Line 3 Decommissioning (L3D)

Draft Decommissioning Plan

Board Order MO-008-2016 – Condition 11 September 8, 2020

Table of Contents 1.0 LINE 3 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN OVERVIEW ...... 6 1.1 Declaration of Intent and Limitations ...... 6 1.2 Definitions and Abbreviations Used in the Draft Plan ...... 7 1.3 Asset Overview ...... 10 1.3.1 Pipeline ...... 10 1.3.2 Mainline Valve Sites ...... 12 1.3.3 Other Mainline Sites ...... 13 1.3.4 Facilities (Pump Stations and Terminals) ...... 14 2.0 DECOMMISSIONING ACTIVITIES ...... 15 2.1 Pipeline Cleaning ...... 16 2.1.1 Cleaning Execution...... 16 2.1.2 Cleaning Train Design ...... 17 2.1.3 Back Pressure Gas ...... 18 2.1.4 Motivation Gas Selection ...... 19 2.1.5 Water Usage ...... 19 2.1.6 Pig Selection ...... 20 2.1.7 Water Quality Sampling Program ...... 21 2.2 Pipeline Isolation ...... 22 2.2.1 Facilities (Pump Stations/Terminals) ...... 23 2.2.2 Valve Sites (Manual, Hydraulically-actuated, Motor-actuated) ...... 23 2.2.3 Pressure-Indicating Transmitters (PIT) ...... 23 2.2.4 Densitometers ...... 24 2.2.5 Delivery Sites ...... 24 2.3 Segmentation ...... 24

2.4 Railway Fill ...... 25 2.5 Cathodic Protection ...... 27 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION ...... 27 3.1 Decommissioning Activities: Potential Environmental Effects ...... 27 3.2 Water Withdrawal ...... 29 4.0 DECOMMISSIONING PERIOD MONITORING ...... 36 4.1 Surveillance and Monitoring Program ...... 36 4.2 Line 3 Integrity Threats ...... 38 5.0 STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT ...... 39 5.1 Previous Engagement ...... 39 5.2 Condition Requirements...... 39 5.3 Recent Engagement Activities ...... 40 5.3.3 Indigenous Nations, Governments and Groups ...... 40 5.3.4 Other Potentially Affected Stakeholders ...... 42 5.4 Engagement During the Decommissioning Activities ...... 43 5.5 Outstanding Concerns ...... 43 Appendix A – Line 3 Decommissioning Work Locations ...... 44 Appendix B – Line 3 Decommissioning Schematics ...... 49 Appendix C – Line 3 Decommissioning Engagement Maps ...... 49 Appendix D – Line 3 Decommissioning EPP ...... 49 Appendix E – Cleaning Scope Drawings ...... 49 Appendix F – Isolation Scope Drawings ...... 49 Appendix G – Segmentation Scope Drawings ...... 49 Appendix H – Railway Fill Scope Drawings ...... 49 Appendix I – List of Indigenous Nations, Governments and Groups Invited to Engage ...... 50

Appendix J – Notification Letter & Fact Sheet – February 10, 2020 ...... 52 Appendix K – “What We Heard” Summaries - March 2020 ...... 53 Appendix L – Letter Regarding Engagement During Covid-19 – March 25, 2020 ...... 54 Appendix M – Line 3 and Prairie Region News Newsletter – May 28, 2020 ...... 55 Appendix N - Summary of Feedback - Indigenous Nations, governments & groups ...... 56 Appendix O – List of Other Potentially Affected Stakeholders Invited to Engage ...... 70 Appendix P - Summary of Feedback - Potentially Affected Stakeholders ...... 75

List of Tables and Figures Table 1: Line 3 Pipeline Segment Information ...... 11 Table 2: Mainline Valve Sites ...... 12 Table 3: Other Mainline Sites ...... 14 Table 4: Line 3 Pump Stations and Terminals ...... 14 Table 5: Cleaning Program Work Locations ...... 16 Table 6: Cleaning Train Detailed Design Summary ...... 18 Table 7: Cleaning Program Water Withdrawal and Disposal Locations ...... 19 Table 8: Cleaning Train Pig Selection Design Summary ...... 20 Table 9: Isolation Scope Summary ...... 22 Table 10: Railway Fill Scope Summary ...... 25 Table 11: Railway Fill Material Summary ...... 26 Table 12: Summary of Environmental Effects and Mitigation Methods ...... 30 Table 13: Integrity Threats and Associated Consequence and Control Mechanisms ...... 38

Figure 1: Line 3 Decommissioning Overview Map ...... 11 Figure 2: General Cleaning Train Design ...... 17

- THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY BLANK –

1.0 LINE 3 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN OVERVIEW

1.1 Declaration of Intent and Limitations Following the issuance of Board Order MO-008-2016 [CER Filing ID: A80884] (“Decommissioning Order”) by the Canada Energy Regulator (“CER”), previously called the National Energy Board (“NEB”), Enbridge Pipelines Inc. (“Enbridge”) completed detailed engineering and execution planning for the Line 3 Decommissioning (“L3D”) project, a subset of the Line 3 Replacement Program (“L3D Project”). This draft Decommissioning Plan (“Plan”) is intended to provide the CER with details of Enbridge’s decommissioning plan for Existing Line 3 Pipeline as per Condition 11 of the Decommissioning Order.

This draft Plan provides a consolidated summary of the Decommissioning Activities required to decommission the Existing Line 3 Pipeline in Canada (“Decommissioning Activities”), which has now been replaced by the Replacement Line 3 Pipeline (“Line 93”). On December 1, 2016, the NEB issued the Certificate and Decommissioning Order authorizing the construction and operation of Line 93, as part of the Line 3 Replacement Program (“L3R”). Line 93 has been in operation since December 2019.

This draft Plan also provides a summary of the monitoring activities to be performed following the completion of Decommissioning Activities and during the Decommissioned Period. This draft Plan is structured as follows:

• Section 1 provides an overview of the Existing Line 3 Pipeline (the asset to be decommissioned). This section also includes the definition of key terms by the CER in the Decommissioning Order [CER Filing ID: A80884]. • Section 2 details the Decommissioning Activities to be completed by the L3D Project pursuant to the Decommissioning Order to decommission the asset in-place. • Section 3 details the framework used to evaluate the environmental effects of the Decommissioning Activities at each location and the mitigation methods proposed and implemented. • Section 4 provides an overview of the monitoring programs during the Decommissioned Period following the same premise as Section 2. Further details of the monitoring programs will be described in Enbridge’s filing pursuant to Condition 12 of the Decommissioning Order. • Section 5 summarizes the engagement of potentially affected stakeholders and Indigenous Nations, governments and groups with respect to the draft Plan.

1.2 Definitions and Abbreviations Used in the Draft Plan Enbridge is utilizing the following definitions and abbreviations in this draft Plan:

Board National Energy Board.

BIS Business Information Sheets.

CALA Canadian Association for Laboratory Accreditation Inc.

CCAR Major Projects Management Office Crown Consultation and Accommodation Report.

Certificate Certificate OC-063 for L3R; Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity authorizing the construction and operation of the Section 52 Pipeline and related Facilities, issued pursuant to section 54 of the NEB Act.

CER Canada Energy Regulator. On August 28, 2019, the National Energy Board was replaced with the Canada Energy Regulator.

Condition 14 The Decommissioning Engagement Plan for Indigenous Groups as required by Condition 14 of the Decommissioning Order.

Conditions 21/29 L3R Operational Consultation Plan for Aboriginal Groups filed with the CER on March 29, 2019 as required by Condition 21 of the Section 58 Order and Condition 29 of Certificate OC-063.

Decommissioning As per the Decommissioning Order, “[t]he treatment measures that will be Activities applied to the Existing Line 3 Pipeline by Enbridge to decommission the Existing Line 3 Pipeline, including cleaning of the pipeline, isolation, segmentation, and work at railroad crossings, but not including buoyancy control measures.”

Decommissioned Line The decommissioned Line 3 Pipeline during the Decommissioned Period.

Decommissioning Decommissioning Order MO-008-2016. Order

Decommissioned As per the Decommissioning Order, “[t]he period of time from when the Existing Period Line 3 Pipeline has been decommissioned (that is, the treatments have been applied) until leave to abandon the Existing Line 3 Pipeline is granted by the Board pursuant to paragraph 74(1)(d) of the NEB Act”.

Decommissioning EPP Decommissioning Environmental Protection Plan developed specifically for the L3D Project, included in Appendix D in the final filed Plan.

DOC Depth of cover.

Draft Plans Together, the draft Decommissioning Plan and the draft Decommissioning Engagement Plan for Indigenous Groups as required by Conditions 11 and 14, respectively, of the Decommissioning Order.

ESA Environmental and Socio-Economic Assessment.

Existing Line 3 Pipeline The portion of the existing Line 3 pipeline, forming part of the Project, for which Enbridge requested a Decommissioning Order pursuant to section 45.1 of the Canada Energy Regulator Onshore Pipeline Regulations, SOR/99-294. The following segments of the Existing Line 3 Pipeline, totaling approximately 1,049 km will be decommissioned: Segment 1: Hardisty Terminal (E1/2 19-42-9 W4M) to Cromer Terminal (NE 17-9-28 WPM and SE 20-9-28 WPM); and Segment 2: NW 9-9-26 WPM to Gretna Station (SE 8-1-1 WPM).

GOC Government of Canada.

Governor in Council Governor General acting on advice of the Federal Cabinet.

Guidelines Aboriginal Consultation and Accommodation Updated Guidelines for Federal Officials to Fulfill the Duty to Consult.

IAMC Indigenous Advisory and Monitoring Committee established by the GOC as part of its approval of the L3R. The IAMC facilitates the integration of Indigenous knowledge, teachings, values, use of the land, oral traditions and worldviews into the monitoring, regulation, compliance, mitigation, remediation, and performance for the lifecycle of the L3R. The IAMC Terms of Reference can be found here.

IMP Integrity Management Program.

KME Enbridge Kilometer Post.

L3D Project Line 3 Decommissioning project, a subset of the Line 3 Replacement Program.

L3R Line 3 Replacement Program.

Line 3 Replacement The pipeline and facilities, forming part of the L3D Project, for which Enbridge Pipeline requested a Certificate and a Section 58 Order.

MSAs Master Service Agreements.

NEB National Energy Board.

Order in Council Order in Council PC 206-1048 dated November 25, 2016.

PITs Pressure-indicating Transmitters.

Plan Decommissioning Plan for the L3D Project as required under Condition 11 of the Decommissioning Order.

RFI Request for Information.

RFP Request for Proposal.

SARM Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities.

Section 58 Order Order XO-E101-004-2016.

SEP Socio-Economic Plan.

SERC Socio-Economic Requirements of Contractors.

TPH Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons.

1.3 Asset Overview

1.3.1 Pipeline Line 3 is an existing 863.6 mm outer diameter (“O.D.”) [Nominal Pipe Size (“NPS”) 34] pipeline predominantly externally coated with a polyethylene tape-wrap coating system (97.3% of the line length) that has been in operation since 1968. The pipe’s grade is generally Gr. 359 (X52; ~98.1% of the line length). The pipe’s nominal wall thickness varies from 7.1 mm (minimum: ~24.4% of the line length) to 19.1 mm (maximum; ~0.01% of the line length). Intermediate pipe wall thicknesses include but are not limited to: 7.14 mm (70.6%), 7.92 mm (2.5%) and 12.7 mm (2.0%). Line 3 is co-located within Enbridge’s mainline corridor that contains up to eight pipelines, including the Existing Line 3 and the Line 3 Replacement Pipeline.1 The coating system is known to have disbondment issues (i.e. it does not stay adhered to the pipeline steel) which has created integrity issues that have reduced Line 3’s capacity to transport liquid hydrocarbon (“Product”).

Enbridge has replaced the Line 3 pipeline in Canada with a new NPS 36 pipeline (Line 93) as part of L3R. The Line 3 Replacement Pipeline initiates at Hardisty Terminal and terminates at Gretna Terminal. A small portion of Line 3 downstream of Cromer Terminal was previously replaced by Enbridge and will continue to operate as part of the Line 3 Replacement Pipeline. The portions of Line 3 that have been replaced by L3R are to be decommissioned. These segments are identified in Figure 1 and Table 1.

1 Lines 1, 2, 4, 13, 65 and 67

Figure 1: Line 3 Decommissioning Overview Map

Table 1: Line 3 Pipeline Segment Information

From To Approx. Pipeline Segment Enbridge Enbridge Location Kilometer Post Location Kilometer Post Length (KP ‘E’) (KP ‘E’) (km) 1 Hardisty Terminal 175.445 Kerrobert Terminal 351.291 176.31 2 Kerrobert Terminal 351.291 Regina Terminal 704.202 354.58 3 Regina Terminal 704.202 Cromer Terminal 958.845 255.63 4 Ex-Cromer* 980.344 Gretna Terminal 1242.403 262.31

Total 1048.83

*The location downstream of the tie-in between Line 3 Replacement pipeline [Order OH-002-2015] and the previously replaced Line 3 pipeline segment downstream of Cromer Terminal [Order XO-E101-016-2013].

1.3.2 Mainline Valve Sites Table 2 contains a list of the forty-four (44) valve sites along the pipeline corridor (i.e. all valve sites which are not located at a Line 3 pump station or terminal). This list also includes the valves located at Souris Station and Manitou Station as these facilities do not have a Line 3 pump station. Table 2 also indicates if each valve site is co-located with other operating facilities or if it is a stand-alone site with only Line 3 infrastructure at its location. Valve sites are also described based on how the valves are operated. Note that valves which are electrically actuated are indicated as motor operated valves.

Table 2: Mainline Valve Sites

KME Notes E207.831 Stand Alone Hydraulic Operated E209.052 Co-located Motor Operated E263.626 Co-located Manual Operated E274.985 Co-located Motor Operated E279.123 Stand Alone Hydraulic Manual Operated E335.055 Co-located Motor Operated E397.221 Co-located Motor Operated E404.062 Co-located Hydraulic Motor Operated E457.978 Co-located Motor Operated E504.157 Co-located Hydraulic Motor Operated E506.668 Co-located Hydraulic Motor Operated E523.966 Co-located Motor Operated E573.210 Stand Alone Hydraulic Operated E581.249 Co-located Motor Operated E590.584 Stand Alone Motor Operated E637.439 Stand Alone Hydraulic Operated E691.670 Co-located Motor Operated & Densitometer E740.203 Co-located Manual Operated E749.200 Co-located Motor Operated E774.597 Co-located Manual Operated E800.607 Co-located Motor Operated E827.066 Co-located Manual Operated

KME Notes E855.717 Co-located Manual Operated E856.598 Co-located Motor Operated E899.948 Co-located Manual Operated E929.153 Co-located Motor Operated E946.771 Co-located Hydraulic Manual Operated E997.966 Stand Alone Manual Operated E1009.179 Co-located Motor Operated E1023.371 Stand Alone Manual Operated Co-located Motor Operated E1040.126 At Souris Station which does not contain a Line 3 pump station E1069.493 Co-located Motor Operated E1073.877 Co-located Manual Operated E1082.278 Co-located Motor Operated E1087.300 Stand Alone Manual Operated E1092.295 Stand Alone Manual Operated E1131.016 Co-located Manual Operated E1139.246 Co-located Motor Operated E1148.141 Stand Alone Manual Operated Co-located Manual Operated E1165.086 At Manitou Station which does not contain a Line 3 pump station E1190.643 Co-located Motor Operated E1201.867 Stand Alone Manual Operated E1206.351 Co-located Motor Operated E1227.008 Co-located Manual Operated

1.3.3 Other Mainline Sites There are several other types of sites located along the mainline corridor that are not co-located with Line 3 mainline valve sites or a Line 3 pump station or terminal but may be co-located with other operating assets. These locations include pressure transmitting sites, densitometer sites and mainline delivery sites.

Table 3 contains the locations and descriptions of these sites. There is also one location listed in Table 2 where a densitometer is located alongside a Line 3 mainline valve.

Table 3: Other Mainline Sites

KME Notes E239.409 Pressure Indicating Transmitter E343.389 Densitometer E344.632 Pressure Indicating Transmitter E493.010 Pressure Indicating Transmitter Stony Beach Take-off NPS 16 Manual E660.922 Operated Valve (delivery site) E934.332 Pressure Indicating Transmitter E953.782 Densitometer E1177.997 Pressure Indicating Transmitter

1.3.4 Facilities (Pump Stations and Terminals)

There are 18 pump stations or terminals along the Existing Line 3 Pipeline. The pipeline will be physically separated at these locations (isolated) as further described in Section 2.2. The locations and station or terminal names are listed in Table 4 below. Note that the Enbridge Kilometer Post (“KME”) given in this table is general to the facilities and is not specific to the L3D Project scope. Table 4: Line 3 Pump Stations and Terminals

KME Station/Terminal E175.445 Hardisty Terminal E229.631 Metiskow Station E289.884 Cactus Lake Station E351.291 Kerrobert Terminal E413.632 Herschel Station E475.055 Milden Station E538.087 Loreburn Station E590.671 Craik Station E652.950 Bethune Station

KME Station/Terminal E704.202 Regina Terminal E761.971 Odessa Station E812.249 Glenavon Station E875.200 Langbank Station E958.845 Cromer Terminal E1031.614 West Souris Station E1103.289 Glenboro Station E1155.628 St. Leon Station E1242.403 Gretna Terminal

2.0 DECOMMISSIONING ACTIVITIES

The Decommissioning Order defined Decommissioning Activities as, “the treatment measures that will be applied to the Existing Line 3 Pipeline by Enbridge to decommission the Existing Line 3 Pipeline, including cleaning of the pipeline, isolation, segmentation, and work at railroad crossings, but not including buoyancy control measures”. The Decommissioning Activities are detailed in this section and are defined as per below:

• Pipeline Cleaning (Section 2.1): Running of a cleaning train through each pipeline segment defined in Table 1 to remove residual product from the pipeline.

• Pipeline Isolation (Section 2.2): Physical separation of the pipeline segments, as defined in Table 1, from active assets to prevent re-injection of product into the decommissioned asset. Additional considerations for closing and permanently disabling valves, de-energizing, electrical isolation and removal of standalone surface infrastructure is included within this section.

• Pipeline Segmentation (Section 2.3): Removing a small section of pipe and installing plates to prevent the creation of water conduits as the decommissioned pipeline corrodes during the Decommissioned Period. This scope is limited to the sites required to mitigate water or other fluid conduits in addition to physical separation of the pipeline at facilities and valve closures (per Section 2.2) and filling railway crossings with an engineered material (Section 2.4).

• Pipeline Railway Fill (Section 2.4): Removing a small section(s) of pipe, installing plates and injecting an engineered material beneath railway crossings to mitigate subsidence concerns during the Decommissioned Period.

• Pipeline Cathodic Protection System (Section 2.5): The cathodic protection system will remain in place and operational following the completion of the Decommissioning Activities.

A summary of all work locations where Decommissioning Activities will occur including the corresponding KME, province, segment number, activity description, risk mitigated, construction method, and an estimated schedule duration can be found in Appendix A.

It should also be noted that the pipeline will be empty (also referred to as purged or displaced) of product but will contain pressurized Nitrogen prior to starting Decommissioning Activities.

2.1 Pipeline Cleaning The pipeline cleaning program for the Existing Line 3 Pipeline reduces the potential impacts associated with the loss of liquid containment as the pipeline corrodes during the Decommissioned Period by ensuring as much residual product as possible is removed from the pipe walls and cannot be released into the environment in the future. This scope will be completed in four pipeline segments as listed in Table 1. The cleaning program consists of running a ‘cleaning train’ through the pipeline to remove residual product left in the pipeline after completion of displacement of the pipeline. Locations for the cleaning program are listed below in Table 5. Note that these locations are subject to change pending the finalization of the hydraulic assessment for the cleaning program.

Table 5: Cleaning Program Work Locations

Segment 1 2 3 4 Initiating Location Hardisty Terminal Kerrobert Terminal Regina Terminal Ex-Cromer Intermediate Injection Location Metiskow Station Milden Station Glenavon Station Glenboro Station Intermediate Venting Location Cactus Lake Station Loreburn Station Langbank Station St. Leon Station Terminating Location Kerrobert Terminal Regina Terminal Cromer Terminal Gretna Terminal

2.1.1 Cleaning Execution The cleaning program is proposed to be completed in a split execution fashion. One portion of the program will begin in Hardisty Terminal and continue to Regina Terminal (Segments 1 and 2 presented in Table 1). The second portion will start at Regina Terminal

and continue to Cromer Terminal (Segment 3 presented in Table 1). The third portion will start at the Ex-Cromer location, downstream of Cromer Terminal, and continue to Gretna Terminal (Segment 4 presented in Table 1). These three sections may be completed concurrently or sequentially however, the current execution plan is to complete Segment 4 in 2021, followed by Segments 1, 2 and 3 in 2022. The general execution sequence for each segment is:

• mobilize and complete site preparations (refer to Appendix E for cleaning footprint details); • inject gas to establish required initial back pressure (if needed); • build-out the cleaning train at the initiating location (e.g. load/launch pigs and inject liquid slugs); • motivate the train between the initiating and terminating locations by injecting gas (motivation) at the initiating/intermediate location(s), and venting gas (back-pressure) at intermediate/terminating location(s) (refer to Table 5); • sample/receive the cleaning train at the terminating location (e.g. collect liquid slugs, receive/unload pigs); and • vent pipeline (motivation gas), dispose of waste, restore site conditions, and de-mobilize.

2.1.2 Cleaning Train Design Figure 2 provides a general illustration for the cleaning train design to be implemented in each pipeline segment. The train will be built out with the lubricating pig, depicted on the far right, being loaded first and the process will then follow sequentially right to left.

Figure 2: General Cleaning Train Design

A ‘lubrication slug’ to reduce the wear of the lead pig’s sealing elements will be injected in front of the cleaning train. This slug will consist of the same chemistry-water mixture as the ‘cleaning slugs’. Each cleaning train will contain three (3) ‘cleaning slugs’ separated by pigs. These slugs are a combination of cleaning chemistry and water and are intended to remove residual product from the pipeline’s interior walls. Following the cleaning slugs, each train will include four (4) ‘rinse slugs’ separated by pigs. These slugs consist only of water and are intended to remove residual cleaning chemistry from the pipeline interior left behind by the cleaning slugs. The cleaning train will also utilize a control slug to support speed control of the cleaning train in order to ensure appropriate

contact time between the cleaning chemistry and the pipeline’s interior walls which is essential to a successful cleaning program. This slug will also consist only of water. The results of detailed engineering for the cleaning train design proposed for each segment of Line 3 are provided in Table 6. These values are subject to change pending the final analysis that requires selection of the cleaning contractor(s) for each segment.

Table 6: Cleaning Train Detailed Design Summary

Hardisty to Kerrobert Regina to Ex-Cromer to Segment Kerrobert to Regina Cromer Gretna Lubrication Slug Volume (# slugs, total m3) 1 - 47 1 - 93 1 - 68 1 - 76 Cleaning Slug Volume (# slugs, total m3) 3 - 320 3 - 637 3 - 637 3 - 516 Rinse Slugs Volume (# slugs, total m3) 4 - 612 4 - 1,196 4 - 876 4 - 972 Control Slug Volume (# slugs, total m3) 1 - 4,653 1 - 4,799 1 - 4,719 1 - 2,243 Net Fluid Volume (m3) 5,632 6,725 6,127 3,807 Approximate Train Length (km) 9.94 11.87 10.82 6.70 Estimated Train Run Time* (hr.) 60 142 59 188 Estimated Motivation Gas Requirements 1.25 2.88 1.21 2.32 (MM sm3) *Train run time refers to the duration of train motivation. This duration does not include the time required to build- out the train at the initiating location or receive the train at the terminating location, or any intermittent shut-downs during the transit time.

2.1.3 Back Pressure Gas Back pressure gas is used to manage the speed at which the cleaning train moves down the pipeline during the cleaning run. Management of the cleaning train speed is especially important for ensuring the effectiveness of the cleaning program and was a key factor in the hydraulic design of the program. Nitrogen will be used as the back-pressure gas and the initial back pressure pad for the cleaning train will be provided by the Nitrogen utilized to displace the product from the line (i.e. the motivation gas from the displacement activities will become the back-pressure gas) prior to the start of the cleaning program. If residual gas pressure is insufficient for the cleaning program, additional Nitrogen will be injected at the cleaning injection locations (refer to Table 5) prior to build-out of the cleaning train. Back pressure gas will manage the speed of the train through venting ahead of the pig train at the venting locations listed in Table 5.

2.1.4 Motivation Gas Selection Nitrogen will also be used as the motivation gas. Motivation gas will be injected at the cleaning injection locations (refer to Table 5) behind the cleaning train and will be used in conjunction with the back-pressure gas to manage the cleaning train speed. The motivation gas will be vented to atmosphere at the venting locations (refer to Table 5) after the cleaning program is complete for a given pipeline segment. As such, no residual pressure will remain in the decommissioned pipeline following the Decommissioning Activities or during the Decommissioned Period.

2.1.5 Water Usage Table 7 summarizes the anticipated water volume requirements, source locations, disposal requirements, and disposal locations correlating to the cleaning train and separated by pipeline segment. The estimated minimum and estimated maximum water volumes in Table 7 is the anticipated effect on water withdrawal and disposal volumes in the event that water is not re-used in subsequent pipeline segments. It is anticipated that a portion of the water in the control slug will be re-useable from one segment to the next in which case actual water withdrawal volumes may be lower than reflected in Table 7. This concern was previously identified in Enbridge’s Response to NEB IR No. 3.8.c [Exhibit B20-02]. A further discussion of the environmental evaluation of the water withdrawal and disposal sites can be found in Section 3.2. All water used in the cleaning program will be disposed of at an appropriate disposal facility; there will be no attempt to return this water to the source locations.

Table 7: Cleaning Program Water Withdrawal and Disposal Locations

Kerrobert to Ex-Cromer to Segment Hardisty to Kerrobert Regina to Cromer Total Regina Gretna Water Withdrawal Municipal Hydrant - Hardisty Terminal AllCock Reservoir Cromer Terminal - Location Regina Terminal Temporary Access N/A (hydrotest pond N/A (hydrotest pond N/A (hydrotest pond Yes Requirements within facility) within facility) within facility) Estimated Minimum Water Volume 5,900 2,200 1,600 0 9,700 Required (m3) Estimated Maximum Water Volume 5,900 7,200 6,700 4,200 24,000 Required (m3)

Liquid Waste Liquid Waste Liquid Waste Liquid Waste Planned Disposal Disposal Site Disposal Site Disposal Site Disposal Site - Location ** (e.g. Kindersley TRD) (e.g. Halbrite TRD) (e.g. Alida TRD) (e.g. Alida TRD) Estimated Waste 900 2,100 2,500 4,200 9,700 Volume (m3) Estimated Maximum 5,900 7,200 6,700 4,200 24,000 Waste Volume (m3)

Kerrobert to Ex-Cromer to Segment Hardisty to Kerrobert Regina to Cromer Total Regina Gretna Approximate Timeline for May – July 2022 Aug – Oct 2022 May – July 2021 Aug - Oct 2021 - Withdrawal/Disposal *** *Does not include ‘minor’ waste volumes not utilized for the cleaning train (e.g. generated from draining traps, flushing temporary piping and tankage, and hydrovac slurries)

*The difference between estimated and maximum water volume requirements is to account for the potential re-use of rinse slug/control slug water volumes in the cleaning train of the subsequent segment. The decision for re-use is made at the time of execution based upon the actual water quality received. ** Locations are subject to disposal availability at each facility at the time of execution. ***Withdrawal and disposal will be within a few weeks of each other.

2.1.6 Pig Selection All pigs proposed for the cleaning train are steel-mandrel cup and disc pigs that may also include brushes and a cavity for electronic transmitters, for pig tracking purposes.

• Cups – Provide a high seal for pig motivation and separation between liquid-liquid and liquid-gas interface; and a better seal compared to discs, but correspondingly, experience greater wear while travelling along the pipeline. • Discs – Support seal for motivation and batch separation provided by cups plus scraping/sweeping effect for liquid and particulate. Brushes – Will be used only where specified as per

• Table 8 – Provide additional scraping (mechanical cleaning) of any build-up on the pipeline wall. The cleaning train selection details are summarized in Table 8. The ‘Pig #’ refers to the sequence of launching the pigs into the pipeline, which can be seen in Figure 2 from right to left. The final selection is subject to change pending selection of the cleaning contractor(s) and pig vendor(s). The pig selection and sequence is unchanged by the pipeline segment.

Table 8: Cleaning Train Pig Selection Design Summary

Pig # Leading Batch Trailing Fluid Proposed Pig Type Gas (Back 1 Cleaning Batch Cup-Disc Pig with brushes Pressure) 2 Cleaning Batch Cleaning Batch Cup-Disc Pig with brushes

Pig # Leading Batch Trailing Fluid Proposed Pig Type 3 Cleaning Batch Cleaning Batch Cup-Disc Pig with brushes 4 Cleaning Batch Rinse Batch Cup-Disc Pig with brushes 5 Rinse Batch Rinse Batch Cup-Disc Pig without brushes 6 Rinse Batch Rinse Batch Cup-Disc Pig without brushes 7 Rinse Batch Rinse Batch Cup-Disc Pig without brushes 8* Rinse Batch Control Slug Cup-Disc Pig without brushes Gas 9 Control Slug Cup-Disc Pig without brushes (Motivation) *Pig 8 is not implemented if the control slug is not utilized

2.1.7 Water Quality Sampling Program The water quality sampling plan will be used to validate the effectiveness of the cleaning program and ensure the measurable level of cleanliness is met by measuring residual petroleum concentrations in the rinse water and control slugs of the cleaning train for each segment. Additionally, these samples will be used to determine if the control slug meets acceptable criteria for the water to be reused in the following segment. Sampling will be completed using the same segmented locations presented in Table 1. Samples are to be submitted to a Canadian Association for Laboratory Accreditation Inc. (“CALA”) accredited laboratory for analysis.

Water samples for cleaning validation will be drawn from two slugs, the rinse-water slug and the control slug, at specific times/volumes along the batches. These samples will be used to validate the effectiveness of the cleaning program based on the results from the cleaning validation program conducted on a 19.8 km section of the NPS 34 Line 3 that was deactivated near Cromer, Manitoba [CER Filing ID: A50617]. Based on this program Enbridge has established that a target concentration of 100mg/L of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (“TPH”) in the final water slug is achievable. In addition to the sampling mentioned above, samples will be taken during each of the chemical cleaning slugs and the first four rinse- water slugs for a total of twenty-eight (28) samples at various stages throughout the cleaning program. These additional samples will be used for monitoring the chemical concentration and cleaning effectiveness as the program proceeds, allowing for adjustments to the program at field level as needed to meet the TPH target.

2.2 Pipeline Isolation The isolation program for Line 3 eliminates the potential for additional product to be reintroduced into the pipeline during the Decommissioned Period. Isolation scope encompasses work at all sites along the right-of-way with Line 3 infrastructure, regardless of whether it is co-located with other active lines or not (e.g. mainline valve sites and stations/terminals). The isolation scope of work includes activities which will physically separate the Existing Line 3 Pipeline from active assets. In locations where physical removal is not required, (i.e. no connection to active assets) valves will be closed and permanently disabled from operation. Electrical infrastructure dedicated to Line 3 will be de-energized and disconnected, with the exception of electrical assets which support the application of cathodic protection to the pipeline. The isolation scope of work is summarized in Table 9 by both types of site and by province. Refer to Appendix F for the current isolation footprint as committed to in Enbridge Response to NEB IR No. 4.13.c [Exhibit B27-02].

Table 9: Isolation Scope Summary

Type of Site Standalone Sites (#) Co-located Sites (#) Alberta Saskatchewan Manitoba Facility (Station/Terminal) 0 18 2 11 5 Motor Operated Valve 0 19 Manually Operated Valve 7 9 3 22 18 Hydraulically Operated Valve 3 5 Pressure Indicating Transmitter 2 3 1 3 1 Densitometer Site 0 2 0 1 1 Take-off 0 1 0 1 0 Total 12 57 6 38 26

The pipeline isolation execution will have the same general approach regardless of the location.

• mobilizing and completing site preparations; • electrical isolation and removal as required; • excavating the pipeline and cutting/removing identified valves, instruments and any associated piping as identified during detailed engineering; • welding and coating plates to both sides of the pipe cut, or installation of blind flanges as deemed necessary; • back-filling the excavation; and

• restoring site conditions, and de-mobilizing.

2.2.1 Facilities (Pump Stations/Terminals) The Existing Line 3 Pipeline will be physically separated (mechanically isolated) from the eighteen (18) pump stations and terminals along the pipeline. Station and terminal isolation locations were determined on a site by site basis and considered several factors when determining the removal scope to best achieve mechanical isolation of the mainline. These factors include:

• location of mainline and station valves; • station valve connection type (i.e. welded valve vs bolted valve connection); • surrounding infrastructure; and • operational field access to surrounding active assets.

2.2.2 Valve Sites (Manual, Hydraulically-actuated, Motor-actuated) All actuated valves (co-located or stand-alone) along the right-of-way will be closed and permanently disabled as part of Decommissioning Activities. This scope includes:

• removal or lock-out of manual actuation (e.g. hand wheels); • for motor-actuated valves, de-energization and electrical isolation via lock-out, tag-out procedures or disconnecting and terminating cables; and • for hydraulically-actuated valves, removing or plugging connection ports for hydraulic power packs.

Co-located valves, including their surface features (e.g. fencing or gravel pads), will be left in-place. Stand-alone valves and their supporting infrastructure will be removed to the top of pipe depth, as well as having their surface features removed and the site will be restored to a similar condition of the surrounding area. The valve isolation scope of work location details can be found in Appendix F.

2.2.3 Pressure-Indicating Transmitters (PIT) All PITs (co-located or stand-alone) will be de-energized and electrically isolated via lock-out tag-out procedure or disconnecting and terminating cables and will be removed to the top of pipe or the closest flange location to the pipe. The opening will then be plugged, and a blind flange installed, or a cap will be welded to prevent water ingress. The removal of the PITs at co-located locations was an addition made in the detailed engineering phase. This addition was made due to the relatively simple removal process and in order to avoid any field confusion between operating and decommissioned assets, especially at valve sites where the space is typically more limited. The PIT isolation scope of work location details can be found in Appendix F.

2.2.4 Densitometers The pipeline will be physically separated from densitometer buildings by plugging or sealing the densitometer suction and discharge instrumentation piping loops, preventing the re-introduction of product into the pipeline. Co-located densitometers, including their surface features, will be left in-place. There are no stand-alone densitometer sites for the Line 3 system. The densitometer isolation scope of work location details can be found in Appendix F.

2.2.5 Delivery Sites There is only one delivery site (Stony Beach Take-off) location along the Existing Line 3 Pipeline. The take-off valve (i.e. the valve directly connected to the mainline) will be decommissioned in the same manner as described in the ‘valve isolation scope’ in Section 2.2.2. The take-off valve will also be physically separated by removal of the piping connecting Line 3 to the delivery assets at this site. The removal of the piping will be completed by Enbridge personnel in consideration of safe work procedures and considering the sequence between displacement, final tie-ins, drain-up, cleaning and isolation. As this delivery site is co-located, all surface features will be left in-place. The delivery site isolation scope location details are summarized in Appendix F.

2.3 Segmentation The general objective of the segmentation program is to create a barrier within the pipeline in order to prevent the travel of fluid along the pipeline during the Decommissioned Period. This movement of fluid is also called the ‘water conduit effect’ and occurs most often when the ground water interacts with the decommissioned pipeline. Enbridge explored the potential for use of minimally invasive procedures pursuant to Condition 10 of the Decommissioning Order, including inflatable pigs, injectable or spray-applied polyurethane foam, self-consolidating concrete and inline tools for the purpose of creating this barrier. Based on evaluation and testing, completed both in laboratory and field settings, it was determined that a minimally invasive procedure is not viable for Line 3 segmentation scope as further explained in Enbridge’s response to Condition 10 of the Decommissioning Order [CER Filing A97310]. As a result, Enbridge will be utilizing a conventional excavation method, followed by cutting and extracting a portion of the pipeline at strategic locations, and sealing both sides of the cut with a steel plate in order to complete this scope. Based on using conventional excavation methods, the segmentation scope consists of:

• mobilizing and completing site preparations; • excavating the pipeline and cutting/removing a short pipe section; • welding and coating plates to both sides of the pipe cut; • back-filling the excavation; and • restoring site conditions, and de-mobilizing.

The thirty-seven (37) segmentation locations and details are listed within in Appendix G.

2.4 Railway Fill Pursuant to Condition 16 of the Decommissioning Order, the railway fill program for Line 3 will include the cut and fill of active railway crossings with an engineered fill material. This reduces the potential impact associated with (long-term) subsidence beneath railway crossings. This scope consists of:

• mobilizing and completing site preparations; • excavating the pipeline and cutting/removing a short pipe section on one or both sides of the railway crossing; • injecting an engineered material within the carrier pipe; • welding and coating plates to both sides of the pipe cut; • back-filling the excavation(s); and • restoring site conditions, and de-mobilizing.

The railway fill scope of work is summarized in Table 10. Refer to Appendix H for the current railway fill footprint.

Table 10: Railway Fill Scope Summary

Enbridge Kilometer Alberta Saskatchewan Manitoba Posts (KP ‘E’) * 196.496 / 196.615 X 247.838 / 247.909 X 347.279 / 347.350 X 365.580 / 365.694 X 392.939 / 393.009 X 436.682 / 436.845 X 464.199 / 464.306 X 493.564 / 493.630 X 536.503 / 536.685 X 697.355 / 697.412 X 704.748 / 704.824 X 706.670 / 706.751 X

Enbridge Kilometer Alberta Saskatchewan Manitoba Posts (KP ‘E’) * 709.797 / 709.961 X 711.749 / 711.824 X 738.130 / 738.205 X 906.265 / 906.341 X 703.030 / 703.323 X 703.913 / 704.033 X 983.196 / 983.272 X 1033.300 / 1033.360 X 1063.961 / 1064.036 X 1191.769 / 1191.831 X 2 16 4 Total 22 *Two Kilometer Posts are provided for each crossing to account for potential work on either side of the railway.

The proposed engineered fill material for all locations is a flowable grout with a compressive strength of at least 2.0 MPa. Alternate fill materials have been evaluated and may be utilized on a site-specific basis considering crossing depth of cover (“DOC”) as per Table 11.

Table 11: Railway Fill Material Summary

Minimum Depth of Minimum Compressive Type of Fill Cover* (m) Strength Required (MPa)** Foam 1.4 0.18 Cellular Concrete 0.6 1.1 Controlled Low Strength Material 0.3 8.3 (“CLSM”) Concrete 0.2 27.6 *Minimum DOC means that the fill material shall not be utilized unless the minimum acceptable depth of cover from the top-of-pipe to the bottom of track of the railway crossing is achieved. **Minimum compressive strength included to illustrate effect of DOC on material requirements. Minimum compressive strength specified/utilized at a specific crossing may be reduced based on actual DOC (instead of minimum DOC).

2.5 Cathodic Protection The intent of the cathodic protection program for Line 3 is the continued application of cathodic protection to the pipeline in its decommissioned state and throughout the Decommissioned Period. The system will continue to be monitored as part of the Surveillance and Monitoring Program described in Section 4.0.

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION Enbridge’s framework for evaluating the potential effects to the environment due to undertaking the Decommissioning Activities at each location is identified below.

3.1 Decommissioning Activities: Potential Environmental Effects The potential effects to the environment as a result of undertaking Decommissioning Activities at each location are described in the Environmental and Socio-Economic Assessment (“ESA”) prepared for the L3R [CER Filings A64179, A64180, A64181], and are similar to the potential effects associated with pipeline construction, specifically, those related to activities that entail surface disturbance (i.e. clearing, topsoil salvage, excavation, backfilling, topsoil replacement, revegetation, temporary access, spill prevention and clean-up). These potential effects are well understood and are summarized in

Table 12 along with the key mitigation measures which will be utilized. The complete mitigation measures for Decommissioning Activities can be found in the Decommissioning Environmental Protection Plan (“Decommissioning EPP”) developed specifically for the L3D Project, found in Appendix D.

Existing knowledge from past projects and construction of the L3D Project will be used to inform mitigation measures. Field work will be considered in areas where additional information is needed to inform site-specific mitigation measures. For example, where there is a high potential for the presence of a species at risk, field work may be needed to identify site-specific mitigation. Sites requiring this advanced field work have this noted on their individual photomosaic drawings, which can be found in the Decommissioning EPP (Appendix D). This field work is expected to begin in mid- 2020 in order to inform site-specific mitigation measures prior to the start of Decommissioning Activities.

As outlined in the Decommissioning EPP (Appendix D) new or alternative mitigation measures will be developed if measures identified in the Decommissioning EPP are ineffective (or alternative methods would be more effective) at avoiding or reducing environmental effects of the L3D Project (see Section 2.1.3 of the Decommissioning EPP in Appendix D).

The general potential effects associated with Decommissioning Activities are summarized in

Table 12. Site-specific environmental considerations and mitigation measures are provided on the environmental photomosaic prepared for each segmentation and isolation location and appended to the Decommissioning EPP. The site-specific mitigation measures provided in the photomosaics and general mitigation measures in the Decommissioning EPP were developed to avoid or reduce the potential environmental and socio-economic effects.

3.2 Water Withdrawal Enbridge anticipates that it will be withdrawing water from existing storm water retention / hydrotest ponds within the Hardisty and Cromer Terminals respectively. Additionally, water will be sourced from the City of Regina. One natural source will be utilized near the Kerrobert Terminal, this natural source (Allcock Reservoir) is located next to a county road and site-specific mitigation has been outlined on the respective photomosaic for the site. This will minimize the potential environmental effects of water withdrawal from natural water sources for use in cleaning activities. Where water is withdrawn from natural sources, Enbridge will follow the applicable water withdrawal regulations. Water used for pipeline cleaning will be tested and will be disposed of at an appropriate liquid waste facility.

Table 12: Summary of Environmental Effects and Mitigation Methods

Summary of Key Mitigation Measures General Potential Effect(s) [Decommissioning EPP Reference]1 Soils • Topsoil/subsoil mixing • Salvage available topsoil (minimum 10 cm) using the Environmental Photomosaics as a guide. Where soils are not readily during decommissioning distinguishable by colour, Enbridge Environmental Inspection will provide direction. Salvage to a maximum depth of 40 cm • Compaction and rutting [Section 8.3]. during decommissioning • Salvage a transitional layer of lower topsoil/upper subsoil to ensure that available topsoil has been salvaged and that the • Erosion of topsoil upper few centimetres of the root zone in the subsoil layer are conserved [Section 8.3]. • Soil contamination due to • If topsoil is not salvaged, access will be limited where possible to dry or frozen ground conditions to reduce the potential for spot spills terrain disturbance, soil structure damage and admixing. If wet or thawed soils, admixing, rutting or compaction is identified, • Disturbance of previously during site activity, usage of the access should be suspended until favorable site conditions exist, or until appropriate contaminated soil mitigation measures have been implemented. Potential mitigation measures include restricting traffic to low-ground-pressure tires or wide pad tracks, restricting work to non-problem areas, the use of mats or salvaging topsoil. • Lowering of soil productivity from crop • When working on topsoil, postpone decommissioning activities, suspend equipment travel or utilize construction alternatives pests (e.g., clubroot if one of the following indicators occurs: rutting of topsoil to the extent that admixing may occur; excessive wheel slip; disease excessive build-up of mud on tires and cleats; formation of puddles; or excessive tracking of mud as vehicles leave the workspace [Section 5.3]. • Implement the Wet/Thawed Soils Contingency Plan [Appendix D5] during wet/thawed conditions. Postpone decommissioning activities, suspend equipment travel or use construction alternatives in the event of wet/thawed soils to reduce terrain disturbance and soil structure damage [Section 5.3]. • If wind or water erosion is evident during the decommissioning, implement the applicable measures from Section 5.3. • Install appropriate and adequately sized dewatering filtration, diffusion and erosion protection measures, and review with Enbridge for approval. Install secondary erosion control measures at this site (i.e., silt fence) to protect the site from erosion in the case of a failure of the primary filtration and erosion control structures. • Immediately implement the Fuels and Hazardous Materials Contingency Plan in Appendix D4 of the Decommissioning EPP in the event of a spill. Report spills to Enbridge Construction Management and Enbridge Environmental Inspection. Complete a spill report form and submit to Enbridge Environment. [Section 5.3] Review and adhere to measures outlined in the Biosecurity Management Plan in Appendix F of the Decommissioning EPP to reduce the risk of introducing or spreading crop disease and pests. Water Quality and Quantity

Summary of Key Mitigation Measures General Potential Effect(s) [Decommissioning EPP Reference]1 • Alteration of natural • Backfill the excavation in lifts and compact after each lift, if warranted, at locations where a wider than normal excavation is surface water flow patterns necessary. Adhere to other backfilling and/or trench compaction measures or equipment requirements as directed by due to excavation Construction Management or Enbridge Environmental Inspection [Section 8.3]. subsidence • Ensure that excess spoil is not feathered-out over the salvaged area to an extent that may cause excessive subsidence of • Alteration or contamination the excavation or admixing of topsoil and subsoil [Section 11.3]. of surface water or • Maintain equipment in good working condition and ensure equipment and vehicles are free of leaks [Section 5.3]. groundwater in the event • Minimize fuel storage, refuelling or servicing of equipment within 100 m of the high watermark of watercourses, drainages or of a spill wetlands, where feasible [Section 5.3]. • Report spills immediately to Enbridge Construction Management and Enbridge Environmental Inspection. Complete a spill report form and submit to Enbridge Environment [Section 5.3]. • Employ the following measures to reduce the risk of fuel spills in a waterbody. Minimize fuel storage, refuelling or servicing of equipment within 100 metres (m) of the high watermark of watercourses, drainages or wetlands where feasible. When refuelling is necessary within 100 m of the normal high watermark of a waterbody implement the following measures: o fuel, oil or hazardous material is not stored within 100 m of a waterbody, unless adequate secondary containment is provided and approved by Enbridge Environmental Inspection o secondary containment should be of sufficient size to minimize the potential for loss of drips and small accidental spills o containers, hoses and nozzles are free of leaks o fuel nozzles are equipped with automatic shut-offs; o operators are stationed at both ends of the hose during fuelling, unless the ends are visible and readily accessible by one operator o fuel remaining in the hose is returned to the storage facility o secondary containment is available under the fuelling area o adequate spill response materials are provided at the site of the transfer to control spills

Summary of Key Mitigation Measures General Potential Effect(s) [Decommissioning EPP Reference]1 Air and GHG Emissions • Air emissions during • Multi-passenger vehicles will be used for the transport of decommissioning crews to and from the decommissioned decommissioning activities workspace, where practical, to lessen the volume of traffic on roads, as well as reduce air emissions and potential for wildlife • GHG emissions during mortality [Appendix D12]. decommissioning activities • Prohibit the burning of construction debris or refuse, to the extent feasible. In the event that the burning of construction mats and pipeline skids on high-risk biosecurity sites is warranted, obtain the approval of Enbridge Environment. Ensure that applicable burning permits are obtained and kept onsite [Section 5.3]. • Control construction-related road dust near residential areas and other areas as advised by Construction Management or Enbridge Environmental Inspection or lands. Consider applying water to the workspace and access roads if traffic and wind conditions result in pulverized soils and dust problems. Alternatively, control dust emissions by applying dust suppressants, if warranted. Ensure that dust suppressants are acceptable to the municipal district/rural municipality, Enbridge and landowners [Section 5.3]. Noise • Noise during • Take reasonable measures to control construction-related noise near residential areas. Alter equipment, erect noise barriers decommissioning activities or change the work schedule, to the extent practical, if excessive noise becomes a nuisance to nearby residents. Schedule decommissioning activities near residential areas or community facilities (e.g., golf courses, campgrounds or parks) during the period from 7 AM to 7 PM, or in accordance with applicable noise bylaws or approval conditions [Section 5.3]. • Ensure that noise abatement equipment (e.g., mufflers) on machinery is in good working order. Turn off equipment when not in use, if practical (restrict the duration that vehicles and equipment are allowed to sit and idle, unless air temperatures are less than 0 degrees Celsius [°C]). Enclose noisy equipment, as needed, to limit the transmission of noise beyond the segmentation location site. Locate stationary equipment, such as compressors and generators, away from noise receptors where practical. Replace or repair equipment parts generating excessive noise, if practical [Section 5.3]. Wetlands

Summary of Key Mitigation Measures General Potential Effect(s) [Decommissioning EPP Reference]1 • Alteration of wetland • Protect and maintain shallow riparian areas that contain emergent vegetation (i.e., graminoids) by establishing buffer zones. habitat function Generally, a 10 m minimum buffer zone (or greater if requested by Enbridge Environmental Inspection) is to be established at • Alteration of wetland wetlands that are Class III and higher and swamp wetlands that contain surface water and/or saturated soils after clearing. hydrological function No buffer zone is necessary for Class I and II marsh wetlands or for class III swamp wetlands that are dry following clearing • Alteration of wetland (i.e., lacking surface water and/or saturated soils) or where wetlands are cultivated to their margins [Section 10.3]. biogeochemical function • Salvage the upper surface material in wetlands to a maximum depth of 40 cm from the area to be disturbed to maintain root stocks for replacement (see Details 16 to 18 in Appendix E and the Environmental Photomosaic Package), or as advised by Enbridge Environmental Inspection [Section 10.3]. • For wet wetlands, store wetland topsoil and spoil separately from upland topsoil and spoil and mark/flag appropriately. Refer to Appendix D13 of the Decommissioning EPP for further details on crossing methods. Store seedbanks (i.e., wetland surface materials/strippings) separately from adjacent upland soils (e.g., within remaining undisturbed wetland). Ensure adequate separation between wetland and upland soil piles [Section 10.3]. • If the excavation needs dewatering prior to segmentation, pump water into stable and well-vegetated areas or install appropriate mitigation. Monitor discharge areas and change the discharge location if adequate natural filtration is no longer practical and sedimentation occurs. Ensure site specific approval is received from Enbridge environment prior to water pumping activities. Where siltation occurs at pump off sites ensure the site is cleaned up during final cleanup [Section 10.3]. • Do not seed Class III or higher marsh wetlands or swamp wetlands and allow these wetlands to naturally regenerate following decommissioning activities. Consult with Enbridge Inspection to determine if seeding of the riparian areas adjacent to wetland is necessary. Seed with an appropriate native or riparian seed mix if it is deemed warranted [Section 10.3]. • Replant salvaged trees/shrubs along the disturbed margins of wetlands Class III and higher and swamp wetlands as directed by Enbridge Environmental Inspection at locations noted in the Environmental Photomosaic Package. Install willow staking along the wetland to stabilize disturbances and reduce the sedimentation risk to wetlands where shrubs were present prior to decommissioning and where instructed by Enbridge Environmental Inspection [Section 10.3]. Wildlife • Alteration of wildlife habitat • Review with the Contractor the mitigation to be implemented to avoid or reduce effects on rare plants, rare ecological • Changes to wildlife communities and wildlife species with special conservation status, wildlife features, archaeological features, TLRU sites and movement any other sensitive environmental or cultural features along or in proximity to the decommissioning activities. Conduct this • Wildlife mortality review in advance of decommissioning activities at known locations where any of the above features are known to be present so that the Contractor has a full understanding of the procedures to be implemented (see the Environmental Photomosaic • Effects of habitat, Package) [Section 5.2]. movement and mortality risk change on wildlife • Implement the Wildlife Species of Concern Discovery Contingency Plan [Appendix D2] and Recommended Wildlife Mitigation species at risk. and Management Measures [Appendix J] in the event wildlife species with special conservation status are identified during decommissioning activities. • Notify Enbridge Environmental Inspection if a wildlife feature is discovered during decommissioning activities and suspend work in the immediate area until further direction is provided [Section 5.3]. • Identify environmental features that require scheduling considerations (i.e., wildlife restricted activity periods [RAPs]) and adhere to regulatory requirements with regards to scheduling during planning, decommissioning and reclamation phases of the L3D Project (i.e., notification timing) [Section 5.2]. • Stake both boundaries of the workspace. Do not allow brushing or grading beyond the stakes unless extra temporary workspace rights have been obtained. Clearly flag or stake the boundaries of temporary access roads and shoo-flies. Where wetlands are unavoidable, clearly identify the workspace boundaries using fencing, staking or flagging. Identify the start and end points of the wetland and limit disturbance or encroachment beyond the fenced, staked or flagged workspace [Section 7.1].

Summary of Key Mitigation Measures General Potential Effect(s) [Decommissioning EPP Reference]1 Wildlife (cont.) • Conduct wildlife sweeps at identified wildlife features outlined in the Environmental Photomosaic Package (should any work be planned in those locations within the sensitive timing periods outlined in Appendix J) [Section 5.2]. • Conduct breeding bird surveys should any work be planned within the migratory bird RAP of April 26 to August 14 in areas identified as having wildlife potential per the Breeding Bird Survey Protocol [Appendix D]. • Conduct amphibian salvages prior to the commencement of heavy equipment activity at known locations of breeding and overwintering amphibians with special conservation status (see the Environmental Photomosaic Package) in accordance with amphibian salvage approval conditions, if required. Ensure that those conducting the amphibian salvage have training to meet the approval conditions [Section 5.2]. • Establish construction traffic speed limits and post speed limits on access roads to reduce the risk of collisions with wildlife (see the Environmental Traffic Control Plan in Appendix D12) [Section 5.3]. • Replant shelterbelts with same or similar species, where appropriate and where requested as per the Line List [Section 11.3]. Vegetation • Weed introduction and • Review and implement the weed management mitigation in the Biosecurity Management Plan where required [Appendix F, spread Section 5.2]. • Potential effect to native • Prohibit any equipment which arrives in the L3D Project Area in a dirty condition from entering the decommissioning vegetation workspace until it has been cleaned off at a suitable location [Appendix F]. • Disturbance of vegetation • Choose an appropriate management option (i.e., mechanical, biological, physical, botanical or chemical) or a combination of due to a spill from treatments that will provide cost-efficient and effective weed management, based on the data collected at weed occurrence construction equipment sites. Refer to the Alberta Crop Protection 2014 guide (Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development 2014), the Saskatchewan associated clean-up and 2014 Guide to Crop Protection (Saskatchewan Ministry of Agriculture 2014), the Manitoba Guide to Field Crop Protection reclamation activities at (MAFRD 2014b) and the Enbridge Vegetation Management Guide (Enbridge 2015) for general recommendations on weeds decommissioning locations [Appendix F]. • Clearly post signs or equivalent marking prohibiting workers and equipment from entering staked, flagged and/or fenced environmentally sensitive areas as identified on the Environmental Photomosaics prior to any work being implemented. Signage/marking may include native prairie entry and exit points and, where warranted, rare plant locations [Section 7.2]. • Retain sod on native prairie if a competent sod layer exists. Strip topsoil and grade only where safety considerations dictate in order to reduce disturbance to the sod or where there is a high potential of pulverization and/or rutting [Section 8.3]. • Do not use a subsoiler plow on native prairie, stony or rocky, or treed lands [Section 11.3]. • Seed disturbed areas on native prairie with Seed Mix No. 3, 7, or 11, based on Ecoregion, unless otherwise requested by the landowner [see Detail 25 in Appendix E]. Complete seeding as quickly as practical where natural recovery is not the preferred reclamation technique [Section 11.3]. • In the event rare plants or rare ecological communities are identified or suspected on the footprint during decommissioning activities implement the Plant Species of Concern Discovery Contingency Plan [Appendix D1]. • Immediately implement the Fuels and Hazardous Materials Contingency Plan [Appendix D4] and applicable measures from Section 5.3 of the EPP in the event of a spill. • Report spills immediately to Enbridge Construction Management and Enbridge Environmental Inspection. Complete a spill report form and submit to Enbridge Environment [Section 5.3]. Species at Risk • Direct and indirect effects • See Vegetation and Wildlife sections of this table. on vegetation and wildlife species at risk

Summary of Key Mitigation Measures General Potential Effect(s) [Decommissioning EPP Reference]1 Human Occupancy, Resource Use, Archaeology and Traditional Land Use • Sensory disturbance of • Notify affected landowners, municipalities and Aboriginal groups prior to the commencement of decommissioning activities of nearby residents and land the decommissioning details, including the segmentation locations and schedule [Section 4.0]. Maintain communication with and resource users affected stakeholders, including Aboriginal groups, throughout the decommissioning process. • Disruption of outdoor • Implement the Environmental Traffic Control Plan [Appendix D12] for vehicular use on the decommissioning workspace and recreation experience, associated access roads [Section 2.1.2]. disruption of outfitting, • Provide a temporary water supply if livestock are cut off from water due to decommissioning activities. Fence sites where hunting fishing, ranching applicable to prevent cattle from entering the worksite [Section 5.2]. and farming activities of • Install temporary gates and fencing prior to decommissioning activities, if requested by the landowner (see Detail 11 in land users, including Appendix E) [Section 5.3]. Aboriginal groups • Follow any site-specific resource protection measures resulting from the heritage resource assessment [Section 5.3]. • Disturbance of previously • In the event traditional land use sites are identified during decommissioning activities, follow the contingency measures unidentified traditional use identified in the Traditional Land and Resource Use Sites Contingency Plan (see Appendix D8) [Section 5.3]. sites and activities • In the event archaeological, historical or paleontological resources are identified during decommissioning activities, follow the contingency measures identified in the Heritage Resource Discovery Contingency Plan (see Appendix D3) [Section 5.3]. • Prohibit the collection of any historical, archaeological or palaeontological resources by L3D Project personnel with the exception of permitted L3D Project archaeologists [Section 5.3]. • Parking on the shoulders of public roads will be minimized to the extent practical. If parking is necessary, ensure vehicles are on one side of the road, access is available for local traffic, and operators are available to move vehicles if necessary [Appendix D12].

Human Occupancy, Resource Use, Archaeology and Traditional Land Use (cont.) • Disturbance of previously • Vehicular traffic will be restricted to the approved and staked decommissioning workspace, and access roads [Appendix unidentified archaeological D12]. See recommended mitigation measures regarding nuisance air emissions in points 4.0 Air Emissions element. sites • See recommended mitigation measures in Water Quality and Quantity of this table. • Disruption of normal, daily • See recommended mitigation measures in Air and GHG Emissions of this table. living activities of residents • See recommended mitigation measures in Vegetation of this table. and resource users • Increased traffic volumes as a result of transporting workers, supplies and equipment

Summary of Key Mitigation Measures General Potential Effect(s) [Decommissioning EPP Reference]1 Spills, Contamination, Accidents and Malfunctions • Soil contamination due to • Immediately implement the Fuels and Hazardous Materials Contingency Plan [Appendix D4] and applicable measures from spot spills Section 5.3 of the EPP in the event of a spill. • Disturbance of previously • Suspend decommissioning activity in the immediate vicinity of the spot spill until the spill has been cleaned. Ensure contaminated soil contaminated material is disposed of at an approved facility or location [Appendix D4]. • Alteration or contamination • Report spills immediately to Enbridge Construction Management and Enbridge Environmental Inspection. Complete a spill of surface water or report form and submit to Enbridge Environment [Section 5.3]. groundwater in the event • Consider soils contaminated if free product is present, the soil is a notably different colour than the surrounding soil (black, of a spill shades of grey, blue and green), hydrocarbon odours are present or there is sheen on excavation water. Immediately notify • Effects of accidents and the Environmental Inspector and/or Construction Manager [Appendix D6]. malfunctions on wildlife • Implement the Contaminated Soils Discovery Contingency Plan [Appendix D6] in the event that contaminated, or potentially • Spills of hazardous contaminated, soils are encountered [Section 5.3]. materials during ground • Follow remediation procedures outlined in the NEB Remediation Process Guide (NEB 2011) in the event contaminated sites disturbance are encountered during decommissioning activities. decommissioning activities • Report the location and details of collisions with wildlife to Enbridge Environmental Inspection [Section 5.3]. • Fire during ground disturbance decommissioning activities • Damage to foreign utilities • Transportation accidents

Note: 1 Refer to the Environmental Photomosaic for site-specific mitigation for each location. The complete mitigation measures to be implemented during decommissioning activities are provided in the Decommissioning EPP.

4.0 DECOMMISSIONING PERIOD MONITORING As part of prudent asset lifecycle management, Enbridge will continue to manage primary category threats as specified within the Damage Prevention Management Program established for decommissioned assets, including managing the identified integrity threats so as to allow the decommissioned asset to safely degrade in-place over time. The Surveillance and Monitoring Program is one of the contributing components of the Damage Prevention Management Program providing monitoring of the Decommissioned Line.

4.1 Surveillance and Monitoring Program The Surveillance and Monitoring Program is an integrated program that consists of a combination of six contributing Integrated Management System (“IMS”) management programs that collectively monitor the condition of the Enbridge Liquids Pipeline’s (LP) pipeline system through real-time and/or scheduled inspections, and ad hoc surveillance activities. The program is a component of the overall Damage Prevention Management Program, aligning to the Enbridge Management System Framework.

The Damage Prevention Program is applicable to both operating and non-operating assets, and is fed by six contributing programs as applicable based on an individual asset’s current lifecycle stage:

• Damage Prevention; • Integrity Management; • Environmental Management; • Safety Management; • Security Management; and • Operate & Maintain – Leak Detection component. Each monitored activity contributes to meeting the Surveillance and Monitoring Program objective and supports the goals and objectives of the contributing management programs. The surveillance and monitoring activities executed are controlled by the contributing programs mentioned herein. Monitoring activities within the Program fall into the following categories:

• pipeline system condition monitoring; • pipeline system control monitoring; • cathodic protection system operation monitoring; • right-of-way monitoring; • environmental impact monitoring; • occupational exposure monitoring; and • security monitoring. Specifically, for decommissioned assets, the Surveillance and Monitoring Program incorporates risk-based factors to ensure safety to people and the environment, and ensures such assets are monitored and maintained to ensure changing conditions do not result in an unsafe condition under the following primary categories:

• aerial and terrestrial patrols; • cathodic protection equipment monitoring; • crossing inspections; • erosion monitoring; • slope stability monitoring; • health or occupational exposure monitoring; and • vegetation, soil and water quality monitoring.

4.2 Line 3 Integrity Threats The planned L3D Project integrity threat treatment program incorporates the identification of the primary threats, associated consequences, Integrity Management Program (“IMP”) program controls, and consequence mitigation/management. Table 13 below highlights the potential integrity threats and the associated mitigation, monitoring and controls to be utilized both during Decommissioning Activities and in the Decommissioned Period as part of the Program.

Table 13: Integrity Threats and Associated Consequence and Control Mechanisms

Consequence IMP Controls Consequence Mitigation/Management Integrity Threat Through -Wall Corrosion Ground subsidence (includes Maintain a Cathodic Protection (CP) Program to slow external Integrity CP Program Leading to Structural loss of land aesthetics and/or corrosion growth rates and actively monitor corrosion growth at Collapse surface erosion resulting from determined locations water channeling) Agricultural Land Fill pipe under railway crossings with engineered material Decommissioning Project Scope Railway Crossings (including isolation and capping) Primary Highway Crossings Perform right-of-way monitoring for signs of abnormal surface

conditions including road surfaces OMM Book 3: Right-of-Way Monitoring Soil and water contamination Pipeline purge, robust internal cleaning program, Decommissioning Project Scope as a result of residual and pipeline segmentation during decommissioning. hydrocarbon within the pipe Perform right-of-way monitoring for signs of abnormal surface OMM Book 3: Right-of-Way Monitoring (once corrosion occurs) conditions and indications of potential soil and water contamination (e.g. surface staining, hydrocarbon sheen, etc.)

Emergency Preparedness & Response Maintain emergency management plan Program

Conduit for ground water Pipeline segmentation during decommissioning Decommissioning Project Scope (could lead to flooding or Perform right-of-way monitoring for signs of abnormal surface OMM Book 3: Right-of-Way Monitoring draining of areas) and conditions and indications of potential soil and water external ground contaminants contamination (e.g. surface staining, hydrocarbon sheen, etc.) transfer (once corrosion occurs) External Pipe Damage (2nd Damage to pipe surface that Perform right-of-way monitoring for signs of abnormal surface OMM Book 3: Right-of-Way Monitoring rd & 3 Party Line Strikes) leads to early through-wall conditions corrosion event and Positively identify company underground facilities prior to the OMM Book 3: Damage Prevention related subsidence start of any construction activities

Receive and authorize external requests to build facilities across, OMM Book 3: Crossings on, along, under, or engaging in an activity that causes a ground disturbance within the prescribed area of the pipeline asset

Maintain visibility of pipeline location the same as in-service assets and ensure public awareness OMM Book 1: Public Awareness Program Exposed Pipe Exposed pipe at land Perform right-of-way monitoring for signs of abnormal surface OMM Book 3: Right-of-Way Monitoring locations through frost-heave, conditions including unstable slopes

Consequence IMP Controls Consequence Mitigation/Management Integrity Threat erosion, or geotechnical slope movement OMM Book 3: Depth-of-Cover Monitoring Perform depth-of-cover monitoring Exposed pipe at water Perform right-of-way monitoring for signs of abnormal conditions OMM Book 3: Right-of-Way Monitoring crossing locations through at water crossings buoyancy, erosion, or flooding

5.0 STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT

5.1 Previous Engagement Consultation related to the L3R was completed and incorporated into the initial L3R application and consultation logs filed with the NEB. A summary of engagement included in the initial L3D Project Application is located in:

• Chapter 4 (Consultation) of the L3R application [Exhibit B1-08] and several of its appendices [Exhibits B1-09, B1-10, B1-11, B1-12, B1-14, B1-15, B1-16 and B1-19] • Chapter 5 ([Indigenous] Engagement) of the L3R application [Exhibit B1-21] and several of its appendices [Exhibits B1-23 and B1-24]

5.2 Condition Requirements Condition 11 of the Decommissioning Order requires Enbridge to develop and engage with Indigenous2 Nations, governments and groups and other potentially affected stakeholders on a plan identifying how we propose to execute the Decommissioning Activities. Condition 14 requires Enbridge to develop and engage with Indigenous Nations, governments and groups on a plan for how we propose to engage with Indigenous2 Nations, governments and groups once the Decommissioning Activities have been completed (“Decommissioned Period”). Enbridge has been engaging on both these conditions in parallel; however, the focus of the engagement described in this Section 5 is related to Condition 11 and the Decommissioning Activities. More information on Condition 14, which we are also seeking your input on, can be found at www.enbridge.com/L3D. Specifically, in accordance with Condition 11 (j) and (k), respectively, Enbridge is required to provide: a description of how input from potentially affected stakeholders and Indigenous Nations, governments and groups has been incorporated into the decommissioning

2 Enbridge is using the term “Indigenous” in this document instead of the term “Aboriginal” used in the text of the conditions in the Decommissioning Order. Similarly, Enbridge will use the term “Engagement” instead of “Consultation” which is used in the text of the conditions in the Decommissioning Order. Enbridge has used the term “Engagement” to reflect the engagement that is required by Enbridge under the conditions and to avoid any confusion with respect to the duty to consult, which is a duty of the Crown.

plan; and a summary of any outstanding concerns raised by potentially affected stakeholders and Indigenous Nations, governments and groups regarding the decommissioning plan, including a description of how these concerns have been or will be addressed by Enbridge or an explanation as to why no further steps will be taken.

5.3 Recent Engagement Activities

5.3.3 Indigenous Nations, Governments and Groups Since February 10, 2020, Enbridge has reached out to 134 Indigenous Nations, governments and groups to offer an opportunity to engage on the decommissioning plan and Decommissioning Activities. The list of these Indigenous Nations, governments and groups is provided in Appendix I and includes the Indigenous Advisory & Monitoring Committee (“IAMC”).

a. Introduction & Notification

On February 10, 2020, Enbridge emailed an information package consisting of a cover letter, a L3D Project fact sheet, a draft of Condition 14 and website link to the L3D Project website (inclusive of a copy of the draft Plan) to 134 Indigenous Nations, governments and groups and formally sought feedback on the draft Plan, the draft Condition 14 plan (together, the “Draft Plans”) and Decommissioning Activities. By way of the cover letter, Enbridge invited all Indigenous Nations, governments and groups to attend one of four information sessions in March 2020 and offered to cover travel-related costs and expenses to a maximum amount of $2,000 for two representatives from each community. Enbridge was also prepared to meet with communities one on one if desired by the community or to receive written feedback. The February 10, 2020 letter and L3D fact sheet are attached as Appendix J.

b. In-Person Information Sessions – March 2020 In order to facilitate face-to-face feedback and discussion, Enbridge hosted four facilitated Information sessions in four different locations: Regina, Saskatchewan on March 4, 2020; Winnipeg, Manitoba on March 5, 2020; Edmonton, Alberta on March 11, 2020; and Saskatoon, Saskatchewan on March 12, 2020. Invitations for the information sessions were sent to 134 Indigenous Nations, governments and groups by email on February 10, 2020. A total of 59 participants attended the in-person information sessions, including representatives from the IAMC.

The information sessions were designed to provide more information on the Decommissioning Activities, and to seek input on the Draft Plans. Participants received information packages that included a factsheet on decommissioning and economic opportunities, a map book, and the Draft Plans.

A summary of feedback received during the four March 2020 in-person information sessions was emailed to participants on April 9, 2020 and is included hereto as Appendix K. A summary of the feedback received with respect to Condition 14 is captured under Section 3.0 of the Condition 14 plan.

c. One-on-One Meetings Enbridge has continued to engage with Indigenous Nations, governments and groups in one-on-one meetings (in person (prior to April 2020), by phone and by video conference) through regular engagement opportunities and as requested. Enbridge followed up with Indigenous Nations, governments and groups that requested individual meetings during the in-person information sessions held in March 2020. The majority of those follow-up meetings focused on economic opportunities. One of the meetings resulted in an amendment to the draft Plan whereby an additional segmentation site has been added to the draft Plan to address the feedback received. Further details can be found in Appendix N, Section A (17).

d. Communication and Engagement during Covid-19 The World Health Organization declared the global outbreak of the coronavirus (Covid-19) as a pandemic on March 11, 2020. On March 25, 2020, Enbridge emailed a letter to 134 Indigenous Nations, governments and groups to provide an update on what steps were being taken to help stop the spread of Covid-19 and to keep communities and employees as safe as possible. These steps included working with Indigenous Nations, governments and groups to cancel any planned in-person engagement until further notice.

Enbridge also informed Indigenous Nations, governments and groups that the filing date for the L3D Project conditions originally scheduled for submission to the CER in June 2020 would be delayed to fall 2020 due to issues surrounding Covid-19. Indigenous Nations, governments and groups were invited to reach out to the Enbridge engagement team at any time with any comments or questions on the draft Plan, the Decommissioning Activities or the L3D Project. The March 25, 2020 letter is attached hereto as Appendix L. In addition, Enbridge met with several individual Indigenous Nations that requested meetings. The meetings focused mainly on business opportunities and no feedback on the draft Plan was received.

e. Newsletter On May 28, 2020, Enbridge emailed the first edition of the Line 3 and Prairie Region News newsletter to the 134 Indigenous Nations, governments and groups. The newsletter provided: an update on the L3D Project activities; an overview of the March 2020 information sessions; and an update on filing timelines. It was noted that the timing of the second round of information sessions requested by Indigenous Nations, governments and groups during the March 2020 information sessions would be postponed due to Covid-19; however, meetings could continue by video or audio conference. Enbridge encouraged Indigenous Nations, governments and groups

to reach out with any concerns or questions on the draft Plan, Decommissioning Activities or other items related to the L3D Project. A copy of the newsletter is attached as Appendix M.

f. Additional Information Sessions In response to feedback received during the March 2020 information sessions, Enbridge planned to add a second round of information sessions to discuss the updated draft Plan and how feedback received had been incorporated into the same. Due to Covid-19, additional in-person information sessions could not be held. To maintain the commitment, Enbridge continued to communicate with Indigenous Nations, governments and groups, and offered video and telephone meetings on the updated draft Plan. Enbridge also plans to host three webcasts for all engaged Indigenous Nations, governments and groups. Webcasts are planned for September 29, 2020; October 1, 2020; and October 7, 2020.

For detailed information regarding how input from Indigenous Nations, governments and groups has been considered and incorporated into the draft Plan, where appropriate, please see Appendix N.

5.3.4 Other Potentially Affected Stakeholders a. Government

Enbridge emailed a notification letter and a L3D Project website link to the following potentially affected stakeholders and requested any feedback on the draft Plan and Decommissioning Activities:

• 104 municipalities and counties located in Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba on February 10, 2020; and • 57 provincial and federal stakeholders comprised of Members of Parliament and Members of the Legislative Assembly along the L3D Project ROW as well as potentially interested or affected ministries and departments on February 14, 2020.

The list of municipalities, counties, provincial and federal stakeholders is included in Appendix O. The L3D Project website contains a video explaining the decommissioning process, maps showing the location of the Decommissioning Activities and a draft Plan. In early March 2020, Enbridge representatives attended the Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities (“SARM”) annual convention to share information about the L3D Project and answer questions. Enbridge planned to conduct similar events in Alberta and Manitoba, but such events were cancelled due to health and safety concerns with respect to Covid-19. Enbridge anticipates completing further engagement with potentially affected stakeholders in late summer/early fall 2020.

Detailed information regarding how input from potentially affected stakeholders has been considered and incorporated, where appropriate, into the draft Plan, will be incorporated into Appendix P. To date, no concerns have been raised.

b. Landowners

Enbridge has engaged and continues to engage with local landowners. Further details will be provided in the Plan that will be filed with the CER.

5.4 Engagement During the Decommissioning Activities During Decommissioning Activities, Enbridge will continue to provide opportunities for engagement and inclusion of Indigenous Nations, governments and groups. This includes:

• The potential inclusion of Indigenous construction monitors; • Communication about and inclusion in economic opportunities associated with the Decommissioning Activities; • Ongoing one-on-one engagement with individual Indigenous Nations, governments and groups; • Updates on Decommissioning Activities during Regional roundtables as committed to by Enbridge under Conditions 21/29. The engagement that occurs throughout the Decommissioning Activities will be reported on to the regulator as per Condition 8, (Aboriginal Consultation Report).

5.5 Outstanding Concerns No concerns were raised in response to the notification to the 104 municipalities and counties, and the 57 provincial and federal stakeholders and no concerns were raised during the SARM annual convention.

A summary of the current outstanding concerns identified by Indigenous Nations, governments and groups, as well as other potentially affected stakeholders, and how these will be addressed by Enbridge, will be reviewed with Indigenous Nations, governments and groups during the fall 2020 webcast information sessions. A final table of outstanding concerns, if any, will be included in this section 5.5 in the Plan filed with the CER.

Appendix A – Line 3 Decommissioning Work Locations

Risk Construction Schedule KME Activity Notes Mitigated Method Province Segment #

Hardisty Terminal E175.945 Isolation (Terminal) Alberta 1 - Hardisty to Kerrobert Start of Cleaning Segment 1 E196.496 Railway Fill Upstream Side Alberta 1 - Hardisty to Kerrobert E196.615 Downstream Side Alberta 1 - Hardisty to Kerrobert E207.831 Isolation (Valve) Stand Alone Hydraulic Operated Alberta 1 - Hardisty to Kerrobert E209.052 Isolation (Valve) Co-located Motor Operated Alberta 1 - Hardisty to Kerrobert Metiskow Station E229.805 Isolation (Station) Intermediate Gas Injection Site Cleaning Alberta 1 - Hardisty to Kerrobert Segment 1 E229.866 Alberta 1 - Hardisty to Kerrobert E239.409 Isolation (Other) Pressure Indicating Transmitter Alberta 1 - Hardisty to Kerrobert E247.838 Railway Fill Upstream Side Alberta 1 - Hardisty to Kerrobert E247.909 Downstream Side Alberta 1 - Hardisty to Kerrobert E263.626 Isolation (Valve) Co-located Manual Operated Alberta 1 - Hardisty to Kerrobert E271.100 Segmentation Eyehill Creek [E272.1]; Inflow from west Alberta 1 - Hardisty to Kerrobert E274.985 Isolation (Valve) Co-located Motor Operated Saskatchewan 1 - Hardisty to Kerrobert E279.123 Isolation (Valve) Co-located Hydraulic Operated Saskatchewan 1 - Hardisty to Kerrobert Cactus Lake Station E289.964 Isolation (Station) Intermediate Gas Venting Site Cleaning Saskatchewan 1 - Hardisty to Kerrobert Segment 1 E292.536 Segmentation Class IV Wetland [E293.6]; Inflow from west Saskatchewan 1 - Hardisty to Kerrobert E296.523 Segmentation Class V Wetland [E297.2]; Inflow from west Saskatchewan 1 - Hardisty to Kerrobert E298.000 Segmentation Class V Wetland [E297.2]; Inflow from east Saskatchewan 1 - Hardisty to Kerrobert E319.702 Segmentation Class IV Wetland [E317.6]; Inflow from east Saskatchewan 1 - Hardisty to Kerrobert E326.000 Segmentation Class VI Wetland [E326.5]; Inflow from west Saskatchewan 1 - Hardisty to Kerrobert E331.330 Segmentation Class VI Wetland [E330.1]; Inflow from east Saskatchewan 1 - Hardisty to Kerrobert E335.055 Isolation (Valve) Co-located Motor Operated Saskatchewan 1 - Hardisty to Kerrobert E339.770 Segmentation Class V Wetland [E338.5]; Inflow from east Saskatchewan 1 - Hardisty to Kerrobert E343.389 Isolation (Other) Densitometer Saskatchewan 1 - Hardisty to Kerrobert E344.632 Isolation (Other) Pressure Indicating Transmitter Saskatchewan 1 - Hardisty to Kerrobert E347.279 Railway Fill Upstream Side Saskatchewan 1 - Hardisty to Kerrobert E347.350 Downstream Side Saskatchewan 1 - Hardisty to Kerrobert Kerrobert Terminal E351.297 Isolation (Terminal) End of Cleaning Segment 1 Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina Start of Cleaning Segment 2 E351.972 Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina E360.400 Segmentation Class V Wetland [E359.6]; Inflow from east Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina E365.580 Railway Fill Upstream Side Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina E365.693 Downstream Side Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina E392.939 Railway Fill Upstream Side Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina E393.009 Downstream Side Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina E397.211 Isolation (Valve) Co-located Motor Operated Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina E404.062 Isolation (Valve) Co-located Hydraulic Motor Operated Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina

Risk Construction Schedule KME Activity Notes Mitigated Method Province Segment #

E413.783 Isolation (Station) Herschel Station Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina E436.682 Railway Fill Upstream Side Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina E436.845 Downstream Side Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina E457.978 Isolation (Valve) Co-located Motor Operated Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina E464.199 Railway Fill Upstream Side Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina E464.306 Downstream Side Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina Milden Station E475.108 Isolation (Station) Intermediate Gas Injection Site Cleaning Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina Segment 2 E475.436 Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina E489.439 Segmentation Class IV Wetland [E489.9]; Inflow from west Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina E493.010 Isolation (Other) Pressure Indicating Transmitter Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina E493.564 Railway Fill Upstream Side Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina E493.630 Downstream Side Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina E498.200 Segmentation Class IV Wetland [E499.1]; Inflow from west Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina Class IV Wetland (Semi-Permanent Marsh) E499.843 Segmentation Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina [E498.9 to E499.3]; Outflow to east E504.157 Isolation (Valve) Co-located Hydraulic Motor Operated Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina E506.668 Isolation (Valve) Co-located Hydraulic Motor Operated Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina E523.966 Isolation (Valve) Co-located Motor Operated Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina E536.503 Railway Fill Upstream Side Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina E536.685 Downstream Side Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina Loreburn Station E538.276 Isolation (Station) Intermediate Gas Venting Site Cleaning Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina Segment 2 E573.210 Isolation (Valve) Co-located Hydraulic Operated Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina E581.249 Isolation (Valve) Co-located Motor Operated Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina Iskwao Creek (Sportfish-bearing E585.500 Segmentation Watercourse) Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina [E586.3 to E586.6]; Inflow from west E590.584 Isolation (Station) Craik Station Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina E590.780 Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina Class IV Wetland [E636.4 to E637]; Inflow E634.200 Segmentation Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina from west (Class V wetland at E633.2) E637.439 Isolation (Valve) Co-located Hydraulic Operated Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina E653.060 Isolation (Station) Bethune Station Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina E660.917 Isolation (Take-off) Co-located Stony Beach Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina Co-located Motor Operated & E691.670 Isolation (Valve) Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina Densitometer E697.355 Railway Fill Upstream Side Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina E697.412 Downstream Side Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina E703.030 Railway Fill Upstream Side Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina E703.323 Downstream Side Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina E703.913 Railway Fill Upstream Side Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina E704.013 Downstream Side Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina

Risk Construction Schedule KME Activity Notes Mitigated Method Province Segment #

Regina Terminal

Isolation (Terminal) End of Cleaning Segment 2 Saskatchewan 2 - Kerrobert to Regina E704.443 Start of Cleaning Segment 3

Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer E704.745 E704.748 Railway Fill QU Ex-Launcher Xing Upstream Side Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer QU Ex-Launcher Xing Downstream Side E704.824 Railway Fill QU Suction/Discharge Upstream Side Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer Added 2019 QU Suction/Discharge Downstream Side E704.824 Railway Fill Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer Added 2019 Regina Station E704.886 Isolation (Station) Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer P/S 3 valve cluster E706.670 Railway Fill Upstream Side Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer E706.751 Downstream Side Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer E709.797 Railway Fill Upstream Side Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer E709.961 Downstream Side Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer E711.749 Railway Fill Upstream Side Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer E711.824 Downstream Side Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer E738.130 Railway Fill Upstream Side Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer E738.205 Downstream Side Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer E740.203 Isolation (Valve) Co-located Manual Operated Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer E746.275 Segmentation Class IV Wetland [E746.2]; Inflow from east Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer E749.200 Isolation (Valve) Co-located Motor Operated Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer Vibank Community Water Supply [E752.0 E754.727 Segmentation Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer to E753.0]; Outflow E758.900 Segmentation Class V Wetland [E759.3]; Inflow from west Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer E762.429 Isolation (Station) Odessa Station Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer E774.597 Isolation (Valve) Co-located Manual Operated Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer E793.400 Segmentation Class IV Wetland Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer E795.656 Segmentation Class IV Wetland Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer E800.607 Isolation (Valve) Co-located Motor Operated Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer E805.506 Segmentation Class IV Wetland Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer Glenavon Station E812.168 Isolation (Station) Intermediate Gas Injection Site Cleaning Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer Segment 3 E822.167 Segmentation Class V Wetland Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer E827.066 Isolation (Valve) Co-located Manual Operated Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer E837.880 Segmentation Class IV Wetland Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer E842.203 Segmentation Class IV Wetland Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer E845.640 Segmentation Class IV Wetland Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer E849.006 Segmentation Class IV Wetland Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer E855.717 Isolation (Valve) Co-located Manual Operated Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer E856.598 Isolation (Valve) Co-located Motor Operated Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer E867.422 Segmentation Class IV Wetland Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer

Risk Construction Schedule KME Activity Notes Mitigated Method Province Segment #

Langbank Station E875.169 Isolation (Station) Intermediate Gas Venting Site Cleaning Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer Segment 3 E888.129 Segmentation Class IV Wetland Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer E891.799 Segmentation Class V Wetland Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer E899.948 Isolation (Valve) Co-located Manual Operated Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer E906.265 Railway Fill Upstream Side Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer E906.341 Downstream Side Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer E929.153 Isolation (Valve) Co-located Motor Operated Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer E934.332 Isolation (Other) Pressure Indicating Transmitter Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer E938.200 Segmentation Class IV Wetland Saskatchewan 3 - Regina to Cromer E945.921 Segmentation Class IV Wetland Manitoba 3 - Regina to Cromer E946.771 Isolation (Valve) Co-located Hydraulic Manual Operated Manitoba 3 - Regina to Cromer E949.012 Segmentation Pipestone Creek Manitoba 3 - Regina to Cromer E953.782 Isolation (Other) Densitometer Manitoba 3 - Regina to Cromer Cromer Terminal E959.383 Isolation (Terminal) Manitoba 4 - Cromer to Gretna End of Cleaning Segment 3 E959.632 Manitoba 4 - Cromer to Gretna Ex-Cromer Isolation Start of Cleaning Segment 4 E981.000 Manitoba 4 - Cromer to Gretna (Line 3 Tie-in) Completed as part of the Line 3 Replacement Pipeline Project E983.196 Railway Fill Upstream Side Manitoba 4 - Cromer to Gretna E983.272 Downstream Side Manitoba 4 - Cromer to Gretna E997.966 Isolation (Valve) Co-located Manual Operated Manitoba 4 - Cromer to Gretna E1009.179 Isolation (Valve) Co-located Motor Operated Manitoba 4 - Cromer to Gretna E1023.371 Isolation (Valve) Co-located Manual Operated Manitoba 4 - Cromer to Gretna E1031.571 Isolation (Station) West Souris Station Manitoba 4 - Cromer to Gretna E1033.300 Railway Fill Upstream Side Manitoba 4 - Cromer to Gretna E1033.360 Downstream Side Manitoba 4 - Cromer to Gretna Souris Station Does not contain a Line 3 pump station for E1040.126 Isolation (Valve) Manitoba 4 - Cromer to Gretna isolation purposes Co-located Motor Operated E1051.760 Segmentation Class IV Wetland Manitoba 4 - Cromer to Gretna E1069.493 Isolation (Valve) Co-located Motor Operated Manitoba 4 - Cromer to Gretna E1073.877 Isolation (Valve) Co-located Manual Operated Manitoba 4 - Cromer to Gretna E1082.278 Isolation (Valve) Co-located Motor Operated Manitoba 4 - Cromer to Gretna E1085.710 Segmentation Oak Creek Manitoba 4 - Cromer to Gretna E1087.300 Isolation (Valve) Co-located Manual Operated Manitoba 4 - Cromer to Gretna E1092.295 Isolation (Valve) Co-located Manual Operated Manitoba 4 - Cromer to Gretna Glenboro Station E1103.354 Isolation (Station) Intermediate Gas Injection Site Cleaning Manitoba 4 - Cromer to Gretna Segment 4 E1103.653 Manitoba 4 - Cromer to Gretna

Risk Construction Schedule KME Activity Notes Mitigated Method Province Segment #

E1117.100 Segmentation Class IV Wetland Manitoba 4 - Cromer to Gretna E1131.016 Isolation (Valve) Co-located Manual Operated Manitoba 4 - Cromer to Gretna E1139.246 Isolation (Valve) Co-located Motor Operated Manitoba 4 - Cromer to Gretna E1148.141 Isolation (Valve) Stand Alone Manual Operated Manitoba 4 - Cromer to Gretna St. Leon Station E1155.788 Isolation (Station) Intermediate Gas Venting Site Cleaning Manitoba 4 - Cromer to Gretna Segment 4 Manitou Station Does not contain a Line 3 pump station for E1165.086 Isolation (Valve) Manitoba 4 - Cromer to Gretna isolation purposes Co-located Operated E1177.997 Isolation (Other) Pressure Indicating Transmitter Manitoba 4 - Cromer to Gretna E1190.643 Isolation (Valve) Co-located Motor Operated Manitoba 4 - Cromer to Gretna E1191.769 Railway Fill Upstream Side Manitoba 4 - Cromer to Gretna E1191.831 Downstream Side Manitoba 4 - Cromer to Gretna E1194.300 Segmentation Deadhorse Creek Manitoba 4 - Cromer to Gretna E1201.867 Isolation (Valve) Stand Alone Manual Operated Manitoba 4 - Cromer to Gretna E1206.351 Isolation (Valve) Co-located Motor Operated Manitoba 4 - Cromer to Gretna E1227.008 Isolation (Valve) Co-located Manual Operated Manitoba 4 - Cromer to Gretna E1228.911 Segmentation Buffalo Creek Manitoba 4 - Cromer to Gretna Gretna Terminal E1242.510 Isolation (Station) Manitoba 4 - Cromer to Gretna End of Cleaning Segment 4

Appendix B – Line 3 Decommissioning Schematics - Still in development

Appendix C – Line 3 Decommissioning Engagement Maps - Included (online)

Appendix D – Line 3 Decommissioning EPP - Still in development

Appendix E – Cleaning Scope Drawings - Still in development

Appendix F – Isolation Scope Drawings - Still in development

Appendix G – Segmentation Scope Drawings - Still in development

Appendix H – Railway Fill Scope Drawings - Still in development

Appendix I – List of Indigenous Nations, Governments and Groups Invited to Engage 1 Agency Chiefs Tribal Council 46 Kainai (Blood) Tribe 91 Pine Creek First Nation 2 Ahtahkakoop Cree Nation 47 Kawacatoose First Nation 92 Poundmaker Cree Nation 3 Alexander First Nation 48 Keeseekoose First Nation 93 Red Pheasant First Nation 4 Alexis Nakota Sioux Nation 49 Keeseekoowenin First Nation 94 Region 2, Métis Nation of Alberta 5 Assembly of First Nations 50 Kinistin Saulteaux First Nation 95 Region 3, Métis Nation of Alberta 6 Assembly of First Nations - Manitoba Region 51 Lake Manitoba First Nation 96 Region 4, Métis Nation of Alberta 7 Assembly of First Nations -Alberta Region 52 Little Black Bear Band 97 Rolling River First Nation 8 Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs 53 Little Pine First Nation 98 Roseau River Anishinabe First Nation 9 Battleford Agency Tribal Chiefs 54 Long Plain First Nation 99 Saddle Lake Cree Nation 10 Battlefords Tribal Council 55 Louis Bull First Nation 100 Sakimay First Nation 11 Beardy’s & Okemasis First Nation 56 Lucky Man First Nation 101 Samson Cree Nation 12 Bearspaw First Nation 57 Manitoba Metis Federation 102 Sandy Bay (White Mud River) First Nation 13 Beaver Lake Cree Nation 58 Métis Nation - Saskatchewan 103 Sapotaweyak Cree Nation 14 Big Island Lake Cree Nation 59 Métis Nation - Saskatchewan Eastern Region III 104 Saskatchewan First Nation Resource Centre of Excellence 15 Big River First Nation 60 Métis Nation - Saskatchewan Western Region IA 105 Saskatoon Tribal Council 16 Birdtail Sioux Dakota First Nation 61 Métis Nation - Saskatchewan Western Region IIA 106 Saulteaux First Nation 17 Brokenhead Ojibway First Nation 62 Métis Nation - Saskatchewan, Eastern Region IIA 107 Siksika First Nation 18 Buffalo Point First Nation 63 Métis Nation - Saskatchewan, Western Region III 108 Sioux Valley Dakota Nation 19 Canupawakpa Dakota Nation 64 Métis Nation of Alberta 109 Skownan First Nation 20 Carry the Kettle First Nation 65 Métis National Council 110 Sputheast Treaty #4 Tribal Council 21 Central Urban Métis Federation Inc. 66 Michel First Nation 111 Southern Chiefs' Organization Inc. 22 Chacachas First Nation 67 Mistawasis First Nation 112 Standing Buffalo First Nation 23 Chief Big Bear First Nation 68 Montana First Nation 113 Star Blanket Cree Nation 24 Chiniki First Nation 69 Moosomin First Nation 114 Stoney Nakoda Nation 25 Congress of Aboriginal Peoples 70 Mosquito Grizzly Bear's Head, Lean Man First 115 Stoney Knoll (Young Chippewayan) First Nation Nation 26 Cote First Nation 71 Mountain Cree Asini Wachi Nehiyawak 116 Swan Lake First Nation 27 Cowessess First Nation 72 Muscowpetung First Nation 117 Sweetgrass First Nation

28 Dakota Ojibway Tribal Council 73 Muskowekwan First Nation 118 The Key First Nation 29 Dakota Plains Wahpeton Nation 74 Nekaneet First Nation 119 Thunderchild First Nation 30 Dakota Tipi First Nation 75 Ocean Man First Nation 120 Tootinaowaziibeeng Treaty Reserve (Valley River) 31 Dauphin River First Nation 76 Ochapowace First Nation 121 Touchwood Agency Tribal Council 32 Day Star First Nation 77 O-Chi-Chak-ko-Sipi (Crane River) First Nation 122 Treaty 2 First Nations - Anishinaabe Agowidiiwinan 33 Ebb and Flow First Nation 78 Okanese First Nation 123 Tsuu T'ina First Nation 34 Enoch Cree Nation #440 79 One Arrow First Nation 124 Wahpeton Dakota First Nation 35 Ermineskin Cree Nation 80 Onion Lake Cree Nation 125 Waywayseecappo First Nation 36 Federation of Sovereign Indigenous Nations 81 Papaschase First Nation 126 Wesley First Nation 37 File Hills Qu'Appelle Tribal Council 82 Pasqua First Nation 127 West Region Tribal Council 38 Fishing Lake First Nation 83 Paul First Nation 128 White Bear First Nation 39 Flying Dust First Nation 84 Peepeekisis First Nation 129 Whitecap Dakota Nation 40 Frog Lake First Nation 85 Peguis First Nation 130 Witchekan Lake First Nation 41 Gabriel Dumont Institute 86 Pelican Lake 131 Wood Mountain Lakota First Nation 42 Gamblers First Nation 87 Pheasant Rump Nakota First Nation 132 Wuskwi Sipihk (Indian Birch) First Nation 43 George Gordon First Nation 88 Piapot First Nation 133 Yellow Quill First Nation 44 Interlake Reserves Tribal Council 89 Piikani Nation 134 Yorkton Tribal Council 45 Kahkewistahaw First Nation 90 Pinaymootang First Nation

Appendix J – Notification Letter & Fact Sheet – February 10, 2020

Appendix K – “What We Heard” Summaries - March 2020

Appendix L – Letter Regarding Engagement During Covid-19 – March 25, 2020

Appendix M – Line 3 and Prairie Region News Newsletter – May 28, 2020

Appendix N - Summary of Feedback - Indigenous Nations, governments & groups Summary of Feedback Received on the Plan Enbridge’s Responses to the Feedback Received & How Such Feedback Informed the Design of the Plan, Where Appropriate. A. Decommissioning & Environmental Activities 1. Participants asked about differences in approach between Enbridge informed the participants that the NEB (now the CER) decommissioning activities in Canada and the United already granted approval to decommission the line in place and States (U.S.). Participants asked why if landowners in the Enbridge is complying with the Decommissioning Order and all U.S. want the pipe on their land removed, it is removed, of the associated Conditions. There were no changes made to and why the same is not happening in Canada. the draft Plan as a result of this inquiry. Participants indicated that if landowners are getting paid to have decommissioned pipe on their land in the U.S., that should also happen in Canada. 2. Participants asked if dirt fill at segmentation sites is Enbridge explained during the information session that fill will required where pipe is removed. If fill is required, what be required for segmentation locations where the pipe is sources will be used if it will be tested for contaminants? removed. Fill is approved by the respective landowner, and where possible a source from the landowner is used. Where this is not a possibility, Enbridge will bring in an approved source that has been sampled for contaminants. The Decommissioning EPP lists sampling requirements for imported material within the biosecurity section. There were no changes made to the draft Plan as a result of this inquiry. 3. Participants asked about spill capture measures during All potential spill locations will have prevention measures in Decommissioning Activities. place such as: spill trays; secondary spill containment measures; and minimization of onsite fuel storage. Spill containment in the event of an incident will follow a detailed mitigation plan which can be found in the Decommissioning EPP. There were no changes made to the draft Plan as a result of this inquiry. 4. Participants asked how long it will take for the pipe to fully Enbridge informed participants that the pipe will fully degrade degrade. gradually over a period of hundreds of years. 5. Participants asked about the process to remove the oil Pigs are used to push the oil to an Enbridge facility where it is from the line and clean the line. transferred to another pipeline or stored.

6. Participants asked about the decommissioning process for Enbridge responded during the information session that the main facilities and pump stations and asked why facilities main facilities and pump stations will be left in place, in a safe will not be completely removed. state. The buildings themselves may be re-purposed to another use, such as onsite storage. 7. Participants asked how many times repairs were done on Enbridge’s preventative maintenance program is in place to the line. address concerns before they become issues. This involves several digs along Enbridge’s mainline each year, including Line 3. 8. Participants asked about: Enbridge responded: i. The flushing and cleaning process; i. It was noted during the information session that the pipe ii. The chemicals used in the cleaning solution to clean will be cleaned and flushed until the rinse water slugs the pipe; within the cleaning train are confirmed to meet applicable iii. The half-life of chemicals; limits. Enbridge has performed this activity before and has iv. What happens to the oil cleaned from the line and the been able to achieve these results. Chemicals used will not water source in Hardisty, Alberta; be released into the general environment. v. If the cleaning figures were realistic; and ii. Contractors are proposing to Enbridge the chemicals they vi. How the pigs move through the line. will use. As Enbridge is committed to safety and protection of the environment, priority is given to the environmentally Participants also recommended that if contractors are friendly option(s). given pipe to test the chemicals on, the pipe should be iii. Chemicals are mixed with water for the cleaning batches, from various points along the pipeline. at relatively low concentration rates. Additionally, water rinses will follow these batches to remove the residual chemical from the pipe walls. This material will be removed from the line and disposed at an approved third-party facility. Given the low concentration rates being applied to the cleaning batches and planned water rinses, residual cleaning chemicals are expected to be nil or at such low levels as to pose no risk to the environment if released from the Decommissioned Line. iv. The majority of the oil (from Hardisty through to Gretna) is removed and delivered into tanks or onto another operating line in the system and ultimately delivered to market using the existing Enbridge infrastructure. Oil residue removed during the cleaning program is disposed at an approved third-party facility.

v. Enbridge has performed the cleaning activity before and has been able to achieve these cleaning results outlined in the draft Plan. vi. Pigs are propelled in the cleaning program with pressurized nitrogen, which is injected into the pipeline in front of and behind the pigs to regulate how fast or slow they move through the pipeline

In response to the recommendation provided by the participants, Enbridge notes that the chemical cleaning agents used are selected to target the specific products shipped within Line 3 which have left residue on the pipe walls, not to target the pipe itself. Because the products remain consistent from entry into the pipeline at Hardisty through to their delivery downstream of Gretna, multiple points of study would yield identical results and therefore we feel multiple points of testing are unnecessary and no changes have been made to the draft Plan as a result of the recommendation. 9. Participants asked if the pipe under wetlands will be filled Enbridge’s priority is to not disturb wetlands. The pipe (similar to rail crossings). underneath wetlands will not be filled. Filling the lines is for the purpose of maintaining structural stability of the railway crossing due to higher loading rates, which is not a concern under wetlands. 10. Participants asked questions about corrosion, including: Enbridge provided responses during the information sessions i. Corrosion rates and how the pipe will corrode and and provides further information below in response to the breakdown over time; questions regarding corrosion: ii. How long after the pipe was first constructed until the i. Localized external corrosion is expected to continue in a first time a section had to be dug up and replaced; similar manner to corrosion rates during Line 3’s service life. iii. What the protective coating is made of now; and what This will eventually lead to small perforations through the the protective coating was made of when the line was pipe wall, likely on the side walls, in approximately 25-50 installed; years (`2036-2061). Soil and moisture will enter into the iv. Quality of the product carried and if the product pipeline via these small perforations and increase the contributes to corrosion of the line; and internal corrosion rates, particularly at the bottom of the pipe v. Corrosion of the pipe and the protective coating where soil and moisture will accumulate. The perforation on affecting water sources, water quality and aquifers. the bottom of the pipe is expected approximately 25 years after the first perforations due to external corrosion (~2060-

2085). After this the pipe will begin to slowly degrade, but full degradation of the pipe (i.e. whereby nothing of the pipe remains) is expected to take hundreds of years.

ii. Existing Line 3 Pipeline has been managed under a formal integrity program since the asset was placed into service. The external condition of the pipe has been managed through regular monitoring and dig/repair activities to maintain the safe condition of the line.

iii. Existing Line 3 Pipeline was coated using a polyethylene tape-wrap coating system, which was typical/best practice at the time the Existing Line 3 Pipeline was constructed. That coating still exists on the pipeline today. Newly constructed lines are typically coated with modern high-performance fusion bond epoxy or multi-layer polyethylene coating systems.

iv. The crude oil products transported through the pipeline have minimal effect on the corrosion of the pipeline based on operating conditions of the pipeline system and effective internal corrosion management programs.

v. Degradation of the pipeline and its coatings was evaluated in the Decommissioning Environmental Technical Report (CER ID:A4E7E0). Metals potentially released by degradation of the pipeline are not considered a threat to the environment and the tape coating used on the Existing Line 3 Pipeline is considered to be inert and therefore is not considered a risk.

11. Participants asked about the depth of pipe along the route, Depth of cover along the pipeline route is in accordance with the depth of cover at wetlands and watercourses, and applicable environmental standards (e.g. CSA Z662, the buoyancy concerns of the decommissioned pipe. minimum depth of cover is 0.9 m). The Existing Line 3 Pipeline depth of cover surveys indicate that less than 1% of the line has a depth of cover less than or

equal to 0.9 m, with the minimum recorded at 0.6 m and more than 50% of the line with over 1.2 m of cover. The depth of cover at railway crossing is typically 2.0 m but can be much deeper. Buoyancy concerns have been evaluated and filed with the CER in support of Conditions 6 and 7 of the Decommissioning Order [A97880]. Evaluations conducted by Enbridge determined there was negligible risk of buoyant pipe. 12. Participants asked about the number of lines and length of Enbridge has completed decommissioning or abandonment pipe that Enbridge has decommissioned. work on approximately 130km of pipeline over 10 projects within our North American System. This includes 60km of pipeline over 3 different projects within the Prairie Region in Canada which is the where the L3D Project is located.

13. Participants raised concerns about air quality, flora and Enbridge is committed to protection of the environment fauna during Decommissioning Activities, although it was throughout all of its activities. Feedback was considered in the understood generally that keeping the decommissioned development of the guidelines, which are outlined within the pipe in the ground limited environmental effects. Decommissioning EPP. Segmentation locations were specifically located to minimize conflict with areas like watercourses and wetlands. Enbridge will include environmental inspectors on site and buffer areas will be created and maintained. The photomosaics included in the Decommissioning EPP provide specific drawings for each segmentation location. These photomosaic drawings will be used by the L3D Project group, including the environmental inspectors engaged by Enbridge, to provide site specific mitigation for each segmentation location. 14. Participants raised concerns about wastewater. The pipe will be cleaned and flushed until the rinse water slugs within the cleaning train are confirmed to meet applicable limits. Wastewater will be disposed of by third parties at liquid waste disposal sites with all required regulatory approvals. There were no changes required to the draft Plan as a result of the concern raised. 15. Participants expressed concerns regarding environmental i. The greenhouse gas footprint is significantly less for effects of leaving the pipe in the ground, while decommissioning in place than for removal of the line. acknowledging that the effects may be less than if the pipe ii. It is expected that water will eventually enter the pipe. Segmentation is designed to protect the natural

was removed. Participants raised particular concerns hydrology of the areas from water infill or loss when this about: happens so when water eventually enters the pipe it i. Greenhouse gas footprint; would not alter the flow of the water in the surrounding ii. Potential effects in 50 years’ time, including if area by creating new water conduits. For further clarity, water gets into the line; and segmentation is not used to stop water from getting into iii. If the pipeline will eventually slump or cave in, the line as it decomposes but is used so the that it may be many years from now, but that it Decommissioned Line does not become a new water will happen. conduit. iii. Please see the Environmental Technical Report as referenced above in response 10(v). Please note that it is not expected that the line will suddenly slump or cave, but all precautions have been put in place for protection of the environment. 16. Participants suggested a video of the segmentation Enbridge played a video for the attendees to understand the process would be helpful to understand the process and decommissioning process during each information session. effects. 17. A participating First Nation suggested segmentation sites An isolation site exists on the east side of the participating First be located on either side of their reserve lands and it was Nation’s reserve. Enbridge has added an additional agreed that there would be follow-up discussion between segmentation site on the west side of the participating First Enbridge and the participating First Nation to discuss this Nation’s reserve in the draft Plan to address their concern. specific issue. 18. Participants commented on the importance of Contractors would have specific project Emergency Response environmental health and safety during Decommissioning plans for the construction period while the Decommissioning Activities and the Decommissioned Period. Participants Activities are completed. Each Enbridge Operating Region has asked about emergency response plans and suggested a specific Emergency Response plan which encompasses the plans reference the emergency response planning right-of-way emergencies. These plans are not specific to each explicitly. line, however, Line 3’s information will be maintained within the region’s response plan throughout the Decommissioned Period.

As part of the L3R Conditions 21/29, Enbridge is committed to engaging on Emergency Response with Indigenous Nations, governments and groups. 19. Participants raised flooding concerns and the chance of Cathodic Protection systems operate on very low current (milli combustion due to cathodic protection as scenarios to volts) and are typically buried presenting negligible combustion consider. concerns.

B. Regulatory 1. Participants asked if a draft plan for decommissioning was A draft plan was not submitted, but Enbridge did submit a previously submitted to the CER. Decommissioning Report, which detailed the potential approaches and Enbridge’s proposed approach to Existing Line 3 Pipeline. The Report can be found here under filing ID: A4E6E9 C. Traditional Land Use 1. Participants asked how Traditional Land Use (“TLU”) sites Unlike isolation or railway fill sites, Enbridge has some ability to were being avoided for the segmentation and how TLU choose the location of segmentation sites to some degree. information provided for the L3D Project was used. Where possible, the locations of segmentation sites were purposely chosen to avoid TLU sites. Additional mitigation measures will be implemented including flagging areas to avoid disruption of unavoidable sites (e.g. rare plants). There is site specific mitigation for every segmentation site. Mitigation is included in the Decommissioning EPP – Appendix P. D. Indigenous Engagement and Inclusion 1. Participants asked if Indigenous Nations, governments and Enbridge anticipates having Indigenous construction monitors groups could be involved in the “audit process” as for the Decommissioning Activities. While the observers. Decommissioning Order did not specify or require a plan for engagement with Indigenous Nations, governments or groups during the execution of Decommissioning Activities, Section 5.4 has been added to the draft Plan as a result of feedback received during the information sessions and in support of Enbridge’s focus on the engagement and inclusion of Indigenous Nations, governments and groups during the execution of Decommissioning Activities. 2. Participants asked how Indigenous Nations, governments Throughout consultation on the L3R, including the regulatory and groups were consulted on the decision to leave the hearing process, Enbridge advised that it was planning to pipe in the ground. decommission the line in place (i.e. in the ground). The GOC’s approval for the L3R in 2016 included the approval to decommission the line in place. Decommissioning the line in place is an industry standard in Canada to mitigate potential impacts to the environment, by reducing risk of soil stability, major construction and the potential risk to existing pipelines from heavy equipment. Enbridge remains responsible for the Decommissioned Line just as we would an active line.

3. Participants asked about the process of abandonment and Enbridge provided information, which included a presentation the involvement of Indigenous Nations, governments and and video, describing the abandonment process. groups in the process. Enbridge confirmed and described its approach to the inclusion and maximization of the involvement of Indigenous businesses in the process. Enbridge also advised that it anticipates Indigenous monitors will be involved during the Decommissioning Activities 4. Participants asked about the already decommissioned The already decommissioned line near Cromer, Manitoba was section of the line near Cromer, Manitoba, and inquired decommissioned in 2015 and Enbridge engaged with about the Indigenous engagement involved. The potentially affected Indigenous Nations, governments and participants expressed the need for improved and ongoing groups in relation to this project. Through Enbridge’s lifecycle communication. approach to engagement, we will be communicating much more often than we did prior to the L3D Project. Conditions 21/29 of the Certificate and Order in Council authorizing the construction and operation of the Line 3 Replacement Pipeline and related facilities, and Condition 14 of the Decommissioning Order also require ongoing engagement for the life of the L3D Project. 5. Participants asked about the deviation of the Line 3 route Indigenous Nations, governments and groups were consulted for the newly constructed L3 Replacement Program and on the L3 Replacement program pipeline route throughout the requested an explanation of the deviation, engagement consultation period prior to GOC’s approval of the L3 that occurred and studies conducted. Replacement Program. Enbridge considered a variety of factors in deciding the new route which included engineering, environment, traditional land use, landowner concerns, etc. 6. Participants asked about the role of the IAMC and how The IAMC was established as part of the GOC’s approval of their processes overlap and work in relation to the L3D the L3R. Membership includes representatives from the CER, Project, and if the IAMC monitors were the monitors used Natural Resources Canada and 16 Indigenous Nations, during L3R construction activities. governments and groups along the Line 3 right-of-way. Enbridge is not a member of the IAMC. Enbridge has continued to engage with the IAMC on the Decommissioning Activities. Indigenous Construction Monitors were not hired through the IAMC. The IAMC monitors were a separate initiative. The IAMC website is: http://iamc-line3.com/ 7. Participants emphasized the difference between In Enbridge’s view, consultation refers to the duty to consult Consultation and engagement, indicating that the with Indigenous Nations, governments and groups, which was information sessions constitute engagement and not satisfied when the GOC approved the construction

Consultation, and that the distinction should be clear in all and operations of the L3D Project, which included the activities and reporting. decommissioning of the Existing Line 3 Pipeline. Engagement are the activities taken by Enbridge since that time. 8. Participants discussed the importance of ongoing Enbridge is planning for ongoing engagement, as identified in engagement and communication with Enbridge and the Section 3.5 of the draft Plan, through the Decommissioned importance of trust. Participants also Indicated that they Period and will adapt the Plan accordingly. Further, as a result felt more than one engagement session is needed to of feedback received during the information sessions, Enbridge discuss decommissioning and that sessions should be has added Section 5.4 to this draft Plan to outline its held throughout the lifecycle of the L3D Project. commitment to continued engagement during the Decommissioning Activities. Enbridge is focused on and committed to life-cycle engagement. E. Indigenous Monitors 1. Participants emphasized the need for engagement and Enbridge understands and agrees in the importance of monitors at all sites, including decommissioning sites. engagement by Indigenous Peoples in the monitoring process. Enbridge anticipates the use of Indigenous monitors during Decommissioning Activities. Enbridge has added a Section 5.4 to the draft Plan in response to feedback received through the 2. Participants were interested in Indigenous monitors during information sessions and to outline Enbridge’s commitment to Decommissioning Activities and asked about the continued engagement during the Decommissioning Activities. Indigenous monitors’ scope. The importance of Indigenous Section 5.4 includes reference to Enbridge’s anticipated use of monitors was emphasized. Indigenous monitors during Decommissioning Activities. F. Indigenous Economic Participation 1. Participants raised concerns about previous processes Enbridge always strives to improve and streamline our related to procurement and contracting of sub-contractors business processes. Enbridge outlined the Indigenous and asked about the Indigenous procurement policy. business engagement processes it uses to provide a full and transparent approach for participating in Enbridge’s economic opportunities. The Socio-Economic Requirements of Contractors (“SERC”) has been developed and is applied directly in Enbridge’s procurement processes for engaging Indigenous businesses. 2. Participants commented that Indigenous Nations, In response, Enbridge has requested updated Business governments and groups need to be prime and have Information Sheets (“BIS”) and asked that Indigenous Nations, economic opportunities and should not and will not be governments and groups identify which business they would placated with minor opportunities. like to participate as a potential general contractor. Enbridge provided these identified businesses with a Request for Information (“RFI”). Should the businesses show they have the

capacity to compete as a general contractor, they will be able to participate in the Request For Proposal (“RFP”) process as a general contractor. 3. Participants commented that some Indigenous Nations, Enbridge appreciates this feedback and will only be inviting governments and groups will be more affected than others proximate Indigenous Nation-, government- or group-owned or (closer to the L3D Project) and that contracting needs to partnered businesses to participate in the economic be fair. Participants emphasized the need for local opportunities identified within one or more segments. Indigenous Nations, governments and groups to participate first, and only afterward to look elsewhere. 4. Participants expressed concern about a history of, “last on, Enbridge’s goal is to maximize the Indigenous involvement in first off” related to contracting opportunities, and the decommissioning work at all levels, from employment to emphasized that this should not be the case. business opportunities. 5. Participants expressed concern about a disconnect Enbridge recognizes the need to make a distinction between between mainline contracting; maintenance contracting; the different types of economic activities Enbridge performs remediation contracting; and contracts and contracting across the enterprise. As a result, Enbridge communicates opportunities going to Indigenous Nations, governments with Indigenous Nations, governments and groups, and their and groups. businesses, about the economic opportunities for Indigenous business engagement through four distinct categories of activity: 1. Major Projects (e.g. L3R); 2. Core Projects (e.g. smaller projects with shorter time duration); 3. Operations (e.g. day to day activities which are very modest in comparison to project work); and, 4. Programs (e.g. maintenance such as Integrity Digs). Enbridge has made it a regular practice to communicate and provide information about contracting opportunities across the enterprise. Enbridge has been adapting its SERC to other areas of Enbridge’s business outside of the L3R. Not all areas of the business have adapted yet, but Enbridge anticipates more opportunities in these areas will be coming as Enbridge fully adopts the SERC process across the enterprise. 6. Participants raised concerns about pitting Indigenous Enbridge wants to assist in helping to build business capacity Nations, governments and groups against each other to and part of the process is developing the ability to compete for secure contracts and suggested that a better solution is work which is a standard requirement for a successful and needed. sustainable business. Enbridge has set aside as much work as possible for only Indigenous businesses to compete for, not to pit the Indigenous Nations, governments and groups against

each other, but to ensure that the work goes to an Indigenous business rather than a non-Indigenous business. 7. Participants expressed concern about Enbridge not Enbridge will not be using the Working Warrior program for the listening with regard to the Working Warrior program, and L3D Project decommissioning work and will be working with the that the program was terrible for local Indigenous people Indigenous Nations, governments and groups directly to as local Indigenous Nations, governments and groups provide opportunities for their businesses. The SERC will be a backed away from opportunities. Participants stressed that requirement of the general contractors and they will be Enbridge needs to work directly with local Indigenous responsible for securing and maintaining a percentage of Nations, governments and groups and ensure that local Indigenous labour. people get the jobs. 8. Participants suggested that one solution to increase Enbridge, generally speaking, does not encourage Indigenous economic opportunities for Indigenous Nations, Nations, governments and groups to formulate partnerships governments and groups may be providing contracts to solely to pursue one-off (e.g. infrequent) contracting local Indigenous Nations, governments and groups, and to opportunities with Enbridge – as this often does not provide a allow them to form partnerships as needed to do the work, sustainable way to build and maintain business capacity at the and only if they are not able to fill the contract to look local level. In the case of seeking prospective General elsewhere for bids. Contractors for the L3D Project and increasing Indigenous business engagement, Enbridge has requested Indigenous Nations and groups update and provide their BIS and identify a business that could be considered for the RFI process which will help determine an Indigenous Nation, government or group’s capacity and interest in participating in the RFP process for decommissioning. Enbridge intends to use this process to bring forward one or more General Contractors that are Indigenous. 10. Participants discussed who is considered ‘local’ and Enbridge has geo-mapped Indigenous Nations, governments participants commented that Enbridge should be having and groups proximate to their infrastructure and is using this these discussions. approach to define ‘local’ for the purposes of economic opportunities extended to Indigenous businesses affiliated with those Indigenous Nations, governments and groups. This provides a fair and transparent approach for allocating economic opportunities. 11. Participants commented that Enbridge needs to create Enbridge is not assisting with arranging or recommending opportunities for Indigenous Nations, governments and partnerships for the decommissioning activities as it did for the groups to work together, especially for those with limited L3R construction work, since this may raise expectations. In capacity to partner with groups that have more capacity. the case of the L3D Project, the amount of available work is

limited. Enbridge is open to offering potential opportunities to partnerships that exist or are created for the decommissioning work and has involved these partnerships in the RFI process as a general contractor for the decommissioning work. 12. Participants indicated that previously it had been difficult to An outcome of Enbridge’s past efforts to work with Indigenous communicate with Enbridge about opportunities. Nation, government and group businesses is the development Participants hope the process has improved and that of BIS. Only the businesses listed in the BIS provided by the Indigenous businesses are taken seriously. Nation or group will be considered for opportunities. Since March 2020, Enbridge has been working directly with the Indigenous Nations, governments and groups to have the BIS updated and incorporated into the Indigenous economic engagement strategy. 13. Participants asked how many pre-qualified Indigenous Enbridge continues to prequalify Indigenous businesses on a businesses Enbridge has and indicated that hiring regular basis but is focused on ensuring that if a business is Indigenous businesses is the next step and that being prequalified that there is a reasonable chance for that Indigenous Nations, governments and groups are unhappy business to participate in economic opportunities. Enbridge with the progress. does not require an Indigenous business to be prequalified in order to participate in economic opportunities for subcontracting but will engage and prequalify them in advance of a direct contract being awarded to them. Enbridge currently has about 114 Indigenous businesses prequalified in their system.

14. Participants indicated that “boots on the ground” never Indigenous business that are identified through the BIS are came through previously and that there are many considered for opportunities which can include work as the individual workers that are not in the position to be Prime; general contractor or as a subcontractor to a general contractor but could be working on the project (truck drivers and as identified in the SERC. welders as an example) and that these people need to be hired. Participants asked how small operators and small businesses get hired on these projects. 15. Participants noted that there will not be economic Through our ongoing engagement as identified in Conditions opportunities for all 134 Indigenous groups and 21/29, Enbridge would be happy to provide general information recommended that Enbridge provide and report on other on the other opportunities, such as community investment, opportunities provided to communities such as community employment training and cultural awareness activities and investment, scholarships, student positions, employment support. Much of this is already available in Enbridge’s annual training and cultural awareness activities and support. Corporate Social Responsibility reports.

16. Participants indicated that there must be contract Enbridge understands the importance of maximizing opportunities, employment opportunities and further opportunities for Indigenous Peoples and is taking this into involvement by Indigenous Nations, governments and account in relation to the L3D Project. groups. 17. Participants asked about opportunities associated with Enbridge informed the participants that the warranty work warranty work and post-construction monitoring. would be completed by the contractor responsible for the construction. Enbridge informed them that a post-construction environmental monitoring RFI would be going out to Indigenous businesses in the near future. Those Indigenous businesses which are able to demonstrate they have the capacity and interest to do the work would be given a chance to compete in the RFP for decommissioning as prospective general contractors. 18. Participants asked about how procurement opportunities Enbridge communicated that the decommissioning work would will be divided, shared, and balanced between Indigenous be split into four segments. Several categories of identified Nations, governments and groups for prime contracts and work in each segment, where reasonable to do so, would be subcontracts including security and monitoring. presented as a competitive set-aside for Indigenous Nation-, government- and group-owned businesses proximate to the segment. 19. Participants asked about the contracting value of Enbridge informed that roughly $30 million was the value of the Indigenous set asides. work for Decommissioning Activities across all four segments from Hardisty, Alberta to Gretna, Manitoba. 20. Participants asked about the contracting total within The anticipated value of the Segment 4 work is roughly Manitoba. between $6 and $9 million. 21. Participants asked about using Indigenous businesses that Enbridge is focused on local Indigenous content and strive to are based outside the segment, if there are no other include local businesses first. There are Indigenous Nations, Indigenous businesses available and discussed the governments and groups, mainly in the two Saskatchewan importance of benefits for local Indigenous Nations, segments, which overlap heavily allowing many of their governments and groups. businesses to be in more than one segment.

22. Participants asked about the pre-qualification process and Enbridge is not required to engage businesses under existing master service agreements (“MSAs”). MSAs for decommissioning work as it is a separate and distinct project. Also, Enbridge has informed Indigenous Nations, governments and groups that a business doesn’t need to be immediately pre-qualified to put their business forward, but will need to be prequalified at the stage just prior to being awarded

a direct contract by Enbridge (e.g. for those businesses which are competing as prospective general contractors). For all other subcontracting services, Indigenous businesses will need to comply with the general contractor requirements in order to be eligible for engagement and for performing their services. 23. Participants asked about how work is contracted out Enbridge issues a SERC document, which requires contractors through prime contractors, and how best to get in front of to seek pricing from Indigenous businesses for services the prime contractors. contractor does not self-perform. The SERC requires the contractor to develop a Socio-Economic Plan (“SEP”), which, if the contractor is awarded the work, forms part of their contract with Enbridge. The best way to get in front of contractors is to ensure that the Indigenous business is listed on an Indigenous community’s BIS. The BIS is provided to contractors when, under the SERC, they must seek pricing for the listed Indigenous businesses for services that are not self-performed. In the case of “set-asides”, general contractors are required to select an Indigenous business from those listed for a particular set-aside. 24. Participants asked about the timing of the RFP, the timeline The RFP is tentatively set to be issued on September 10th, to bid and the services involved in the contracts. 2020 and responses are tentatively set to be received by October 8th, 2020. The primary services identified may include, among other potential service opportunities: aggregate supply; bio-security; concrete supply; electrical; equipment rentals; excavation/earthworks; hydrovac; line locating; mats; painting & coating; portable facilities; survey; waste management; water trucks; welding; and vacuum trucks.

25. Participants suggested the condition reporting also include While reporting to the CER is not anticipated to include a listing the economic and procurement opportunities for of economic and procurement opportunities for Indigenous Indigenous Nations, governments and groups. Nations, governments and groups, Enbridge will continue to engage with Indigenous Nations, governments, groups and businesses on these opportunities through direct engagement activities and ongoing dialogue through the L3D Project.

Appendix O – List of Other Potentially Affected Stakeholders Invited to Engage

MUNICIPALITIES & COUNTIES: 1 Camrose County 27 RM of Huron 53 RM of Thompson 2 City of Morden 28 RM of Kingsley 54 RM of Wallace-Woodworth 3 County of Forty Mile 29 RM of Lajord 55 RM of Walpole 4 County of Paintearth 30 RM of Loreburn 56 RM of Wawken 5 Cypress County 31 RM of Lorne 57 RM of Willner 6 Flagstaff County 32 RM of Mariposa 58 RM of Winslow 7 Leduc County Municipal Authority 33 RM of Marriott 59 Special Areas Board 8 Maskwacis Ambulance Authority 34 RM of Maryfield Strathcona County (Prairie 9 MD of Provost 35 RM of Milden 60 Region) 10 R.M. of Antler 36 RM of Montmartre 61 Town of Craik 11 R.M. of Browning 37 RM of Mountain View 62 Town of Emerson 12 R.M. of Coalfields 38 RM of Oakdale 63 Town of Grand Coulee 13 R.M. of Enniskillen 39 RM of Oakland-Wawanesa - PAP 64 Town of Hardisty 14 R.M. of Moose Creek 40 RM of Pembina 65 Town of Kerrobert 15 R.M. of Reciprocity 41 RM of Pense 66 Town of Killam 16 R.M. of Storthoaks 42 RM of Pipestone 67 Town of Kipling 17 Resort Village of Coteau Beach 43 RM of Progress 68 Town of Luseland 18 RM of Argyle 44 RM of Rhineland 69 Town of Macklin 19 RM of Chester 45 RM of Rudy 70 Town of Outlook 20 RM of Craik 46 RM of Sherwood 71 Town of Provost 21 RM of Dufferin 47 RM of Sifton 72 Town of Rosetown 22 RM of Eye Hill 48 RM of Silverwood 73 Town of Sedgewick 23 RM of Fertile Valley 49 RM of Souris-Glenwood 74 Town of White City 24 RM of Francis 50 RM of South Qu'Appelle 75 Town Of Zealandia 25 RM of Glenboro-South Cypress 51 RM of St. Andrews 76 Village of Amisk 26 RM of Heart's Hill 52 RM of Stanley 77 Village of Bethune

78 Village of Broderick 87 Village of Fairlight 96 Village of Milden 79 Village of Chamberlain 88 Village of Findlater 97 Village of Montmartre 80 Village of Coleville 89 Village of Glenside 98 Village of Pense 81 Village of Conquest 90 Village of Hawarden 99 Village of Plenty 82 Village of Czar 91 Village of Hay Lakes 100 Village of Strongfield 83 Village of Denzil 92 Village of Hughenden 101 Village of Veteran 84 Village of Dinsmore 93 Village of Loreburn 102 Village of Vibank 85 VILLAGE OF DODSLAND 94 Village of Macrorie 103 Village of Youngstown 86 Village of Elbow 95 Village of Maryfield 104 Village Resort of Mistusinne

PROVINCIAL MINISTRIES / DEPARTMENTS ALBERTA MLAs Name Role Camrose Jackie Lovely Maskwacis-Wetaskiwin Hon. Rick Wilson Minister of Indigenous Relations Sherwood Park Jordan Walker Strathcona-Sherwood Park Minister Nate Glubish Minister of Service Alberta MPs Sherwood Park-Fort Saskatchewan Garnett Genuis Battle River-Crowfoot Damien Kurek Ministries Office of the Minister of Energy Minister Sonya Savage Minister of Energy Office of the Minister of Indigenous Relations Minister Rick Wilson Minister of Indigenous Relations Office of the Minister of Transportation Minister Rick McIver Minister of Transportation Office of the Minister of Environment and Parks Minister Jason Nixon Minister of Environment & Parks Departments

Office of the Deputy Minister of Energy Grant Sprague Deputy Minister

Office of the Deputy Minister of Indigenous Relations Donavon Young Deputy Minister Office of the Deputy Minister of Infrastructure Shannon Flint Deputy Minister Office of the Deputy Minister of Environment Bev Yee Deputy Minister SASKATCHEWAN MLAs

Arm River Greg Brkich Kindersley Ken Francis Lumsden-Morse Lyle Stewart Rosetown-Elrose Minister Jim Reiter Minister of Health MPs Battlefords-Lloydminster Rosemarie Falk Saskatoon West Brad Redekopp Moose Jaw-Lake Centre-Lanigan Tom Lukiwski Regina-Qu'Appelle Hon. Andrew Scheer Leader of the CPC Souris-Moose Mountain Robert Kitchen Ministries Office of the Minister of Energy and Resources Minister Bronwyn Eyre Minister of Energy and Resources Office of the Minister of Government Relations Minister Lori Carr Minister of Government Relations Minister Gregg Office of the Minister of Highways and Infrastructure Ottenbreit Minister of Highways and Infrastructure Office of the Minister Environment Minister Dustin Duncan Minister of the Environment Departments Office of the Deputy Minister of Energy and Resources Laurie Pushor Deputy Minister Office of the Assistant Deputy Minister of Government Relations Greg Miller Deputy Minister

Office of the Deputy Minister of Highways and Infrastructure Fred Antunes Deputy Minister Office of the Deputy Minister of Environment Kevin Murphy Acting Deputy Minister MANITOBA MLAs Borderland Josh Guenter Minister Blaine Minister of Agriculture and Resource Midland Pedersen Development Riding Mountain Greg Nesbitt Spruce Woods Minister Cliff Cullen Minister of Justice and Attorney General Turtle Mountain Doyle Piwniuk MPs Brandon-Souris Larry Maguire Portage-Lisgar Hon. Candice Bergen Ministries Office of the Minister of Agriculture and Resource Minister Blaine Minister of Agriculture and Resource Development Pedersen Development Office of the Minister of Infrastructure Minister Ron Schuler Minister of Infrastructure Office of the Minister of Indigenous and Northern Relations Minister Eileen Clarke Minister of Indigenous and Northern Affairs Minister Sarah Office of the Minister of Conservation and Climate Guillemard Minister of Conservation and Climate Departments Office of the Deputy Minister of Agriculture and Dori Gingera- Resource Development Beauchemin Deputy Minister Office of the Deputy Minister of Infrastructure Tareq Al-Zabet Deputy Minister Office of the Deputy Minister of Indigenous and Northern Relations Michelle Dubik Deputy Minister

Office of the Deputy Minister of Conservation and Climate Sarah Harrison Deputy Minister

FEDERAL MINISTRIES / DEPARTMENTS Ministries Minister Seamus Office of the Minister of Natural Resources Canada O'Regan Minister of Natural Resources Canada Office of the Minister of Natural Resources Canada Matt Whittington Senior Policy Advisor Director of Indigenous Relations and Office of the Minister of Natural Resources Canada Cheryl Cardinal Reconciliation Minister Carolyn Office of the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations Bennett Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations Office of the Minister of Transportation Minister Marc Garneau Minister of Transportation Office of the Minister of Environment and Climate Minister Jonathan Minister of Environment and Climate Change Change Canada Wilkinson Canada Departments Deputy Minister of Natural Resources Office of the Deputy Minister of Natural Resources Christyne Tremblay Canada Office of the Deputy Minister of Natural Resources Chris Evans Senior Director, Pipelines, Gas and LNG Office of the Deputy Minister of Indigenous and Deputy Minister of Indigenous and Northern

Northern Affairs Canada Daniel Watson Affairs Canada Office of the Deputy Minister of Transportation Michael Keenan Deputy Minister of Transportation Canada Office of the Deputy Minister of Environment and Deputy Minister of Environment and Climate Climate Change Canada Christine Hogan Change Canada

Appendix P - Summary of Feedback - Potentially Affected Stakeholders - No feedback or concerns have been raised by other potentially affected stakeholders to date. This appendix is being maintained as a placeholder and will be included in the final filed Plan to list should Enbridge receive any feedback or concerns during further engagement on the draft Plan.