2.3 Adjacent Properties – Historical Land Use
The Gowrie Mine was located in the community of Port Morien. During the 19th century
coal mining would have been a central industry in the community. Aside from the
subject coal mining and rail line properties, land use in the Port Morien area would have
been typical of any 19th Century Cape Breton Community, with fields and pastures,
residential properties and woodland. The area to the north of the mine workings and
Port Morien consists of undeveloped woodland. Historically, this woodland may have
been subject to frequent forest fires as a result of embers from the coal fired steam
locomotives. In general, the southern area of Port Morien, located between the subject
properties and Morien Bay, was the location of residential properties and associated
fields and pastures.
Aerial photographs for the years 1930, 1950, 1969, 1983 and 1999 are presented in
Figures 4.3.1 through 4.3.5. Table 4.4 below, summarizes the aerial photograph review
conducted for properties adjacent to the subject properties.
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Cape Breton Development Corporation Properties, Cape Breton County, NS
FINAL
Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited 29
TABLE 4.4: ADJACENT PROPERTY AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH REVIEW SUMMARY
Aerial Photograph
Year PID Direction Adjacent Land Usage
North Forested / residential / farmland
South
Roadway / residential /
farmland
East
Abandoned railway / roadway /
undeveloped
1930
West Undeveloped / forested
North Forested / residential / farmland
South
Roadway / residential /
farmland
East
Abandoned railway / roadway /
undeveloped
1950
West Undeveloped / forested
North Forested / residential / farmland
South
Roadway / residential /
farmland
East
Abandoned railway / roadway /
undeveloped
1969
West Undeveloped / forested
North Forested / residential / farmland
South
Roadway / residential /
farmland
East
Abandoned railway / roadway /
undeveloped
1983
West Undeveloped / forested
North Forested / residential / farmland
South
Roadway / residential /
farmland
East
Abandoned railway / roadway /
undeveloped
1999
15808116,
15808124,
15808132,
15808140,
15808157,
15808165,
15808173,
15808181
West Forested / residential
North
Mostly forested / unidentified
quarry or laydown area
South Forested / residential / farmland
East
PID 15372220 / Former coke
ovens / former Gowrie #2 & #3
1930
West Former Gowrie #4
North
Mainly forested / unidentified
quarry or laydown area
(reduced in size)
South Forested / residential / farmland
East
PID 15372220 / Former coke
ovens / former Gowrie #2 & #3
1950
15758253
West Former Gowrie #4
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Cape Breton Development Corporation Properties, Cape Breton County, NS
FINAL
Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited 30
TABLE 4.4: continued
North
Mostly forested / unidentified
quarry or laydown area
(reduced in size)
South Forested / residential / farmland
East
Former coke ovens / former
Gowrie #2 & #3 / Racetrack
development
1969
West Former Gowrie #4
North
Mostly forested / racetrack
development
South Forested / residential / farmland
East
Former coke ovens / former
Gowrie #2 & #3 / Racetrack
development
1983
West Former Gowrie #4
North
Mostly forested / racetrack
development
South Forested / residential / farmland
East
Former coke ovens / former
Gowrie #2 & #3 / Racetrack
development
1999
15758253
West Former Gowrie #4
North Forested / Undeveloped
South Forested / residential / farmland
East Mainly residential 1930
West
Abandoned railway / roadway /
residential / farmland
North Undeveloped / forested
South Forested / residential / farmland
East Mainly residential 1950
West
Abandoned railway / roadway/
residential / farmland
North Forested / Undeveloped
South Forested / residential / farmland
East Mainly residential 1969
West
Abandoned railway / roadway /
residential / farmland /
racetrack development
North
Racetrack development /
forested
South Forested / residential / farmland
East Mainly residential 1983
15524960, 15372220
West
Abandoned railway / roadway /
residential / farmland /
racetrack development
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Cape Breton Development Corporation Properties, Cape Breton County, NS
FINAL
Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited 31
TABLE 4.4: continued
North
Racetrack development /
forested
South Forested / residential / farmland
East Mainly residential 1999 15524960, 15372220
West
Abandoned railway / roadway /
residential / farmland /
racetrack development
North
Forested (possibly cleared) /
Undeveloped
South
Roadway / residential /
farmland
East
Roadway / residential /
farmland
1930
West Forested / former coke ovens
North
Forested (possibly cleared) /
undeveloped
South
Roadway / residential /
farmland
East
Roadway / residential /
farmland
1950
West Forested / former coke ovens
North
Forested (possibly cleared) /
Undeveloped
South
Roadway / residential /
farmland
East
Roadway / residential /
farmland
1969
West
Forested / former coke ovens /
racetrack development
North Forested / Undeveloped
South
Roadway / residential /
farmland
East
Roadway / residential /
farmland
1983
West
Forested / former coke ovens /
racetrack development
North Forested / Undeveloped
South
Roadway / residential /
farmland
East
Roadway / residential /
farmland
1999
15524945
West
Forested / former coke ovens /
racetrack development
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Cape Breton Development Corporation Properties, Cape Breton County, NS
FINAL
Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited 32
4.3 Site Visit and Evaluation of Findings
4.3.1 Fuel Storage and Handling
Fuel storage was not observed during the site inspection, and is not suspected on the
subject properties. Potential environmental impacts are not suspected.
4.3.2 Spill and Stain Areas
Gowrie #4 Mine (PID 15808140)
During site inspection conducted by MGI Ltd in spring 2004, rust coloured staining was
observed in a stream located on PID 15808140. Acid rock drainage may be a factor.
Potential environmental impacts are possible.
4.3.3 Dangerous Goods Handling and Storage
Handling and storage of dangerous goods or chemicals was not observed on the
property during the site inspection. Potential environmental impacts are not suspected.
4.3.4 Asbestos Containing Materials (ACM)
No suspected Asbestos Containing Material (ACM) was observed on the property during
the site visit. ACMs are not suspected to exist at the site due to the sites’ historic uses
and period of operation.
4.3.5 Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB)
No suspected PCB containing items were observed on the property during the site.
Potential environmental impacts are not suspected.
4.3.6 Ozone Depleting Substances (ODS)
No ODS were observed during the site visit. Potential environmental impacts are not
suspected.
4.3.7 Lead / Mercury
Properties which were the site of historic buildings and structures pose and
environmental concern due to lead and/or mercury based paints which may have been
utilized in the past.
PID 15808132 (Gowrie #4)
Former buildings included an engine and boiler house, bank head, oil house, forge,
stable and housing structures. Potential environmental impacts are possible.
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Cape Breton Development Corporation Properties, Cape Breton County, NS
FINAL
Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited 33
PID 15372220 (Gowrie #2 and #3)
Former buildings included an engine and boiler house, forge, fuel storage sheds,
locomotive shed, and patent fuel works. Potential environmental impacts are possible.
4.3.8 Urea Formaldehyde Foam Insulation (UFFI)
No Urea UFFI was observed during the site visit. Potential environmental impacts are
not suspected.
4.3.9 Wastewater
The site is undeveloped; therefore, there is no wastewater emission from the subject
site. Potential environmental impacts are not suspected.
4.3.10 Water Courses, Ditches or Standing Water
PID 15808140 (Gowrie #4)
During site inspection conducted by MGI Ltd in spring 2004, rust coloured staining was
observed in a stream located on PID 15808140. Acid rock drainage may be a factor as
discussed in section 4.3.2. Potential environmental impacts are possible.
PID 15372220 (Gowrie #2 and #3)
A small pond formerly utilized as an outdoor hockey rink is present on PID 15372220.
Environmental impacts were not observed during site inspection. Potential
environmental impacts are not suspected.
4.3.11 Pesticides / Herbicides
No pesticides were observed to be stored on the property during the site visit. Potential
environmental impacts are not suspected.
4.3.12 Radon
Review of the Nova Scotia Department of Health map “Potential Occurrence of Radon
Gas in Nova Scotia” which serves to identify areas where naturally deposited, slightly
radioactive soils are most likely to enhance radon emission, revealed that soils in the
area of the subject property, and eastern Cape Breton Island in general, exhibit little or
no uranium, thorium or other naturally – occurring radioactive elements in the soil.
Potential environmental impacts are not suspected.
4.3.13 Electromagnetic Fields
Electromagnetic field sources were not observed on the subject property during site
inspection. Potential environmental impacts are not suspected.
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Cape Breton Development Corporation Properties, Cape Breton County, NS
FINAL
Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited 34
4.3.14 Sewage Disposal
Lack of current on-site facilities would indicate lack of sewage disposal on-site. Potential
environmental impacts are not suspected.
4.3.15 Solid Waste
Coal Fines
Surficial materials containing coal and coal fines are common throughout the Industrial
Cape Breton region; therefore, areas identified through the CBDC Property Screening
Program as Class 3 or Class 4 environmental concerns, or containing small or isolated
amounts of coal fines, were deemed to present a low risk for potential environmental
impacts. Larger coal fine areas, identified as Class 1 or Class 2 during the CBDC
Property Screening were deemed to present a greater degree of risk and therefore
recommended for further investigation.
PID 15808181 (Gowrie #4)
One (1) area with visible coal fines was identified during site inspection. The location of
the area of concern is presented in Figure 4-2.1. From site photographs, the coal fine
area appears to be relatively small (Class 3) and potential for environmental impacts are
deemed low.
PID 15808173 (Gowrie #4)
One (1) area with visible coal fines was identified during site inspection. The location of
the area of concern is presented in Figure 4-2.1. The coal fines located on PID
15808173 appear to be intermixed with waste rock. Potential for environmental impacts
from the coal fine material are deemed low, given that the pre-screening ranked these
coal fines as Class 3
PID 15758253 (Morien Branch Railway)
Visible coal fines were identified along the abandoned rail line. The location of the area
of concern is presented in Figure 4-2.2. Given the narrow extent of coal fines
(Class 3) along the rail bed potential for environmental impact are deemed low.
PID 15524960 (Gowrie #2 and #3)
Two (2) areas with visible coal fines were identified during site inspection. Locations of
areas with coal fines are presented in Figure 4-2.3. These areas of coal fines were
located along what appear to be abandoned rail lines or cart paths. Given the relatively
narrow extent of these coal fine areas, and the Pre-screening classification (Class 3),
potential for environmental impacts are deemed low.
PID 15372220 (Gowrie #2 and #3)
Four (4) areas with visible coal fines were identified during the site inspection. Locations
of areas with coal fines are presented in Figure 4-2.3. These areas of coal fines were
located mainly along abandoned rail beds or cart paths. Given the relatively small extent
of these coal fine areas, potential for environmental impacts are deemed low.
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Cape Breton Development Corporation Properties, Cape Breton County, NS
FINAL
Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited 35
Waste Rock
PID 15808181 (Gowrie #4)
One (1) area with visible waste rock was identified during site inspection. The location of
the area of concern is presented in Figure 4-2.1.
PID 15808173 (Gowrie #4)
Two (2) areas with visible waste rock were identified during site inspection. The
locations of the areas of concern are presented in Figure 4-2.1.
Laydown Areas
PID 15808132 (Gowrie #4)
Two large laydown areas are present on the southern section of PID 15808132. One
laydown area covers an area greater than 1 acre. The second laydown area covers an
area of approximately 0.5 acres. Another laydown area is located on the northern portion
of PID 15808132. Photographs of the laydown areas indicate a reddish colour
suggesting possible pyritic content and potential for acid rock drainage. Photographs of
the laydown areas are presented in Figure 4-1.1, locations of the laydown areas are
presented in Figure 4-2.1.
Dumpsite
PID 15808124 (Gowrie #4)
On-site solid wastes include a discarded 900L domestic oil tank on the northern section
of the property. Given the likeliness that the oil tank was empty or nearly empty upon
being discarded, it could be assumed that environmental impacts would be minimal, and
if present, likely limited to surface soils. The location of the discarded tank is presented
on Figure 4-2.1 as a dumpsite.
Housekeeping
PID 15808173 (Gowrie #4)
Two (2) areas were identified as housekeeping issues on PID 15808173. These
housekeeping issues were in the form of illegal dumpsites which included scrap metal
and discarded wire fencing. Figure 4-2.1 presents the areas in which the housekeeping
issues were identified. No environmental concern areas were identified within these
housekeeping points.
PID 15808165 (Gowrie #4)
One (1) area was identified as a housekeeping issue on PID 15808165. Scrap metal
was observed on the eastern portion of PID 15808165. Figure 4-2.1 presents the area
in which the housekeeping issue was identified. No environmental concern areas were
identified within these housekeeping points.
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Cape Breton Development Corporation Properties, Cape Breton County, NS
FINAL
Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited 36
PID 15808132 (Gowrie #4)
One (1) area was identified as a housekeeping issue on PID 15808132. Scrap metal
and domestic debris was observed on the eastern portion of PID 15808132. Figure 4-
2.1 presents the area in which the housekeeping issue was identified. No environmental
concern areas were identified within these housekeeping points.
PID 15758253 (Morien Branch Railway)
One (1) area was identified as a housekeeping issue on PID 15858253. Scrap metal
was observed on the western portion of the PID. Figure 4-2.2 presents the area in which
the housekeeping issue was identified. No environmental concern areas were identified
within these housekeeping points.
PID 15372220 (Gowrie #2 and #3)
Five (5) areas were identified as housekeeping issues on PID 15372220. Typically,
these issues pertained to illegal dumping on the subject property. Materials observed to
be dumped on PID 15372220 include domestic debris, tires, plastics, and scrap metal.
Also present on PID 15372220 is the remains of a mini putt golf course constructed of
wood. Figure 4-2.3 presents areas in which housekeeping issues were identified. No
environmental concern areas were identified within these housekeeping points.
PID 15524945 (Port Morien Undeveloped)
Four (4) areas were identified as posing housekeeping issues on PID 15524945. Scrap
metal and wood debris was observed on the southern portion of PID 15524945. Figure
4-2.4 presents the area in which the housekeeping issues were identified. No
environmental concern areas were identified within these housekeeping points.
4.3.16 Stressed Vegetation
Stressed vegetation was not noted during site inspection. Potential environmental
impacts are not suspected.
4.3.17 Air Emissions
There are no air emissions from the subject site. Potential environmental impacts are not
suspected.
4.3.18 Fill Materials
PID 15808140 (Gowrie #4)
One (1) fill area was identified on PID 15808140. The area is located on the western
portion of the subject PID and is grass covered. Figure 4-1.1 and 4-2.1 illustrate the fill
area location.
PID 1537220 (Gowrie #2 and #3)
Two (2) areas were identified as fill areas on PID 15372220. These areas are located
on the southern portion of the subject PID in proximity to the former site of 12 beehive
coking ovens buried in 2001. Also formerly located in proximity to the fill areas were a
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Cape Breton Development Corporation Properties, Cape Breton County, NS
FINAL
Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited 37
replica railway station and other infrastructure. Potential environmental impacts related
to leaching of metals and ash material contained in the former coke ovens may pose
potential environmental impacts to soil and possibly groundwater in the vicinity of the
filled beehive coking ovens. Figures 4-1.3 and 4-2.3 illustrate the location of these fill
areas.
4.4 Conclusions
The following table 4.5 is a summary of Phase I ESA findings at the CBDC subject
property located in Port Morien, Cape Breton.
TABLE 4.5: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
PID
Potential
Concern Description
Degree of
Risk Media
Contaminants
of Concern
Gowrie #4 Mine
Former
buildings
and
structures
Former structures may
have used lead / mercury
based paints, lube
oils/fuels. Exact locations
of these structures are
unknown.
Medium/Low Soil Metals, PAHs,
TPH.
15808132
Laydown
area
Three (3) large laydown
areas located on
property. All exhibit pyritic
characteristics.
Medium Soil ARD
pH
Staining Rust coloured staining in
stream Medium SW, soil ARD, metals
15808140
Fill Material
Grass covered fill area
located on western
portion of property.
Possible building
location.
Medium to
low Soil, GW Metals, PAHs,
TPH
Solid waste Coal fines – Class 3 Low Soil Metals, PAHs
15808181
Waste rock Visible waste rock Low Soil ARD, metals,
pH
Solid waste Coal fines mixed with
waste rock – Class 3 Low Soil Metals, PAHs
15808173
Waste rock Visible waste rock Low Soil ARD, metals
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Cape Breton Development Corporation Properties, Cape Breton County, NS
FINAL
Neill and Gunter (Nova Scotia) Limited 38
TABLE 4.5 continued
PID Potential
Concern Description Degree of
Risk Media Contaminants
of Concern
15808124 Solid Waste Discarded domestic fuel
oil tank Low
Surface soil
Surface soil.
Potentially
subsurface
soils and
groundwater
depending
on volume
of product, if
any.
TPH
Morien Branch Railway
15808253 Solid Waste Coal fines Low Soil Metals, PAHs
Gowrie #2 and #3 Mine
Former
buildings
and
structures
Former structures may
have used lead / mercury
based paints, lube
oils/fuels. Exact
locations of these
structures are unknown.
Medium/Low Soil Metals, PAHs,
TPH.
Solid Waste Four (4) areas of coal
fines identified – Class 3 Low Soil Metals, PAHs
15372220
Fill material
Two (2) areas of infilling
located near former
Beehive coking ovens.
Medium Soil, GW Metals, PAHs,
TPH.
15524960 Solid Waste Two (2) areas of coal
fines identified – Class 3 Low Soil Metals, PAHs
A Phase II Environmental Site Assessment is recommended to determine if potential
environmental impacts exist at the above mentioned locations. Priority should be given
to potential concerns identified as posing medium to high risk for potential environmental
impact.
Harbour Engineering Joint Venture Phase I ESA Birch Grove Road, Port Morien PID No. 15524945 21
APPENDIX D
Regulatory Correspondence
PO Box 442
Halifax, Nova Scotia
B3J 2P8
Information Access ph: (902) 424-2549
and Privacy fax: (902) 424-6925
January 17, 2018 Our file # ENV-2019-0056/0067
Email: nwambolt@dillon.ca
Nadine Wambolt
Dillon Consuling Ltd.
275 Charlotte Street
Sydney NS B1P 1C6
Dear Ms. Wambolt: RE: Birch Grove Rd. (PID 15524945); Birch Grove Rd. (PID 15524739); Birch Grove Rd. (PID 15524952); 209 Birch Grove Rd. (PID 15372261); 83 Birch Grove Rd. (PID
15372105); Birch Grove Rd. (PID 15564529); 126 Birch Grove Rd. (PID 15372121); 134 Birch Grove Rd. (PID 15372188); 142 Birch Grove Rd. (PID 15372170); 148 Birch Grove Rd. (PID 15372196); 38 Gowrie St. (PID 15372139); and Birch Grove Rd. (PID 15886070), Port Morien
I refer to your enquiry of the Environmental Registry received January 8, 2019. We acknowledge
receipt of payment for 12 properties.
No information was located through the Environmental Registry with regards to the above
referenced properties.
Nova Scotia Environment makes no representations or warranties on the accuracy or
completeness of the information provided.
Sincerely,
Tina Skeir
Information Access Office