450 – 1 Street SW Calgary, T2P 5H1

Tel: (403) 920-2171 Fax: (403) 920-2347 Email: [email protected] September 5, 2019 Filed Electronically Canada Energy Regulator Suite 210, 517 Tenth Avenue SW Calgary, AB T2R 0A8

Attention: Ms. L. George, Secretary of the Commission

Dear Ms. George:

Re: NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL) North Corridor Expansion Project (Project) Hearing Order GH-002-2019 Additional Written Evidence File No.: OF-Fac-Gas-N081-2019-02 02

Pursuant to Paragraph 3.3 of the National Energy Board’s (NEB) Hearing Order,1 please find enclosed NGTL’s Additional Written Evidence that NGTL identified in the Application.

If the CER requires additional information with respect to this filing, please contact Nicole Prince by phone at (403) 920-2940 or by email at [email protected]

Yours truly, NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd.

Original signed by

Brock Gent Legal Counsel Canadian Law, Natural Gas Pipelines

Enclosure

cc: GH-002-2019 List of Parties

1 As indicated in Hearing Order GH-002-2019 and Completeness Determination issued on August 26, 2019, for the Project, on August 28, 2019, the NEB will transition to the Canada Energy Regulator (CER), who will continue to consider this Application pursuant to the NEB Act (NEB Filing ID: C01209).

CANADA ENERGY REGULATOR

IN THE MATTER OF the National Energy Board Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. N-7, as amended, and the regulations made thereunder;

IN THE MATTER OF the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012, S.C. 2012, c. 37, as amended, and the regulations made thereunder;

AND IN THE MATTER OF an application by NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity and other related approvals pursuant to Part III and Part IV of the National Energy Board Act.

NOVA GAS TRANSMISSION LTD.

NORTH CORRIDOR EXPANSION PROJECT

ADDITIONAL WRITTEN EVIDENCE

September 2019

To: Secretary of the Commission Canada Energy Regulator Suite 210, 517 Tenth Avenue SW Calgary, AB T2R 0A8

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Contents Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1-1

1.1 Additional Written Evidence Structure ...... 1-1

2.0 TOLLS AND FINANCING ...... 2-1

2.1 Financing Capacity ...... 2-1 2.2 Financial Resources Plan ...... 2-1

3.0 PIPELINE ROUTING AND CONSTRUCTION ...... 3-1

3.1 Pipeline Routing...... 3-1 3.1.1 Northwest Mainline Area ...... 3-1 3.2 Engineering Design Standards ...... 3-1 3.2.1 Industry Standards ...... 3-2 3.3 Pipeline Section Components ...... 3-2 3.3.1 Launcher and Receiver Facilities ...... 3-2 3.4 Terrain, Geotechnical and Hydrotechnical Assessments ...... 3-3 3.5 Pipeline Watercourse Crossings ...... 3-3 3.6 Leave to Open (LTO) Exemption Request ...... 3-3 3.6.1 NCC Loop – Red Earth Section 3 ...... 3-3 3.6.2 NWML Loop No. 2 – Bear Canyon North Extension ...... 3-3

4.0 COMPRESSION ...... 4-1

5.0 LAND MATTERS ...... 5-1

5.1 Identification of Land Users ...... 5-1 5.2 Right-of-way Requirements ...... 5-1 5.3 Landowner Consultation Activities ...... 5-2

6.0 STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT ...... 6-1

6.1 Stakeholder Consultation Activities ...... 6-1

7.0 ABORIGINAL ENGAGEMENT ...... 7-1

7.1 Sharing of Traditional Knowledge...... 7-3 7.2 Summary of Engagement Activities ...... 7-5 7.2.1 (BFN) ...... 7-6 7.2.2 Bigstone Nation (BCN)...... 7-7 7.2.3 Métis Local 1994 (CLML1994) ...... 7-8 7.2.4 Tha’ First Nation (DTFN) ...... 7-9 7.2.5 Doig River First Nation (DRFN) ...... 7-10

September 2019 Page i

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Contents North Corridor Expansion Project GH-002-2019 Additional Written Evidence

7.2.6 Duncan’s First Nation (DFN) ...... 7-12 7.2.7 East Prairie Métis Settlement (EPMS) ...... 7-13 7.2.8 Gift Lake Métis Settlement (GLMS) ...... 7-15 7.2.9 (HLFN) ...... 7-15 7.2.10 Kapawe'no First Nation (KFN) ...... 7-16 7.2.11 (LRFN) ...... 7-17 7.2.12 Métis Nation of Alberta (MNA) ...... 7-18 7.2.13 Nose Creek Community (NCC) ...... 7-20 7.2.14 Paddle Prairie Métis Settlement (PPMS) ...... 7-20 7.2.15 First Nation (PAFN) ...... 7-22 7.2.16 Peavine Métis Settlement (PMS)...... 7-23 7.2.17 Peerless Trout First Nation (PTFN) ...... 7-24 7.2.18 Sawridge First Nation (SWFN) ...... 7-25 7.2.19 (SRFN) ...... 7-26 7.2.20 Tallcree First Nation (TFN)...... 7-27 7.2.21 Whitefish Lake (Atikameg) First Nation #459 (WLFN459) ...... 7-28 7.3 Plans for Ongoing Engagement ...... 7-28

8.0 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC MATTERS ...... 8-1

8.1 Environmental Regulatory Engagement ...... 8-1 8.2 Additional Environmental Studies ...... 8-1 8.2.1 Wetland...... 8-1 8.2.2 Wildlife ...... 8-2 8.2.3 Vegetation...... 8-7 8.3 Heritage Resources ...... 8-10 8.4 Traditional Land and Resource Use ...... 8-11 8.5 Conclusion ...... 8-12 8.6 Literature Cited ...... 8-12

Page ii September 2019

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Contents Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3-1 Preliminary Mainline Block and Crossover Valve Locations ...... 3-2 Table 3-2 Red Earth Section 3 LTO Exemption Request Facilities ...... 3-3 Table 3-3 Bear Canyon North Extension LTO Exemption Request Facilities ...... 3-4 Table 4-1 Updated Valve Identification Tags ...... 4-1 Table 5-1 Updated Approximate Land Required for Permanent Lands and TWS ...... 5-1 Table 5-2 Landowner Notification Update ...... 5-2 Table 6-1 Stakeholder Notifications...... 6-1 Table 7-1 Aboriginal Groups Currently Engaged on the Project ...... 7-1 Table 7-2 Status of the Traditional Knowledge Studies Being Completed by Each Participating Aboriginal Group...... 7-3 Table 8-1 Summary of 2019 Wetland Survey Results ...... 8-2 Table 8-2 Summary of Wildlife Surveys Completed in 2019 Since Application Filing ...... 8-2 Table 8-3 Summary of 2019 Wildlife Survey Results ...... 8-3 Table 8-4 Summary of 2019 Vegetation Survey Results ...... 8-7

LIST OF APPENDICES

Section 2 – Tolls and Financing

Appendix 2-1 Moody’s Investors Service Credit Opinion Report Appendix 2-2 Fitch Ratings Report Appendix 2-3 DBRS Report

Section 3 – Pipeline

Appendix 3-1 Updated Process Flow Diagram

Section 4 – Compression

Appendix 4-1 Updated Hidden Lake North Compressor Station Unit Addition Preliminary Process Flow Diagram

Section 8 – Environment and Socio-Economic Matters

Appendix 8-1 Beaver First Nation Mitigation Table Appendix 8-2 Cadotte Lake Métis Local 1994 Mitigation Table

September 2019 Page iii NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Contents North Corridor Expansion Project GH-002-2019 Additional Written Evidence

Appendix 8-3 Doig River First Nation Mitigation Table Appendix 8-4 Horse Lake First Nation Mitigation Table Appendix 8-5 Métis Nation of Alberta Region 6 Mitigation Table Appendix 8-6 Peerless Trout First Nation Mitigation Table Appendix 8-7 Sawridge First Nation Mitigation Table Appendix 8-8 Tallcree First Nation Mitigation Table Appendix 8-9 HRA Approvals

Page iv September 2019 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Section 1 North Corridor Expansion Project Introduction Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

1.0 INTRODUCTION

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL), a wholly owned subsidiary of TransCanada PipeLines Limited (TCPL), an affiliate of TC Energy Corporation, provides this Additional Written Evidence (AWE) which reflects developments associated with the North Corridor Expansion Project (Project) since the April 4, 2019, filing of its Application pursuant to sections 52 and 58 of Part III and Part IV of the National Energy Board Act (NEB Act).1

1.1 ADDITIONAL WRITTEN EVIDENCE STRUCTURE

NGTL’s AWE is organized by subject matter, as follows: · Tolls and Financing · Pipeline Routing and Construction · Compression · Land Matters · Stakeholder Engagement · Aboriginal Engagement · Environmental and Socio-Economic Matters

1 NEB Filing ID: A98641.

September 2019 Page 1-1

Section 1 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Introduction North Corridor Expansion Project GH-002-2019 Additional Written Evidence

Page 1-2 September 2019 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Section 2 North Corridor Expansion Project Tolls and Financing Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

2.0 TOLLS AND FINANCING

This section addresses any changes to tolling and financial matters associated with the Project, since the filing of the Application.1

2.1 FINANCING CAPACITY

As indicated in its Application, TCPL will fund Project construction through a combination of predictable cash flows generated from operations, senior debt, as well as subordinated capital in the form of additional preferred shares and hybrid securities, the issuance of common shares and portfolio management.2

Since filing the Application, three rating agencies have issued updated reports or press releases for NGTL’s parents. Fitch Ratings and DBRS have both reaffirmed their “A-” ratings with stable outlooks for TCPL. On April 5, 2019 Moody’s Investor Services, Inc. (Moody’s) downgraded TCPL’s Long Term Rating to Baa1 with a Stable outlook. The downgrade by Moody’s has not had a material impact on TCPL’s cost of debt or access to capital markets. Refer to the following appendices for copies of the recent rating agency reports and publications issued by the three credit rating agencies: • Appendix 2-1 – Moody’s Investor Service Credit Opinion report on TransCanada PipeLines Limited dated April 5, 2019 • Appendix 2-2 – Fitch Ratings press release on TCPL and TC Energy dated June 26, 2019 • Appendix 2-3 – DBRS Rating Report on TC Energy Corporation and TransCanada PipeLines Limited dated June 14, 2019

2.2 FINANCIAL RESOURCES PLAN

NGTL will have the financial resources to ensure that it can financially sustain management of all potential risks including those liabilities that may arise from an accident or malfunction during the construction or operation of the Project.

The Pipeline Financial Requirements Regulations of the NEB Act specifies that federally regulated companies that operate natural gas pipelines of certain sizes and maximum operating pressures are subject to certain levels of absolute financial liability and must demonstrate that they have sufficient financial resources to meet these requirements. NGTL falls within the definition of a Gas Class 1 Absolute Liability Class under these regulations. NGTL was therefore required to maintain

1 NEB Filing ID: A98641. 2 NEB Filing ID: A98641, PDF page 80 of 204.

September 2019 Page 2-1

Section 2 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Tolls and Financing North Corridor Expansion Project GH-002-2019 Additional Written Evidence

access to at least $200 million in financial resources effective July 11, 2019.3 NGTL Financial Resources Plan was approved by the National Energy Board (NEB) on August 26, 2019.4 The Financial Resources Plan applies to the NGTL System as a whole, including the Project.

3 National Energy Board Draft Pipeline Financial Requirements Guidelines (http://www.neb- one.gc.ca/bts/ctrg/gnnb/pplnfnnclrqrmnts/drftpplnfnnclrqrmntgdln-eng.pdf). 4 Ibid.

Page 2-2 September 2019

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Section 3 North Corridor Expansion Project Pipeline Routing and Construction Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

3.0 PIPELINE ROUTING AND CONSTRUCTION

3.1 PIPELINE ROUTING

Since filing the Application,1 Project engineering and construction planning have progressed, resulting in minor refinements of the Project’s proposed pipeline components.

3.1.1 Northwest Mainline Area

NGTL clarifies the names of existing lines the Northwest Mainline (NWML) Loop No. 2 (Bear Canyon North Extension) component of the Project will be tying-in to: • the existing NWML (Bear Canyon Section) through a crossover in SE 10-083-12 W6M • an existing valve site with the NWML Loop No. 2 (Boundary Lake Section) at NE 14-085-13 W6M In addition, NGTL notes the approximate length of non-parallel right-of-way (ROW) for the NWML Loop No. 2 (Bear Canyon North Extension) has been reduced by one kilometre (km), from three km to two km, as a result of crossing from one side of the existing corridor to the other and back again.

3.2 ENGINEERING DESIGN STANDARDS

The Project Application was filed on April 4, 2019, at which time Canadian Standards Association: Oil and Gas Pipeline Systems (CSA Z662)-15 was in force and the effective date of its replacement was unknown. CSA Z662-19 came into force on June 19, 2019.

NGTL confirms that the Project in its entirety will be designed, constructed and operated to comply with CSA Z662-19. NGTL continues to assess the design of all Project components and will update the CER if it becomes aware of any changes required. Subject to any updates that NGTL provides, NGTL confirms that for purposes of further assessment and public hearing, all references made by NGTL to CSA Z662-15 either in the Project’s Application or other Project-related documentation filed or distributed prior to this update, should be interpreted as referring to CSA Z662-19. Consistent with the Project Application, if there are any inconsistencies between the National Energy Board Onshore Pipeline Regulations (OPR) and CSA Z662-19, the OPR will govern.

1 NEB Filing ID: A98641.

September 2019 Page 3-1

Section 3 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Pipeline Routing and Construction North Corridor Expansion Project GH-002-2019 Additional Written Evidence

3.2.1 Industry Standards

NGTL notes that the following Industry Standards have been revised: • CSA A23.1-14 (Concrete materials and methods of concrete construction) was revised to CSA A23.1-19 (June 28, 2019) • CSA A23.2-14 (Test methods and standard practices for concrete) was revised to CSA A23.2-19 (June 28, 2019)

NGTL confirms it will comply with the new edition for Concrete Materials and Methods of Concrete Construction, and Test Methods and Standard Practice for

Concrete.

3.3 PIPELINE SECTION COMPONENTS

NGTL notes the following changes in valve identification tags, as provided in Table 3-1 and Appendix 3-1.

Table 3-1: Preliminary Mainline Block and Crossover Valve Locations *

Preliminary Preliminary Valve Type Northing Easting UTM LSD Red Earth Section 3 NPS 48 Launcher Isolation Valve Assembly 6311454 607901 11N 06-33-091-08 W5M (NCCA40-1-ST) Bear Canyon North Extension Two NPS 36 crossovers to existing NPS 36 6229613 326274 11N 08-10-083-12 W6M NWML (NW35-2-X0, NW35-0-D2) One NPS 36 Station Isolation Valve 6251215 319164 11N 09-14-85-13 W6M Assembly to existing Alces River Compressor Station (NW50-2-CSD-ALR) Note *: All locations are preliminary and will be confirmed during detailed design.

3.3.1 Launcher and Receiver Facilities

As noted in the Application, NGTL indicated the pig trap location for the receiver located within the Hidden Lake Compressor Station, would been installed as part of the Northwest Mainline Loop (Boundary Lake North Section).2 NGTL confirms this pig trap has now been installed.

2 NEB Filing ID: A98641, Table 7-8, PDF page 97 of 204.

Page 3-2 September 2019

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Section 3 North Corridor Expansion Project Pipeline Routing and Construction Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

3.4 TERRAIN, GEOTECHNICAL AND HYDROTECHNICAL ASSESSMENTS

In Section 7.6 – Table 7-9 of the Application,3 NGTL indicated on a preliminary basis, that geotechnical investigation would take place Q2/Q3 2019. Having reassessed its timelines for required permitting, the timing of geotechnical investigations is now planned for Q3/Q4 2019.

Hydrotechnical studies are currently being conducted to identify and delineate areas with stability concerns and are anticipated to be completed in Q1 2020.

Results of the terrain, geotechnical and hydrotechnical studies and details of any appropriate preliminary mitigation measures will be provided to the CER in Q1 2020.

3.5 PIPELINE WATERCOURSE CROSSINGS

NGTL is continuing to advance the watercourse crossings for all pipeline components as identified in the Application. No changes in watercourse crossing methods have been proposed to date. Detailed engineering and design is progressing.

3.6 LEAVE TO OPEN (LTO) EXEMPTION REQUEST

3.6.1 NCC Loop – Red Earth Section 3

NGTL wishes to clarify and update the LTO exemption request, as provided in Table 3-2.

Table 3-2: Red Earth Section 3 LTO Exemption Request Facilities

Name Facilities Description NCCA-40-1-CSS-GFSH (valve NPS 42 W x F valve Tie-in to NPS 42 Goodfish CS assembly) Approximately 60 m of NPS 42 pipe Suction NCCA-40-1-CSD-GFSH (valve NPS 42 W x F valve Tie-in to NPS 42 Goodfish CS assembly) Approximately 60 m of NPS 42 pipe Discharge

3.6.2 NWML Loop No. 2 – Bear Canyon North Extension

NGTL wishes to clarify and update the LTO exemption request, as provided in Table 3-3.

3 NEB Filing ID: A98641, PDF page 100 of 204.

September 2019 Page 3-3

Section 3 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Pipeline Routing and Construction North Corridor Expansion Project GH-002-2019 Additional Written Evidence

Table 3-3: Bear Canyon North Extension LTO Exemption Request Facilities

Name Facilities Description NW35-0-D2 (hot tap) NPS 36 x 36 split-tee Crossover to NPS 36 NWML Bear NPS 36 F x F valve Canyon Section NPS 1 ½ Power Gas Riser Assembly NW50-2-CSD-ALR (tie- NPS 42 flange fitting Tie-in to NPS 42 Alces River CS in assembly) NPS 36 flange fitting Suction NPS 42 x 36 tee fitting NPS 36 weld by flange (W x F) valve assembly NPS 42 welded cap Approximately 15 m of NPS 42 pipe Approximately 5 m of NPS 36 pipe

Page 3-4 September 2019

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Section 4 North Corridor Expansion Project Compression Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

4.0 COMPRESSION

NGTL continues to advance detailed design, as such, NGTL has identified the following refinements to the Hidden Lake North Compressor Station Unit Addition component of the Project: · yard piping size change to NPS 42 from NPS 48 · updated valve identification tags, as provided in Table 4-1

Table 4-1: Updated Valve Identification Tags

Valve ID Valve Type NW89-1-X1 Crossover Valve NW89-1-ST Launcher Isolation Valve NW92-1-2SS-HNN Unit Suction Valve NW92-1-RT Receiver Isolation Valve TAGH32-1-1SV2-NW Side Valve

Appendix 4-1 provides an updated Process Flow Diagram which reflects these changes.

September 2019 Page 4-1

Section 4 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Compression North Corridor Expansion Project GH-002-2019 Additional Written Evidence

Page 4-2 September 2019

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Section 5 North Corridor Expansion Project Land Matters Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

5.0 LAND MATTERS

This section provides an update on land matters associated with the Project, since the filing of the Application.1

5.1 IDENTIFICATION OF LAND USERS

As outlined in Table 11-1 of the Application, approximately 40% of all parcels traversed by the pipeline components are private (freehold) land and approximately 60% are provincial Crown land.2

NGTL has identified one less registered Trapping Area and one additional guide/outfitter for the Project by reviewing the Alberta Professional Outfitters Society list that is updated annually.

5.2 RIGHT-OF-WAY REQUIREMENTS

As outlined in Table 11-2 of the Application, approximately 77 km (95%) of the proposed pipeline route parallels existing NGTL ROW or other existing linear disturbances.3

An estimated 182 ha of new permanent ROW will be required for the pipeline components. An estimated 63 ha of temporary workspace (TWS) will be required for the construction of the pipeline components. NGTL also intends to use additional permanent ROW and TWS that overlap with existing land rights associated with existing NGTL facilities, where feasible.

For update for a breakdown of the estimated land requirements for the Project is provided in Table 5-1.

Table 5-1: Updated Approximate Land Required for Permanent Lands and TWS

Approximate Area Project Component/Land Type (ha) NCC Loop (North Star Section 2) Permanent ROW 52 TWS 27 Overlap* 22 Total 101

1 NEB Filing ID: A98641. 2 NEB Filing ID: A98641, PDF page 141 of 204. 3 NEB Filing ID: A98641, PDF page 143 of 204.

September 2019 Page 5-1

Section 5 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Land Matters North Corridor Expansion Project GH-002-2019 Additional Written Evidence

Table 5-1: Updated Approximate Land Required for Permanent Lands and TWS (cont’d)

Approximate Area Project Component/Land Type (ha) NCC Loop (Red Earth Section 3) Permanent ROW 59 TWS 10 Overlap* 44 Total 113 NWML Loop No. 2 (Bear Canyon North Extension) Permanent ROW 71 TWS 26 Overlap * 9 Total 105 Note *: Overlap refers to TWS and permanent ROW overlapping existing Land Rights.

5.3 LANDOWNER CONSULTATION ACTIVITIES

In accordance with the Landowner Guiding Principles outlined in Section 10.1.6 of 4 the Application, Table 5-2 provides an update of Project-related engagement with landowners and occupants since filing the Application.

Table 5-2: Landowner Notification Update

Date Communication 04-Apr-2019 72-Hour Filing Notification mailout sent via XpressPost 16-Apr-2019 to 26-Jul-2019 Phone calls for survey notifications (FEED, Veg/Wetland/Wildlife) 05-Jun-2019 Notice of Hearing mailout sent via Registered Mail 13-Jun-2019 Phone calls for Wildlife Camera Installation notification (NS2 only) 24-Jul-2019 to 12-Aug-2019 NGTL Representatives met with Landowners to obtain work permits for geotechnical work. 08-Aug-2019 Phone calls for Hand Auger Program notification 22-Aug-2019 to 26-Aug-2019 Phone calls for Geotechnical Program notification

No additional concerns have been raised since filing the Application. Throughout the regulatory process and construction phase, NGTL will continue to consult with landowners and occupants to identify and address questions and concerns, should they arise.

4 NEB Filing ID: A98641, PDF page 109 of 204.

Page 5-2 September 2019

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Section 6 North Corridor Expansion Project Stakeholder Engagement Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

6.0 STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT

This section provides and update on stakeholder engagement associated with the Project, since the filing of the Application.1

6.1 STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION ACTIVITIES

Table 6-1 provides an update of Project-related engagement to identified stakeholders since filing the Application.

Table 6-1: Stakeholder Notifications

Date Communication 04-Apr-2019 72-Hour Filing Notification mailout sent via XpressPost 16-Apr-2019 to 26-Jul-2019 Phone calls for survey notifications (FEED, Veg/Wetland/Wildlife) 05-Jun-2019 Notice of Hearing mailout sent via Registered Mail and/or email 13-Jun-2019 Phone calls for Wildlife Camera Installation notification (NS2 only) 14-Jun-2019 Email sent to the MD of Opportunity offering to discuss project details 08-Aug-2019 Phone calls for Hand Auger Program notification 22-Aug-2019 to 26 Aug-2019 Phone calls for Geotechnical Program notification

No additional concerns have been raised since filing the Application. Throughout the regulatory process and construction phase, NGTL will continue to consult with stakeholders to identify and address questions or concerns, should they arise.

1 NEB Filing ID: A98641.

September 2019 Page 6-1

Section 6 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Stakeholder Engagement North Corridor Expansion Project GH-002-2019 Additional Written Evidence

Page 6-2 September 2019

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Section 7 North Corridor Expansion Project Aboriginal Engagement Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

7.0 ABORIGINAL ENGAGEMENT

In Section 13 of the Application,1 NGTL provided an overview of engagement activities with Aboriginal groups up to March 1, 2019. The following section provides information on the Aboriginal Engagement Program for the Project for the period of March 2, 2019 to August 8, 2019, including: · implementation of the Aboriginal Engagement Program · outcomes of the Aboriginal Engagement Program from March 2019 to August 8, 2019 · plans for ongoing engagement

The potentially affected Aboriginal groups engaged on the Project components that are within or proximate to their identified traditional territories, regional boundaries and/or areas of interest are provided in Table 7-1.

Papaschase First Nation and are engaged primarily through the regulatory process, which provides sufficient opportunities for them to gain understanding of the Project and communicate possible issues or concerns to NGTL.

Table 7-1: Aboriginal Groups Currently Engaged on the Project

Bear Canyon Hidden Lake North Star Red Earth North North Unit Type Name Section 2 Section 3 Extension Addition Beaver First X X X X Nation

Bigstone Cree X Nation Dene Tha’ First X X X Nation Doig River First X X Nation Driftpile Cree X Nation Duncan’s First X X X Nation Horse Lake X X X X First Nation Kapawe’no X X X X First Nation Loon River X First Nation Louis Bull Tribe X X

1 NEB Filing ID: A92619.

September 2019 Page 7-1

Section 7 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Aboriginal Engagement North Corridor Expansion Project GH-002-2019 Additional Written Evidence

Table 7-1: Aboriginal Groups Currently Engaged on the Project (cont’d)

Bear Canyon Hidden Lake North Star Red Earth North North Unit Type Name Section 2 Section 3 Extension Addition First Nations Papaschase X X (cont’d) First Nation Peerless Trout X First Nation Sawridge First X X X X Nation Sucker Creek X First Nation Swan River X X First Nation Tallcree First X X X Nation Whitefish Lake X X X X (Atikameg) First Nation #459 X X X X First Nation First Nation Nose Creek X Organizations Community Métis Cadotte Lake X X X Settlements, Métis Local Organizations 1994 and Locals Métis Nation of X X X X Alberta Métis Nation of X Alberta Region 5 Métis Nation of X X X Alberta Region 6 Métis X X X Settlement General Council East Prairie X Métis Settlement Gift Lake Métis X X Settlement Paddle Prairie X X X Métis Settlement Peavine Métis X X Settlement

Page 7-2 September 2019 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Section 7 North Corridor Expansion Project Aboriginal Engagement Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

7.1 SHARING OF TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE

The current status of the Traditional Knowledge (TK) program for the Project is detailed in Table 7-2. The results of the TK studies completed since filing the Application have been considered within the context of the Environmental and Socio- Economic Assessment (ESA) for the Project (see Appendix 8-1 to 8-8). NGTL will continue to review and assess additional TK information as it is made available by Aboriginal groups. In addition to its TK program, NGTL will continue to document TK and address related concerns identified by Aboriginal groups during activities associated with the Project’s broader Aboriginal Engagement Program.

Table 7-2: Status of the Traditional Knowledge Studies Being Completed by Each Participating Aboriginal Group

Interest in Aboriginal Group Conducting a Study Method of Study Status of Study Beaver First Nation Yes Independent Final Report received May 22, 2019 for North Star Section 2, Red Earth Section 3, Bear Canyon Extension Section and Hidden Lake North Unit Addition. NGTL reviewed the report and provided a response to Beaver First Nation on July 31, 2019. No N/A Letter of no concern received on November 1, 2018 for Red Earth Section 3. Cadotte Lake Métis Yes Independent Final Report received March 14, Local 1994 2019 for North Star Section 2, Red Earth Section 3 and Hidden Lake North Unit Addition. NGTL reviewed the report and will provide a response to Cadotte Lake Métis Local 1994. Dene Tha’ First Nation Yes Independent Pending agreement with NGTL on appropriate scope and costs. Doig River First Nation Yes Independent Final Report received April 5, 2019 for Bear Canyon North Extension and Hidden Lake North Unit Addition. NGTL reviewed the report and will provide a response to Doig River First Nation. Driftpile Cree Nation Yes Site visit Letter of no concern received January 28, 2019 for Hidden Lake North Unit Addition. Duncan’s First Nation Yes Independent Underway for Bear Canyon North Extension, North Star Section 2 and Hidden Lake North Unit Addition.

September 2019 Page 7-3 Section 7 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Aboriginal Engagement North Corridor Expansion Project GH-002-2019 Additional Written Evidence

Table 7-2: Status of the Traditional Knowledge Studies Being Completed by Each Participating Aboriginal Group (cont’d)

Interest in Aboriginal Group Conducting a Study Method of Study Status of Study East Prairie Métis Yes Independent Underway for Bear Canyon North Settlement Extension. Pending agreement with NGTL on appropriate scope and costs for Red Earth Section 3, North Star Section 2 and Hidden Lake North Unit Addition. Gift Lake Métis Yes Independent Interim Report received on October Settlement 23, 2018 for Red Earth Section 3. Interim Report received on November 9, 2018 for North Star Section 2. Final Report received on December 21, 2018 for North Star Section 2 and Red Earth Section 3. NGTL reviewed the reports and provided a response to Gift Lake Métis Settlement on April 1, 2019. Horse Lake First Nation Yes Independent Final Report received on May 24, 2019 for North Star Section 2, Red Earth Section 3, Bear Canyon North Extension and Hidden Lake North Unit Addition. NGTL reviewed the report and provided a response to Horse Lake First Nation on July 31, 2019. Loon River First Nation Yes Independent Pending confirmation of interest and agreement with NGTL on appropriate scope and costs. Métis Nation of Alberta Yes Independent Final Report received on February Region 5 27, 2019 for Red Earth Section 3. NGTL reviewed the report and provided a response to Métis Nation of Alberta Region 5 on March 29, 2019. Métis Nation of Alberta Yes Independent Final Report received on May 3, Region 6 2019 for North Star Section 2, Bear Canyon North Extension and Hidden Lake North Unit Addition. NGTL reviewed the report and will provide a response to Métis Nation of Alberta Region 6.

Page 7-4 September 2019 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Section 7 North Corridor Expansion Project Aboriginal Engagement Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

Table 7-2: Status of the Traditional Knowledge Studies Being Completed by Each Participating Aboriginal Group (cont’d)

Interest in Aboriginal Group Conducting a Study Method of Study Status of Study Paddle Prairie Métis Yes Independent Site visit results received on Settlement February 12, 2019 for Hidden Lake North Unit Addition. NGTL reviewed the letter and provided a response to Paddle Prairie Métis Settlement on April 15, 2019. Underway for Red Earth Section 3 and North Star Section 2. Peavine Métis Yes Facilitated Final Report received on January Settlement 21, 2019 for North Star Section 2 and Red Earth Section 3. NGTL reviewed the report and provided a response to Peavine Métis Settlement on March 29, 2019. Peerless Trout First Yes Facilitated Final Report received on July 9, Nation 2019 for Red Earth Section 3. NGTL reviewed the report and will provide a response to Peerless Trout First Nation. Sawridge First Nation Yes Independent Site visit results received on July 30, 2019 for Red Earth Section 3. NGTL reviewed the report and will provide a response to Sawridge First Nation. Swan River First Nation Yes Independent Final Report received on February 25, 2019 for Red Earth Section 3 and North Star Section 2. NGTL reviewed the report and provided a response to Swan River First Nation on April 1, 2019. Tallcree First Nation Yes Independent Final Report received on May 16, 2019 for North Star Section 2 and Red Earth Section 3. NGTL reviewed the report and provided a response to Tallcree First Nation on July 31, 2019.

7.2 SUMMARY OF ENGAGEMENT ACTIVITIES

Since filing the Project Application,2 NGTL provided the following Project Updates to all Aboriginal groups identified by NGTL and the NEB:

2 NEB Filing ID: A98641.

September 2019 Page 7-5 Section 7 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Aboriginal Engagement North Corridor Expansion Project GH-002-2019 Additional Written Evidence

· April 5, 2019, NGTL sent an email to potentially affected Aboriginal groups to provide an update for the Project. NGTL stated that in January 2019, NGTL notified that NGTL had filed a Project Description with the NEB. NGTL advised that the Application was filed on April 4, 2019 and provided a link to where the Application may be accessed online in the NEB’s Regulatory Document Index · May 9, 2019, NGTL sent an email to potentially affected Aboriginal groups advising of a change in staff at NGTL and introducing the new engagement lead for the Project · June 5, 2019, NGTL provided to potentially affected Aboriginal groups a Project update and update letter for the Notice of Hearing, Application to Participate (ATP) and Comments on the Process

Between June 26, 2019 and July 5, 2019, the NEB received ATPs from the following Aboriginal groups: · Dene Tha’ First Nation · Papaschase Cree Nation · Cadotte Lake Metis · Gift Lake Metis Settlement · · Driftpile Cree Nation · Bigstone Cree Nation · Whitefish Lake First Nation #459 · Louis Bull Tribe

NGTL continues to provide Project information to potentially affected Aboriginal groups, but during this reporting period, has not received a response from the following groups: · Driftpile Cree Nation · Louis Bull Tribe · Métis Settlements General Council · Sucker Creek First Nation

Where engagement has occurred in addition to the notifications listed above, summaries of these activities with the respective Aboriginal groups are provided below. These summaries also identify any questions and concerns communicated to NGTL, as well as the actions taken by, or planned to be taken by, NGTL to address those questions and concerns.

7.2.1 Beaver First Nation (BFN)

On March 5, 2019, NGTL emailed BFN information regarding engagement capacity funding for the Project.

Page 7-6 September 2019 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Section 7 North Corridor Expansion Project Aboriginal Engagement Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

On March 8, 2019, NGTL emailed BFN to follow-up on NGTL’s January 25, 2019 email in which NGTL provided a community specific literature review document of information compiled from publicly available sources for consideration in the ESA for the Project for BFN’s review and feedback by March 1, 2019. NGTL informed BFN that NGTL did not receive a response from BFN and would be including the information in the ESA for the Project. NGTL noted the literature review is only one of many sources of information which will be considered in the ESA. NGTL confirmed engagement between BFN and NGTL will provide further opportunities to share information about BFNs' TK and land use in the Project area and discuss any potential additional issues, concerns or recommendations that BFN may have about the Project.

On March 13, 2019, NGTL received an email from BFN regarding the engagement capacity funding for the Project.

On April 16, 2019, NGTL and BFN exchanged emails regarding the status of BFN’s TK report. BFN stated that the final TK report would be submitted to NGTL by April 19, 2019.

On April 22, 2019, NGTL received BFN’s final TK report for the Project. On April 23, 2019, NGTL emailed BFN to confirm receipt of the final TK report and stated that NGTL would review the report and provide a response to BFN. NGTL has reviewed the results of BFN’s TK Study completed for the Project in the context of the ESA for consideration and incorporation into Project planning, as appropriate. See Appendix 8-1 for BFN’s concerns and NGTL’s responses and proposed mitigation measures from the Project EPP.

On July 31, 2019, NGTL emailed BFN with NGTL’s responses and proposed mitigation for the Project-specific issues and concerns identified in BFN’s TK report for the Project, with an offer to meet to discuss questions or concerns, if any. To date, NGTL has not received a response from BFN but remains available to discuss questions or concerns should any arise.

7.2.2 Bigstone Cree Nation (BCN)

On March 8, 2019, NGTL emailed BCN to follow-up on NGTL’s January 25, 2019 email in which NGTL provided a community specific literature review document of information compiled from publicly available sources for consideration in the ESA for the Project for BCNs’ review and feedback by March 1, 2019. NGTL informed BCN that NGTL did not receive a response from BCN and would be including the information in the ESA for the Project. NGTL noted the literature review is only one of many sources of information which will be considered in the ESA. NGTL confirmed engagement between BCN and NGTL will provide further opportunities to share information about BCN’s TK and land use in the Project area and discuss any

September 2019 Page 7-7 Section 7 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Aboriginal Engagement North Corridor Expansion Project GH-002-2019 Additional Written Evidence

potential additional issues, concerns or recommendations that BCN may have about the Project.

On May 9, 2019, NGTL received an email from BCN confirming receipt of NGTL’s May 9, 2019, email informing BCN that there was a change in staff at NGTL and introducing the new engagement lead for the Project.

NGTL has not been made aware of any outstanding Project-specific questions or concerns raised during its engagement activities to date with BCN. NGTL will continue to address questions and concerns from BCN through its ongoing engagement efforts should any arise.

7.2.3 Cadotte Lake Métis Local 1994 (CLML1994)

On March 4, 2019, NGTL and CLML1994 exchanged emails regarding the TK study for the Project.

On March 8, 2019, NGTL emailed CLML1994 to follow-up on NGTL’s January 25, 2019 email in which NGTL provided a community specific literature review document of information compiled from publicly available sources for consideration in the ESA for the Project for CLML1994’s review and feedback by March 1, 2019. NGTL informed CLML1994 that NGTL did not receive a response from CLML1994 and would be including the information in the ESA for the Project. NGTL noted the literature review is only one of many sources of information which will be considered in the ESA. NGTL confirmed engagement between CLML1994 and NGTL will provide further opportunities to share information about CLML1994's TK and land use in the Project area and discuss any potential additional issues, concerns or recommendations that CLML1994 may have about the Project.

On March 13, 2019, NGTL and CLML1994 exchanged emails regarding the TK study.

On March 14, 2019, NGTL received CLML1994’s TK Report for the Project.

On June 6, 2019, NGTL received an email from CLML1994 regarding other NGTL projects and requesting the business engagement contacts for the projects. On June 10, 2019, NGTL emailed CLML1994 clarifying that CLML1994 was being engaged on the Red Earth Section 3, North Star Section 2 and Hidden Lake Unit Addition components of the Project. NGTL also provided its business engagement leads’ contact information.

NGTL has reviewed the results of CLML1994’s TK Study completed for the Project in the context of the ESA for consideration and incorporation into Project planning, as appropriate. See Appendix 8-2 for CLML1994’s concerns and NGTL’s responses and proposed mitigation measures from the Project EPP. NGTL will provide this

Page 7-8 September 2019

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Section 7 North Corridor Expansion Project Aboriginal Engagement Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

information to CLML1994 and answer any questions or discuss concerns at that time, if any.

7.2.4 Dene Tha’ First Nation (DTFN)

On March 8, 2019, NGTL emailed DTFN regarding NGTL’s invitation for DTFN to conduct a community-led TK study of the proposed Project. NGTL noted that the Hidden Lake North Unit Addition component of the proposed Project falls within the Chinchaga Caribou Range. NGTL acknowledged that DTFN has recommended on past pipeline projects that DTFN be engaged on caribou mitigation. NGTL requested a conference call or an in-person meeting to further discuss the Project and how DTFN can be engaged on caribou mitigation.

On March 28, 2019, NGTL and DTFN exchanged emails in follow-up to the March 8, 2019, email to determine if DTFN was interested in discussing how DTFN would like to be engaged on caribou mitigation regarding the Hidden Lake North Unit Addition. NGTL also inquired about the status of DTFN’s TK report. DTFN responded stating that it is interested in discussing caribou mitigation with NGTL for the Project and informed NGTL its TK report is in progress. Logistics for a conference call were also discussed.

On April 5 and 8, 2019, NGTL and DTFN exchanged emails regarding the logistics for the conference call, during which it was agreed that the parties would meet in person. DTFN also requested that NGTL meet with the community to discuss concerns from the TK study and NGTL's proposed mitigation.

On April 12, 2019, NGTL met with DTFN and discussed the details for a meeting with DTFN community members at the end of April 2019. At the meeting, DTFN confirmed DTFN completed the TK field work for the Project. DTFN also informed NGTL that DTFN was in the process of drafting its interim TK report. NGTL requested DTFN send NGTL a draft interim TK report prior to the late April 2019 meeting to have a productive discussion at the meeting.

On April 16, 2019, NGTL and DTFN exchanged emails to further discuss a meeting in late April 2019. DTFN advised it would like to also discuss potential impacts to caribou and caribou habitat, and NGTL's proposed mitigation. On April 18, 2019, NGTL and DTFN exchanged emails to discuss changing the date of the meeting and confirm a new date.

On April 25, 2019, NGTL emailed DTFN to discuss an agenda for the meetings scheduled for April 30 and May 1. On April 26, 2019, DTFN replied to NGTL proposing discussion items for the meeting on April 29, 2019. On April 29, 2019, NGTL and DTFN exchanged emails and phone calls to discuss topics for discussion at the scheduled April 30, 2019, and May 1, 2019 meetings.

September 2019 Page 7-9

Section 7 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Aboriginal Engagement North Corridor Expansion Project GH-002-2019 Additional Written Evidence

On May 1, 2019, NGTL and DTFN met and discussed the Project. NGTL presented an overview of the Project and described the various Project components. NGTL communicated that the Hidden Lake North Unit Addition and connectivity pipe is the only Project component DTFN is engaged on that falls within a caribou zone. DTFN requested an opportunity for community members to participate in biophysical studies and proposed including this activity in a revised TK scope of work.

On May 15, 2019, NGTL emailed DTFN to follow-up on the meeting held on May 1, 2019. NGTL advised that NGTL’s approach is to have the environmental consultants conduct the biophysical studies and the Aboriginal communities conduct their own TK studies. NGTL also provided an action item work plan for the Project. On May 16, 2019, NGTL received an email from DTFN confirming receipt of the May 15, 2019 email.

On May 21, 2019, NGTL received an email from DTFN requesting a telephone call. NGTL replied to DTFN the following day scheduling a telephone call for May 23, 2019.

On May 23, 2019, NGTL held a telephone call with DTFN to discuss the Project’s TK Protocol Agreement. NGTL advised it would draft the agreement and send to DTFN for review.

On June 5, 2019, NGTL emailed DTFN the TK Protocol Agreement for review.

On June 7, 2019, NGTL emailed DTFN to provide an updated action item tracker.

To date, NGTL has not received a TK report from DTFN. Upon receipt, the findings of DTFN’s TK report will be reviewed in the context of the ESA and considered for incorporation into Project planning, as appropriate.

7.2.5 Doig River First Nation (DRFN)

Between March 1 and March 5, 2019, NGTL and DRFN exchanged emails to coordinate a discussion regarding DRFN’s proposed socioeconomic assessment for the Project.3

On March 6, 2019, NGTL had a conference call with DRFN to discuss DRFN’s proposal to complete a socioeconomic baseline report for the Project.

On March 7, 2019, NGTL and DRFN exchanged emails. NGTL emailed DRFN to confirm a date for an April meeting to further discuss DRFN's undertaking of a socio- economic baseline study for the Project.

3 As indicated in the Application, filed April 4, 2019, on February 28, 2019 NGTL and DRFN exchanged emails stating that they be in contact the week of March 4, 2019 to discuss the proposed socio-economic assessment.

Page 7-10 September 2019

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Section 7 North Corridor Expansion Project Aboriginal Engagement Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

On March 8, 2019, NGTL emailed DRFN regarding NGTL’s invitation for DRFN to conduct a community-led TK study of the proposed Project. NGTL noted that the Hidden Lake North Unit Addition component of the proposed Project falls within the Chinchaga Caribou Range. NGTL advised that it would appreciate the opportunity to discuss how DRFN would like to be engaged on caribou mitigation for the Hidden Lake North Unit Addition.

On March 8, 2019, NGTL and DRFN exchanged emails. DRFN provided DRFN's new contact for discussions related to caribou. DRFN confirmed that discussions related to caribou for the Project should be added to the next meeting in April 2019. On March 17, 2019, NGTL and DRFN exchanged emails regarding DRFN completing a socioeconomic baseline report for the Project.

From March 27 to April 4, 2019, NGTL and DRFN exchanged emails to determine DRFN’s availability for a meeting in April 2019 to discuss how DRFN would like to be engaged on caribou mitigation for the Hidden Lake North Unit Addition and the socioeconomic baseline report. NGTL and DRFN confirmed a meeting to take place in Doig River on April 10, 2019.

On April 5, 2019, NGTL received DRFN’s TK report. NGTL stated it would review the report and provide a response to DRFN.

On April 8, 2019, NGTL and DRFN exchanged emails regarding the CHROMP.

On April 9, 2019, NGTL and DRFN exchanged emails regarding a socio-economic baseline study by DRFN.

On April 10, 2019, NGTL met with DRFN. NGTL and DRFN agreed to leverage and build off of DRFN's participation in caribou habitat restoration and access management plans on other NGTL projects. NGTL provided feedback to DRFN on DRFN's socio-economic baseline study proposal. DRFN requested that NGTL revise DRFN's proposal and send it back to DRFN.

On April 22, 2019, NGTL emailed DRFN regarding the TK Protocol Agreement. On the same day NGTL also emailed DRFN a draft agenda for an April 23, 2019 conference call.

On April 23, 2019, NGTL and DRFN had a conference call to discuss NGTL’s mitigation with respect to caribou. During the conference call NGTL also provided a general overview of pipeline construction techniques, reforestation techniques, responded to questions from DRFN about weed control and others relating to general project development.

On April 26, 2019, NGTL and DRFN exchanged emails regarding the engagement capacity funding agreement and the socio-economic baseline report.

September 2019 Page 7-11

Section 7 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Aboriginal Engagement North Corridor Expansion Project GH-002-2019 Additional Written Evidence

On May 6, 2019, NGTL emailed DRFN regarding engagement capacity funding agreement and the socio-economic baseline report, in follow up to the April 26, 2010 email chain.

On June 7, 2019, NGTL received an email from DRFN in which DRFN advised that they had not reviewed the Project’s environmental information. NGTL replied by email the same day providing a link to the Project’s ESA on the NEB website.

On June 12, 2019, in a meeting between NGTL and DRFN, NGTL provided a brief update on the Project and advised NGTL’s response to DRFN's TK report is forthcoming.

On June 13, 2019, NGTL received an email from DRFN requesting the Project’s environmental information. NGTL replied by email the same day, resending the link to the Project’s ESA on the NEB website.

On June 18, 2019, NGTL emailed DRFN to provide an action item list as a follow-up to the meeting held the previous week.

On June 21, 2019, NGTL received an email from DRFN with a link to download DRFN’s TK report.

On June 27, 2019, NGTL received an email from DRFN with the signed TK Protocol Agreement attached.

On July 3, 2019, NGTL received an email from DRFN requesting the Project shapefiles.

On July 4, 2019, NGTL emailed DRFN providing the Project KMZ files.

NGTL has reviewed the results of DRFN’s TK Study completed for the Project in the context of the ESA for consideration and incorporation into Project planning, as appropriate. See Appendix 8-3 for DRFN’s concerns and NGTL’s responses and proposed mitigation measures from the Project EPP. NGTL will provide this information to DRFN and answer any questions or discuss concerns at that time, if any.

To date, NGTL has not received the socioeconomic assessment from DRFN. Upon receipt, the findings of DRFN’s socioeconomic assessment will be reviewed and responded to as appropriate.

7.2.6 Duncan’s First Nation (DFN)

On March 8, 2019, NGTL emailed DFN to follow-up on NGTL’s January 25, 2019 email in which NGTL provided a community specific literature review document of information compiled from publicly available sources for consideration in the ESA

Page 7-12 September 2019

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Section 7 North Corridor Expansion Project Aboriginal Engagement Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

for the Project for DFN’s review and feedback by March 1, 2019. NGTL informed DFN that NGTL did not receive a response from DFN and would be including the information in the ESA for the Project. NGTL noted the literature review is only one of many sources of information which will be considered in the ESA. NGTL confirmed engagement between DFN and NGTL will provide further opportunities to share information about DFN's TK and land use in the Project area and discuss any potential additional issues, concerns or recommendations that DFN may have about the Project.

On April 16, 2019, NGTL emailed DFN to request a status update on the TK Protocol Agreement and the TK field work for the Project.

On May 16, 2019, NGTL emailed DFN regarding engagement capacity funding for the Project.

On May 20, 2019, NGTL received an email from DFN requesting a meeting to further discuss engagement capacity funding.

On May 21, 2019, NGTL and DFN exchanged several emails to coordinate the timing of a teleconference the same day. NGTL and DFN had a teleconference and discussed the Project, the TK Protocol Agreement and TK study. NGTL requested DFN provide a response to NGTL regarding the engagement capacity funding for the Project. On the same day, NGTL emailed DFN a summary of the teleconference. On June 5, 2019, NGTL received an email from DFN requesting the most current KMZ files. NGTL emailed DFN the KMZ files the same day, and DFN confirmed receipt.

On June 10, 2019, NGTL emailed DFN in follow up to the May 21, 2019 teleconference to discuss the Project and inquire as to when NGTL would receive the TK Protocol Agreement and the TK report.

On June 26, 2019, NGTL received an email from DFN requesting a conference call to discuss the Project and engagement capacity funding. Also, on June 26, 2019, NGTL and DFN exchanged emails regarding the TK Protocol Agreement. NGTL received the signed TK Protocol Agreement from DFN.

To date, NGTL has not received a TK report from DFN. Upon receipt, the findings of DFN’s TK report will be reviewed in the context of the ESA and considered for incorporation into Project planning, as appropriate. To date, NGTL has not been advised of any concerns regarding the Project by DFN.

7.2.7 East Prairie Métis Settlement (EPMS)

On March 5, 2019, NGTL met with EPMS. NGTL and EPMS discussed the outstanding TK scope of work and final TK report. EPMS stated that it is in the process of completing the revised TK scope of work and final TK report and should

September 2019 Page 7-13

Section 7 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Aboriginal Engagement North Corridor Expansion Project GH-002-2019 Additional Written Evidence

have them to NGTL by the end of March 2019. EPMS acknowledged that EPMS missed the deadline for the TK report to be incorporated into the Application.

On March 8, 2019, NGTL emailed EPMS in follow-up on NGTL’s January 25, 2019 email in which NGTL provided a community specific literature review document of information compiled from publicly available sources for consideration in the ESA for the Project for EPMS' review and feedback by March 1, 2019. NGTL informed EPMS that NGTL did not receive a response from EPMS and would be including the information in the ESA for the Project. NGTL noted the literature review is only one of many sources of information which will be considered in the ESA. NGTL confirmed engagement between EPMS and NGTL will provide further opportunities to share information about EPMS’ TK and land use in the Project area and any potential additional issues, concerns or recommendations that EPMS may have about the Project.

On March 19, 2019, NGTL received an email from EPMS confirming receipt of NGTL’s March 8, 2019 email regarding the literature review.

On March 27, 2019, NGTL emailed EPMS confirming receipt of EPMS’s March 19, 2019 email.

On April 5, 2019, NGTL received an email from EPMS requesting a meeting. On April 8, 2019, NGTL emailed EPMS and requested a location for the proposed meeting and topics EPMS would like to discuss. NGTL also requested the status of EPMS' revised scope and budget for the TK study. NGTL responded that it would like a phone call to discuss the letter and EPMS' inquiry about site visits on all components of the Project.

On May 15, 2019, NGTL emailed EPMS regarding engagement capacity funding for the Project.

On July 16, 2019, NGTL sent EPMS an email following up on the scope of work and budget EPMS was preparing for the Project.

On July 17, 2019, NGTL received an email from EPMS requesting that NGTL send EPMS maps for the North Star Section 2, Red Earth Section 3 and Hidden Lake North Unit Addition components of the Project.

On July 24, 2019, NGTL emailed EPMS the requested maps and KMZ files. NGTL requested that EPMS provide details of their interest in engaging on any component of the Project, along with a proposed corresponding scope of work and budget.

To date, NGTL has not received a TK report from EPMS. Upon receipt, the findings of EPMS’s TK report will be reviewed in the context of the ESA and considered for incorporation into Project planning, as appropriate.

Page 7-14 September 2019

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Section 7 North Corridor Expansion Project Aboriginal Engagement Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

7.2.8 Gift Lake Métis Settlement (GLMS)

On March 8, 2019, NGTL emailed GLMS to follow-up on NGTL’s January 25, 2019 email in which NGTL provided a community specific literature review document of information compiled from publicly available sources for consideration in the ESA for the Project for GLMS’s review and feedback by March 1, 2019. NGTL informed GLMS that NGTL did not receive a response from GLMS and would be including the information in the ESA for the Project. NGTL noted the literature review is only one of many sources of information which will be considered in the ESA. NGTL confirmed engagement between GLMS and NGTL will provide further opportunities to share information about GLMS's TK and land use in the Project area and discuss any potential additional issues, concerns or recommendations that GLMS may have about the Project.

Between March 11 and March 27, 2019, NGTL and GLMS exchanged emails to discuss the literature review.

On April 1, 2019, NGTL emailed GLMS NGTL’s responses and proposed mitigation for the Project-specific issues and concerns identified in GLMS’ TK report for the Project, received by NGTL on December 21, 2019. NGTL requested that GLMS review the proposed mitigation and let NGTL know if GLMS has any questions or if GLMS would like to meet to discuss the proposed mitigation in further detail.

On May 15, 2019, NGTL emailed GLMS regarding engagement capacity funding for the Project. To date, NGTL has not received a response from GLMS but remains available to discuss questions or concerns should any arise.

7.2.9 Horse Lake First Nation (HLFN)

On March 8, 2019, NGTL emailed HLFN to follow-up on NGTL’s January 25, 2019 email in which NGTL provided a community specific literature review document of information compiled from publicly available sources for consideration in the ESA for the Project for HLFN’s review and feedback by March 1, 2019. NGTL informed HLFN that NGTL did not receive a response from HLFN and would be including the information in the ESA for the Project. NGTL noted the literature review is only one of many sources of information which will be considered in the ESA. NGTL confirmed engagement between HLFN and NGTL will provide further opportunities to share information about HLFN's TK and land use in the Project area and discuss any potential additional issues, concerns or recommendations that HLFN may have about the Project.

On April 12, 2019, NGTL emailed HLFN to inquire about the status of the TK Protocol Agreement and completion of the TK report.

September 2019 Page 7-15

Section 7 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Aboriginal Engagement North Corridor Expansion Project GH-002-2019 Additional Written Evidence

On April 23, 2019, NGTL received an email from HLFN requesting maps for the Project. On the same day NGTL replied to HLFN providing the maps.

On April 24, 2019, NGTL emailed HLFN the KMZ files for each component of the Project and the Project fact sheet. The KMZ files contained the same project footprint information as the maps sent on April 23, 2019, in a different file format.

On April 26, 2019, NGTL emailed HLFN a PDF of the Project’s segments and screen-shots of all the Project’s components, as well as the Project fact sheet and detailed PDF maps of the Red Earth 3 section of the Project. While the original email did not transmit due to file size, NGTL divided the information into several emails and successfully resent under the size limit.

On May 24, 2019, HLFN emailed NGTL its final TK report for the Project. NGTL replied the same day confirming receipt and inquiring about the TK Protocol Agreement. On May 29, 2019, NGTL telephoned HLFN and left a voicemail regarding the TK Protocol Agreement.

On June 6, 2019, NGTL and HLFN exchanged emails regarding the TK Protocol Agreement.

On July 2, 2019, NGTL received the executed TK Protocol Agreement for the Project.

On July 4, 2019, NGTL emailed HLFN confirming receipt of the TK Protocol Agreement, and that a response to HLFN’s TK report would be prepared.

NGTL has reviewed the results of HLFN’s TK Study completed for the Project in the context of the ESA for consideration and incorporation into Project planning, as appropriate. See Appendix 8-4 for HLFN’s concerns and NGTL’s responses and proposed mitigation measures from the Project EPP.

On July 31, 2019, NGTL emailed HLFN NGTL’s responses and proposed mitigation for the Project-specific issues and concerns identified in HLFN’s TK report for the Project. NGTL requested that HLFN review the proposed mitigation and let NGTL know if HLFN has any questions or if HLFN would like to meet to discuss the proposed mitigation in further detail. To date, NGTL has not received a response from HLFN but remains available to discuss questions or concerns should any arise.

7.2.10 Kapawe'no First Nation (KFN)

On March 20, 2019, NGTL was advised that KFN had been identified by the NEB and the MPMO as a community that may have potential interest in the Project.

On April 3, 2019, NGTL emailed KFN, as part of the email NGTL provided the following:

Page 7-16 September 2019

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Section 7 North Corridor Expansion Project Aboriginal Engagement Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

· the proposed Project Brochure, Project maps and Project shapefiles for KFN’s review · the Project Description and appropriate link to the NEB website where the Project Description is located · the anticipated regulatory, construction and in-service timelines for the Project. NGTL noted that it anticipates filing a Section 52 Project Application with the NEB in the second quarter of 2019 · the NEB website hyperlink to access further information regarding the NEB’s process

On April 3, 2019, NGTL received an email from KFN informing NGTL that KFN was unable to open all of documents from NGTL’s April 3, 2019 email. KFN requested all documents included in NGTL's April 3, 2019 email notification be resent in PDF format. On the same day NGTL replied explaining that it had sent PDF versions and KMZ versions of the same files and reattached the PDF versions of the files for KFN.

On May 27, 2019, NGTL emailed KFN to follow-up on the Project notification sent April 3, 2019. To date, NGTL has not received a response from KFN but remains available to discuss the Project should any questions or concerns arise.

7.2.11 Loon River First Nation (LRFN)

On March 8, 2019, NGTL emailed LRFN to suggest that the parties discuss meeting dates the last week of March to set up a meeting for the first week of April, considering vacation schedules and the election at LRFN.

On March 8, 2019, NGTL emailed LRFN to follow-up on NGTL’s January 25, 2019 email in which NGTL provided a community specific literature review document of information compiled from publicly available sources for consideration in the ESA for the Project for LRFN’s review and feedback by March 1, 2019. NGTL informed LRFN that NGTL did not receive a response from LRFN and would be including the information in the ESA for the Project. NGTL noted the literature review is only one of many sources of information which will be considered in the ESA. NGTL confirmed engagement between LRFN and NGTL will provide further opportunities to share information about LRFN’s TK and land use in the Project area and discuss any potential additional issues, concerns or recommendations that LRFN may have about the Project.

On April 5, 2019, NGTL emailed LRFN and requested LRFN’s availability for a meeting to discuss the Project.

On April 16, 2019, NGTL and LRFN exchanged emails. NGTL inquired about LRFN's availability to meet and discuss the Project. LRFN responded it had a

September 2019 Page 7-17

Section 7 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Aboriginal Engagement North Corridor Expansion Project GH-002-2019 Additional Written Evidence

meeting with LRFN leadership on April 17, 2019 and would get back to NGTL following that meeting. NGTL confirmed receipt of LRFN's response.

On May 16, 2019, NGTL emailed LRFN regarding engagement capacity funding for the Project. To date, NGTL has not received a response from LRFN but remains available to discuss the Project should any questions or concerns arise.

7.2.12 Métis Nation of Alberta (MNA)

On July 17, 2019, NGTL met with MNA to discuss the Project, previous project experience and the business engagement process.

Métis Nation of Alberta – Regional Council Zone V (MNAZV)

On March 29, 2019, NGTL emailed MNAZV with NGTL’s responses and proposed mitigation for the Project-specific issues and concerns identified in MNAZV’s TK report for the Project. NGTL requested that MNAZV review the proposed mitigation and let NGTL know if MNAZV had any questions, or if MNAZV would like to meet to discuss the proposed mitigation in further detail. On the same day NGTL received an email from MNAZV acknowledging receipt of NGTL’s responses and proposed mitigation for the Project-specific issues and concerns identified in MNAZV’s TK report.

On May 9, 2019, NGTL received an email from MNAZV, in response to NGTL’s email from the same day regarding the change in staff at NGTL and introducing the new engagement lead for the Project. MNAZV requested an introductory meeting.

On May 10, 2019, NGTL and MNAZV exchanged emails regarding logistics and potential agenda items for an introductory meeting. A meeting date of May 15, 2019 was tentatively booked.

On May 15, 2019, NGTL emailed MNAZV regarding engagement capacity funding for the Project.

On May 16, 2019, NGTL met with MNAZV. Interest was expressed by MNARZV for engagement capacity funding. MNAZV also requested that NGTL conduct a community presentation on the Project’s Caribou Management Plan.

On May 24, 2019, NGTL emailed MNAZV meeting notes from the May 16, 2019 meeting for review and comment. On the same day NGTL received an email from MNAZV providing feedback on the meeting notes.

On May 27, 2019, NGTL emailed MNAZV confirming receipt of MNAZV’s feedback on the meeting notes and discussing the Project.

Page 7-18 September 2019

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Section 7 North Corridor Expansion Project Aboriginal Engagement Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

On June 3, 2019, NGTL and MNAZV exchanged emails regarding engagement capacity funding for the Project.

On June 14, 2019, NGTL sent MNAZV information regarding engagement capacity funding for review.

On June 25, 2019, NGTL received an email from MNAZV in response to the information provided on engagement capacity funding. MNAZV requested a meeting to discuss further. On the same day NGTL and MNAZV exchanged emails to arrange a meeting date of July 17, 2019.

Between July 4, 2019 and July 10, 2019, NGTL and MNAZV exchanged several emails regarding meeting logistics for the July 17, 2019 meeting.

On July 17, 2019, NGTL met with MNAZV to discuss the Project, previous project experience and the business engagement process. The same day, NGTL received the signed agreement for engagement capacity funding from MNAZV.

Métis Nation of Alberta – Region 6 (MNAR6)

On March 8, 2019, NGTL emailed MNAR6 to follow-up on NGTL’s January 25, 2019 email in which NGTL provided a community specific literature review document of information compiled from publicly available sources for consideration in the ESA for the Project for MNAR6’s review and feedback by March 1, 2019. NGTL informed MNAR6 that NGTL did not receive a response from MNAR6 and would be including the information in the ESA for the Project. NGTL noted the literature review is only one of many sources of information which will be considered in the ESA. NGTL confirmed engagement between MNAR6 and NGTL will provide further opportunities to share information about MNAR6’s TK and land use in the Project area and discuss any potential additional issues, concerns or recommendations that MNAR6 may have about the Project.

On April 1, 2019, NGTL emailed MNAR6 and requested a status update on MNAR6’s TK report for the Project.

On April 16, 2019, NGTL and MNAR6 exchanged emails. NGTL inquired about the status of the TK report for the Project. MNAR6 responded advising the TK report was couriered as the electronic file was corrupted and could not be sent by email. MNAR6 confirmed it submitted to the NEB that MNAR6 has no outstanding concerns about the Project that would require a hearing. NGTL confirmed it had not received the TK report and requested the tracking number.

Between April 24, 2019 and April 26, 2019, NGTL and MNAR6 exchanged emails regarding the tracking of the hard-copy TK report.

September 2019 Page 7-19

Section 7 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Aboriginal Engagement North Corridor Expansion Project GH-002-2019 Additional Written Evidence

On May 3, 2019, NGTL received MNAR6’s TK report. NGTL emailed MNAR6 the same day to notify MNAR6 that the report had been received and that NGTL would review the report and provide a response.

On May 15, 2019, NGTL emailed MNAR6 regarding engagement capacity funding for the Project.

NGTL has reviewed the results of MNAR6’s TK Study completed for the Project in the context of the ESA for consideration and incorporation into Project planning, as appropriate. See Appendix 8-5 for MNAR6’s concerns and NGTL’s responses and proposed mitigation measures from the Project EPP. NGTL will provide this information to MNAR6 and answer questions or discuss concerns at that time, if any.

7.2.13 Nose Creek Community (NCC)

On August 1, 2019, NGTL and NCC exchanged emails to coordinate a telephone call for late August 2019 regarding the Project.

7.2.14 Paddle Prairie Métis Settlement (PPMS)

On March 1, 2019, NGTL received an email from PPMS inquiring if NGTL would like to come to the community for a meet and greet and to discuss the Project. On March 4, 2019, NGTL responded by email to PPMS advising that NGTL supports a meet and greet and discussing the Project. NGTL informed PPMS that sometime in April might work.

On March 27, 2019, NGTL and PPMS exchanged emails. NGTL emailed PPMS to inquire about PPMS's availability for NGTL to meet with PPMS in Paddle Prairie. PPMS responded with availability the week of April 29, 2019 or the first week of May 2019. On April 1, 2019, NGTL and PPMS exchanged emails regarding the meeting to discuss the Project. A meeting date was set for May 2, 2019 in Paddle Prairie.

On April 15, 2019, NGTL emailed PPMS NGTL's responses and proposed mitigation for the Project-specific issues and concerns identified in PPMS’s Site Visit Report for the Hidden Lake North Unit Addition component of the Project, that was received by NGTL on February 12, 2019. NGTL requested that PPMS review NGTL's proposed mitigation and let NGTL know if PPMS has any questions or if PPMS would like to meet to discuss the proposed mitigation in further detail. On the same day NGTL and PPMS exchanged emails. PPMS indicated it would review NGTL's proposed mitigation and let NGTL know if PPMS has any further questions. NGTL advised PPMS that NGTL may need to move the previously scheduled meeting to discuss the Project from May 2, 2019 to May 1, 2019. PPMS responded May 1, 2019 or May 2, 2019 work. NGTL responded that they would confirm the meeting date shortly.

Page 7-20 September 2019

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Section 7 North Corridor Expansion Project Aboriginal Engagement Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

Between April 17 and April 25, 2019, NGTL and PPMS exchanged emails regarding the Project meeting’s date, location, attendees and possible agenda items. The meeting was confirmed for May 2, 2019.

On May 2, 2019, NGTL met with PPMS. NGTL presented information about the Project and provided a Project update. PPMS informed NGTL that PPMS may have an interest in the Red Earth Section 3 and North Star Section 2 components of the Project, despite previously indicating it did not have an interest. NGTL requested that PPMS confirm its interest and then get back to NGTL. PPMS agreed to do so. NGTL inquired if PPMS had any questions about the proposed mitigation NGTL had provided in response to the issues and concerns identified PPMS’s Site Visit Report for the Hidden Lake North Unit Addition component of the Project. PPMS advised it did not have any questions about NGTL's proposed mitigation at this time. NGTL also provided general engagement information including details on scholarship programs, community initiatives, and NGTL’s business engagement process.

On May 6, 2019, NGTL received a telephone call from PPMS. PPMS confirmed its interest in Red Earth Section 3 and North Star Section 2 and advised it will follow up shortly with a request letter for a TK study. NGTL agreed to review the request letter once received and provide a response. The parties also agreed to discuss potential engagement capacity funding for the pipeline components at a later date.

On May 6, 2019, NGTL received an email from PPMS in follow up to the phone discussion that morning. A letter was attached for review requesting additional capacity for the two project components previously not requested for engagement. NGTL replied to PPMS by email the same day confirming receipt of PPMS’s email and attached letter. NGTL informed PPMS that NGTL would review the letter and provide a response.

On May 8, 2019, NGTL telephoned PPMS to discuss PPMS's May 6, 2019 email and letter requesting an opportunity to complete a TK study on Red Earth Section 3 and North Star Section 2. NGTL informed PPMS that a new NGTL representative was taking over the Project. NGTL suggested the new NGTL representative would email PPMS a response to PPMS's May 6, 2019 email and letter. PPMS agreed to review the originally submitted TK study scope of work and budget. NGTL explained North Star Section 2 had approximately 5 km of Crown land and Red Earth Section 3 had approximately 32 km of Crown land and requested this be taken into consideration in the scope and budget.

On May 8, 2019, NGTL emailed PPMS in follow up to the phone call on the same day requesting a scope of work and budget for a TK study.

On May 9, 2019, NGTL received an email from PPMS confirming that a TK scope will be prepared and sent to NGTL. On May 13, 2019, NGTL received an email from

September 2019 Page 7-21

Section 7 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Aboriginal Engagement North Corridor Expansion Project GH-002-2019 Additional Written Evidence

PPMS regarding a TK scope of work. On May 14, 2019, NGTL left a voicemail for PPMS confirming receipt of PPMS’s May 13, 2019, email.

On June 19, 2019, NGTL received an email from PPMS requesting a TK study and providing a scope of work and budget for North Star Section 2 and Red Earth Section 3. On the same day, NGTL emailed PPMS in response to PPMS’s TK study scope of work and budget regarding the details of the TK study.

On June 21, 2019, NGTL received a voicemail from PPMS regarding the TK study details. On June 25, 2019, NGTL received an email from PPMS in follow-up to the June 21, 2019 voicemail. PPMS agreed to the details the parties had been discussing and requested that NGTL send a revised TK study scope of work and budget reflecting the details that were discussed. NGTL emailed PPMS the same day, the revised TK study scope of work and budget as requested. NGTL received confirmation of receipt of the revised TK study scope of work and budget from PPMS later that day.

On June 27, 2019, NGTL emailed PPMS a proposed TK Protocol Agreement for review.

On July 2, 2019, NGTL received from PPMS the executed TK Protocol Agreement. NGTL confirmed receipt via email the same day.

Between July 4, 2019 and July 26, 2019, NGTL and PPMS exchanged several emails regarding logistics and coordination of the TK study scheduled for August 6 to August 13, 2019.

To date, NGTL has not received a final TK report from PPMS. Upon its receipt, the findings of PPMS’s TK report will be reviewed in the context of the ESA and considered for incorporation into Project planning, as appropriate.

7.2.15 Papaschase First Nation (PAFN)

On June 24, 2019, NGTL and PAFN had a telephone conversation initiated by the notification package for another project. NGTL and PAFN agreed to an introductory meeting to discuss various NGTL projects.

On July 10, 2019, NGTL received an email from PAFN confirming the July 12, 2019 meeting. NGTL replied the same day by email to confirm meeting logistics including attendees.

On July 12, 2019, NGTL met with PAFN for an introductory meeting and discussed the Project.

On July 15, 2019, NGTL emailed PAFN a summary of the July 12, 2019 meeting.

Page 7-22 September 2019

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Section 7 North Corridor Expansion Project Aboriginal Engagement Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

7.2.16 Peavine Métis Settlement (PMS)

On March 8, 2019, NGTL emailed PMS to follow up on NGTL’s January 25, 2019 email in which NGTL provided a community specific literature review document of information compiled from publicly available sources for consideration in the ESA for the Project for PMS’s review and feedback by March 1, 2019. NGTL informed PMS that NGTL did not receive a response from PMS and would be including the information in the ESA for the Project. NGTL noted the literature review is only one of many sources of information which will be considered in the ESA. NGTL confirmed engagement between PMS and NGTL, and NGTL will provide further opportunities to share information about PMS's TK and land use in the Project area and discuss any potential additional issues, concerns or recommendations that PMS may have about the Project.

On March 29, 2019, NGTL emailed PMS NGTL’s responses and proposed mitigation for the Project-specific issues and concerns identified in PMS's TK report for the Project. NGTL requested that PMS review the proposed mitigation and let NGTL know if PMS had any questions or if PMS would like to meet to discuss the proposed mitigation in further detail. On March 31, 2019, NGTL received an email from PMS requesting NGTL's availability to discuss the mitigation.

On April 4, 2019, NGTL emailed PMS to inform PMS that NGTL would be happy to meet with PMS to discuss the mitigation. NGTL requested more information on PMS's concerns so that NGTL ensures it brings the appropriate personnel to address PMS's concerns. NGTL communicated it will confirm availability once PMS provides the topics PMS would like to discuss. NGTL also inquired if PMS has any preferred dates for a meeting.

On April 8, 2019, NGTL received a telephone call from PMS. PMS informed NGTL that PMS did not have any concerns with the mitigation provided by NGTL on March 29, 2019 but PMS would like to meet with NGTL to understand NGTL's business engagement process and provide NGTL with information on PMS's business capabilities. NGTL and PMS agreed to set up a meeting for the week of May 6, 2019.

On April 16, 2019, NGTL emailed PMS acknowledging PMS did not have any issues with NGTL's proposed mitigation in response to PMS's TK report. NGTL advised it is available to meet PMS in Grande Prairie the week of May 6, 2019, and requested PMS's availability. NGTL informed PMS that NGTL will provide PMS with an overview of how NGTL's contracting and employment process works.

On May 14, 2019, NGTL received a voicemail from PMS requesting NGTL telephone PMS. NGTL telephoned PMS the same day and left a voicemail.

On May 15, 2019, NGTL emailed PMS regarding engagement capacity funding for the Project.

September 2019 Page 7-23

Section 7 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Aboriginal Engagement North Corridor Expansion Project GH-002-2019 Additional Written Evidence

On May 22, 2019, NGTL telephoned PMS to discuss engagement capacity funding for the Project.

On June 3, 2019, NGTL telephoned PMS to clarify that PMS was seeking engagement capacity funding for the Project.

On July 10, 2019, NGTL and PMS exchanged emails regarding the Project and engagement capacity funding.

7.2.17 Peerless Trout First Nation (PTFN)

On March 1, 2019, NGTL emailed PTFN, in follow up to a February 25, 2019, email exchange, to advise that NGTL did not have trapper maps available. NGTL provided a list of the Registered trappers potentially affected by the Red Earth Section 3 of the Project. NGTL informed PTFN that NGTL's Land Department oversees any discussions with Registered trappers and because the Project does not plan to begin construction until 2021, discussions with trappers have not yet occurred.

On April 16, 2019, NGTL emailed PTFN and requested a follow-up phone call to discuss the next steps of engagement on the Project. NGTL requested PTFN's availability for a phone call.

On April 23, 2019, NGTL and PTFN exchanged phone calls. NGTL received a voicemail message from PTFN to call PTFN back to discuss next steps of engagement for the Project. NGTL telephoned PTFN to discuss next steps of engagement for the Project. NGTL and PTFN discussed logistics for PTFN to complete a TK study. PTFN requested that NGTL send PTFN a shapefile for the Project. On the same day NGTL email PTFN the KMZ file.

On April 24, 2019, NGTL emailed PTFN the shapefile as requested during the April 23, 2019 phone call.

On April 25, 2019, NGTL and PTFN exchanged several emails regarding the TK study, logistics for conducting the TK study and a TK Protocol Agreement.

On April 29, 2019, NGTL and PTFN exchanged emails confirming the TK study logistics that were previously discussed.

On May 1, 2019, NGTL and PTFN exchanged emails regarding the TK study and TK Protocol Agreement.

On May 2, 2019, NGTL and PTFN exchanged phone calls regarding the TK Protocol Agreement. On the same day NGTL received an email from PTFN with proposed amendments to the TK Protocol Agreement.

Page 7-24 September 2019

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Section 7 North Corridor Expansion Project Aboriginal Engagement Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

On May 8, 2019, NGTL and PTFN had a phone call. On the same day, NGTL emailed PTFN a summary of the phone conversation regarding changes to the TK Protocol Agreement. A revised TK Protocol Agreement was attached to the email.

On May 9, 2019, NGTL received a phone call from PTFN. PTFN confirmed the TK Protocol Agreement was acceptable and would be signed by the appropriate parties and sent to NGTL.

Between May 9 and May 16, 2019, NGTL and PTFN exchanged several emails regarding logistics for conducting the TK study.

On May 16, 2019, NGTL received a signed copy of the TK Protocol Agreement from PTFN by email. NGTL emailed PTFN the same day confirming receipt of the TK Protocol Agreement.

On May 21, 2019, PTFN completed the fieldwork component of the TK study.

On May 22, 2019, NGTL emailed PTFN regarding engagement capacity funding for the Project. PFTN replied by email the same day.

On May 23, 2019, NGTL telephoned PTFN regarding engagement capacity funding. On the same day NGTL emailed PTFN in follow up to the phone call. NGTL and PTFN exchanged emails regarding engagement capacity funding for the Project.

On July 8, 2019, NGTL received PTFN’s final TK Report for the Project.

On July 9, 2019, NGTL emailed PTFN confirming receipt of the final TK Report and stating that NGTL would provide a response.

On July 15 and July 16, 2019, NGTL and PTFN exchanged an email and phone calls regarding the TK Protocol Agreement.

NGTL has reviewed the results of PTFN’s TK Study completed for the Project in the context of the ESA for consideration and incorporation into Project planning, as appropriate. See Appendix 8-6 for PTFN’s concerns and NGTL’s responses and proposed mitigation measures from the Project EPP. NGTL will provide this information to PTFN and answer questions or discuss concerns at that time, if any.

7.2.18 Sawridge First Nation (SWFN)

On March 20, 2019, NGTL was advised that SWFN had been identified by the NEB and the MPMO as a community that may have potential interest in the Project.

On April 3, 2019, NGTL emailed SWFN and as part of the email NGTL provided the following:

September 2019 Page 7-25

Section 7 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Aboriginal Engagement North Corridor Expansion Project GH-002-2019 Additional Written Evidence

· the proposed Project Brochure, Project maps and Project shapefiles for SWFN’s review · the Project Description and appropriate link to the NEB website where the Project Description is located · the anticipated regulatory, construction, and in-service timelines for the Project. NGTL noted that it anticipates filing a Section 52 Project Application with the NEB in the second quarter of 2019 · the NEB website hyperlink to access further information regarding the NEB’s process

On April 3, 2019, NGTL emailed SWFN to inform that on January 8, 2019, NGTL filed the proposed Project Description.

On May 27, 2019, NGTL emailed SWFN in follow-up to the Project notification sent April 3, 2019 as no response had been received.

On July 30, 2019, NGTL received a site visit report from SWFN following the independent site visit SWFN conducted for the Project’s Red Earth Section 3 component.

On July 31, 2019, NGTL emailed SWFN acknowledging receipt of the site visit report for the Project. NGTL also provided engagement capacity funding information to SWFN.

NGTL has reviewed the results of SWFN’s TK Study completed for the Project in the context of the ESA for consideration and incorporation into Project planning, as appropriate. See Appendix 8-7 for SWFN’s concerns and NGTL’s responses and proposed mitigation measures from the Project EPP. NGTL will provide this information to SWFN and answer questions or discuss concerns at that time, if any.

7.2.19 Swan River First Nation (SRFN)

On April 1, 2019, NGTL emailed SRFN with NGTL’s responses and proposed mitigation for the Project-specific issues and concerns identified in SRFN’s TK report for the Project, that was received by NGTL on February 25, 2019. NGTL requested that SRFN review the proposed mitigation and let NGTL know if SRFN has any questions or if SRFN would like to meet to discuss the proposed mitigation in further detail.

On May 9 and May 10, 2019, NGTL and SRFN exchanged emails regarding the change in NGTL’s engagement lead for the Project.

To date, NGTL has not received a response from SRFN but remains available to discuss the Project should any questions or concerns arise.

Page 7-26 September 2019

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Section 7 North Corridor Expansion Project Aboriginal Engagement Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

7.2.20 Tallcree First Nation (TFN)

On April 9, 2019, NGTL received a phone call from TFN. TFN informed NGTL that the TK report for the Project should be completed shortly.

On April 23, 2019, NGTL received a phone call from TFN to discuss the Project. TFN informed NGTL that the TK report would be submitted by May 3, 2019. NGTL and TFN also discussed engagement capacity funding for the Project.

On May 15, 2019, NGTL received an email from TFN requesting details of the site visits including the dates they had occurred. On the same day NGTL emailed TFN in follow up to the phone call providing the field dates of the TFN field study and attached field maps as requested.

On May 16, 2019, NGTL received TFN’s TK report by email. On the same day NGTL replied by email confirming receipt of the report.

On May 16, 2019, NGTL emailed TFN regarding engagement capacity funding for the Project.

On May 22, 2019, NGTL emailed TFN for clarification regarding the concerns described in the TK Report.

On May 24, 2019, NGTL received a phone call from TFN to discuss the concerns described in the TK Report and potential mitigation. TFN agreed to provide further descriptions of the concerns in the TK report by May 31, 2019.

On May 31, 2019, NGTL received a revised TK report from TFN reflecting a more detailed discussion of concerns. On the same day NGTL replied to TFN by email confirming receipt of the revised report.

NGTL has reviewed the results of TFN’s TK Study completed for the Project in the context of the ESA for consideration and incorporation into Project planning, as appropriate. See Appendix 8-8 for TFN’s concerns and NGTL’s responses and proposed mitigation measures from the Project EPP.

On June 4, 2019, NGTL telephoned TFN to discuss engagement capacity funding for the Project.

On July 31, 2019, NGTL emailed NGTL’s responses and proposed mitigation for the Project-specific issues and concerns identified in TFN’s TK report. NGTL requested that TFN review the proposed mitigation and let NGTL know if TFN has any questions or if TFN would like to meet to discuss the proposed mitigation in further detail.

September 2019 Page 7-27

Section 7 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Aboriginal Engagement North Corridor Expansion Project GH-002-2019 Additional Written Evidence

7.2.21 Whitefish Lake (Atikameg) First Nation #459 (WLFN459)

On March 20, 2019, NGTL was advised that WLFN459 had been identified by the NEB and the MPMO as a community that may have potential interest in the Project.

On April 3, 2019, NGTL emailed WLFN459, and as part of the email NGTL provided the following: · the proposed Project Brochure, Project maps and Project shapefiles for WLFN459’s review · the Project Description and appropriate link to the NEB website where the Project Description is located · the anticipated regulatory, construction, and in-service timelines for the Project. NGTL noted that it anticipates filing a Section 52 Project Application with the NEB in the second quarter of 2019 · the NEB website hyperlink to access further information regarding the NEB’s process On May 27, 2019, NGTL emailed WLFN459 in follow-up to the Project notification sent on April 3, 2019, as no response had been received. On the same day NGTL received an email from WLFN459 informing NGTL that they had no concerns and that the Project was outside of WLFN459’s traditional territory.

7.3 PLANS FOR ONGOING ENGAGEMENT

NGTL continues to actively engage with all potentially affected Aboriginal groups consistent with the approach described above. Engagement activities will continue during all Project phases. NGTL will continue to respond to questions and concerns, and ongoing engagement activities will continue with the intent to: · address any Project-related questions or concerns · progress work plans that provide capacity funding for communities · understand interests in employment and contracting opportunities · continue to gather input through ongoing engagement activities

Page 7-28 September 2019

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Section 8 North Corridor Expansion Project Environmental and Socio-Economic Matters Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

8.0 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC MATTERS

This section summarizes ongoing efforts pertaining to considerations of environmental and socio-economic matters associated with the Project, since the filing of the Application.1

8.1 ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATORY ENGAGEMENT

Since filing the Application, NGTL has continued to consult with with Alberta Environment and Parks (AEP), regarding the Project. An in-person meeting was held with AEP on July 30, 2019, during which the Project was reviewed, updates were providing regarding additional field investigations recently completed for wildlife, vegetation and wetlands. During a discussion relating to wildlife and potential effects of the Project, AEP was interested in the 2019 field findings and reminded NGTL that results were to be submitted into the Fish and Wildlife Information Management System. NGTL noted the Project consultant would be completing that submission. NGTL also committed to providing AEP with an email containing links to the NEB submission for the Project, highlighting the link to the Wildlife Technical Data Report (which was provided on August 22, 2019). Additional discussions focused on NGTL’s caribou habitat restoration and offset planning. AEP provided recommendations for implementing caribou offset measures in areas which, based on their knowledge of herd population movements, would provide the most benefit for habitat recovery. NGTL noted recent efforts to map assets in the affected herd ranges and ongoing planning to implement offset measures in areas where AEP anticipates the most benefit to the recovery of caribou habitat. Other discussion topics included the anticipated NEB regulatory review process and transition to the CER, and provincial land disposition planning and timelines. Due to scheduling conflicts with the AEP Senior Fisheries Biologist, discussion of the Project and planned watercourse crossings as they relate to fish and fish habitat was deferred for a future focused meeting anticipated for September, when schedules allow. In addition to the in-person meeting, NGTL has had several focused email and telephone exchanges with AEP regarding aspects of land tenure permitting in July and August 2019. NGTL will continue to engage with AEP about the Project throughout the planning period, as well as through construction and reclamation, as appropriate.

8.2 ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES

8.2.1 Wetland

Wetland data were collected at representative locations along the Project Construction Footprints (PCFs) during the wetland field survey conducted from July 29 to

1 NEB Filing ID: A98641.

September 2019 Page 8-1

Section 8 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Environmental and Socio-Economic Matters North Corridor Expansion Project GH-002-2019 Additional Written Evidence

August 6, 2019. No additional mitigation measures beyond those presented in the ESA and Project-specific Environmental Protection Plans (EPPs) are warranted based on the results of the 2019 wetland field studies.

8.2.1.1 Wetland Survey Methods

Wetland data were collected at representative locations along the PCFs by a wetland specialist. During the wetland field survey, wetland classes and delineations that were determined during the desktop review and the wetland overflight survey were confirmed or refined, as warranted. A summary of field results is presented in Table 8-1.

Table 8-1: Summary of 2019 Wetland Survey Results

North Central Corridor Loop Northwest Mainline Loop No. 2 (Bear Hidden Lake North Canyon North Compressor Station Results North Star Section 2 Red Earth Section 3 Extension) Unit Addition Wetland Field Survey 2 additional wetlands 5 additional artificial 11 additional wetlands 5 additional wetlands identified as ponds identified as identified as identified as encountered by the encountered by the encountered by the encountered by the footprint. footprint. footprint. footprint.

8.2.2 Wildlife

Additional wildlife surveys were conducted in May and June 2019. New wildlife habitat features identified during the additional wildlife surveys that may interact with the Project (e.g., identified western toad breeding wetlands) will be added to the Project-specific EPPs and Environmental Alignment Sheets (EAS) prior to construction, as warranted. However, no additional mitigation measures beyond those presented in the ESA and Project-specific EPPs are warranted based on the results of the 2019 wildlife surveys.

A summary of wildlife surveys completed is presented in Table 8-2. A summary of field results is presented in Table 8-3.

Table 8-2: Summary of Wildlife Surveys Completed in 2019 Since Application Filing

Survey Dates North Central Corridor Loop Northwest Mainline Loop No. 2 (Bear Hidden Lake North Canyon North Compressor Station Survey Type North Star Section 2 Red Earth Section 3 Extension) Unit Addition Amphibian May 21, 2019 May 22 to 25, 2019 May 18 to 20, 2019 June 23, 2019 (nonacoustic and (auditory surveys) auditory) June 21 and 26, 2019 (nonacoustic surveys) Yellow Rail None (suitable habitat June 22, 2019 June 27 to 29, 2019 None (outside of is not present along expected species this route) range)

Page 8-2 September 2019

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Section 8 North Corridor Expansion Project Environmental and Socio-Economic Matters Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

Table 8-2: Summary of Wildlife Surveys Completed in 2019 Since Application Filing (cont'd)

Survey Dates North Central Corridor Loop Northwest Mainline Loop No. 2 (Bear Hidden Lake North Canyon North Compressor Station Survey Type North Star Section 2 Red Earth Section 3 Extension) Unit Addition Short-eared May 21, 2019 May 22 to 25, 2019 May 19, 2019 June 24, 2019 Owl/Common (short-eared owl (short-eared owl (short-eared owl only) Nighthawk only) only) June 27 to 28, June 25 to 26, 2019 June 22, 2019 (both) 2019 (both) (both) Breeding Bird June 21 to 22, 2019 June 18 to 21, 2019 June 18 to 20, 2019 June 23, 2019

Table 8-3: Summary of 2019 Wildlife Survey Results

Survey Findings North Central Corridor Loop Northwest Mainline Loop No. 2 (Bear Hidden Lake North Canyon North Compressor Station Species Group North Star Section 2 Red Earth Section 3 Extension) Unit Addition Mammals Observations/sign of Observations/sign of Observations/sign of Wood bison sign (scat) six mammal species six mammal species six mammal species was observed. including: including: including: · Deer spp. and · Deer spp. and · White-tailed deer, moose sign; moose sign; deer spp. and · white-tailed deer; · woodland caribou moose or their sign; · red squirrels (tracks); · American beavers; (auditory); · Black bear (visual · red squirrels; · unidentified bat and sign); · and unidentified bat spp.; and · American beaver spp. · bear spp. (sign). and Canada Lynx (sign). Birds 61 bird species 69 bird species were 69 bird species were 24 bird species were observed, including: observed, including: observed, including: observed, including: · 45 passerine · 45 passerine · 48 passerine · 21 passerine species, species, 5 species, 3 species, 3 waterbird 2 woodpecker woodpecker woodpecker species, no species, 11 species, 11 species, 14 woodpecker, waterbird species, waterbird species, waterbird species, gamebird or raptor 1 game bird one game bird one game bird species observed. species and 2 species, and 5 species, and 2 raptor species. raptor species. raptor species. · One unoccupied · One unoccupied stick nest stick nest observed observed approximately approximately 105 m east of the 12 m south of the PCF near KP 13.4. PCF at KP 19.9. Amphibians · Boreal chorus frog · Boreal chorus frog · Boreal chorus frog · Boreal chorus frog detected at 6 detected at 23 detected at 11 detected at 1 amphibian survey amphibian survey amphibian survey amphibian survey sites; and sites; sites; site; and · wood frog detected · western toad · western toad heard · wood frog detected at 3 amphibian heard at 22 at 1 amphibian at 1 amphibian survey sites. amphibian survey survey site; 2 survey site. sites; and western toad juveniles were

September 2019 Page 8-3

Section 8 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Environmental and Socio-Economic Matters North Corridor Expansion Project GH-002-2019 Additional Written Evidence

Table 8-3: Summary of 2019 Wildlife Survey Results (cont'd)

Survey Findings North Central Corridor Loop Northwest Mainline Loop No. 2 (Bear Hidden Lake North Canyon North Compressor Station Species Group North Star Section 2 Red Earth Section 3 Extension) Unit Addition Amphibians (cont’d) · wood frog detected observed at 5 amphibian incidentally; and survey sites. · wood frog detected at 8 amphibian survey sites. Species at Risk Three species at risk Six species at risk Four species at risk Two species at risk observed, including: observed, including: observed, including: observed, including: · Canada warbler · Woodland caribou · Common nighthawk · Wood bison (listed (listed as tracks (listed as (listed as as Threatened on Threatened on Threatened on Threatened on Schedule 1 of Schedule 1 of Schedule 1 of Schedule 1 of SARA and Special Species at Risk SARA and by SARA and Special Concern by Act (SARA) and by COSEWIC), barn Concern by COSEWIC) and Committee on the swallow (listed as COSEWIC), olive- barn swallow (listed Status of Threatened on sided flycatcher as Threatened on Endangered Schedule 1 of (listed as Schedule 1 of Wildlife in Canada SARA and by Threatened on SARA and by [COSEWIC]), COSEWIC), Schedule 1 of COSEWIC). horned grebes Canada warbler SARA and Special (listed as Special (listed as Concern by Concern on Threatened on COSEWIC), rusty Schedule 1 of Schedule 1 of blackbird (listed as SARA and by SARA and by Special Concern on COSEWIC), and COSEWIC), Schedule 1 of olive-sided common SARA and by flycatcher (listed nighthawk (listed COSEWIC), and as Threatened on as Threatened on western toad (listed Schedule 1 of Schedule 1 of as Special Concern SARA and Special SARA and by on Schedule 1 of Concern by COSEWIC), olive- SARA and by COSEWIC). sided flycatcher COSEWIC). (listed as Threatened on Schedule 1 of SARA and Special Concern by COSEWIC), and western toad (listed as Special Concern on Schedule 1 of SARA and by COSEWIC).

8.2.2.1 Wildlife Survey Methods

Amphibian Surveys

Auditory and nonacoustic surveys for amphibians were conducted at select locations with potentially suitable breeding habitat for amphibians, targeting western toad (i.e., wetlands with open water components, low-lying wet areas, and slow-moving watercourses), following the methods outlined in the Sensitive Species Inventory Guidelines (AESRD 2013), with the exception that only one round of surveys were

Page 8-4 September 2019

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Section 8 North Corridor Expansion Project Environmental and Socio-Economic Matters Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

completed at most survey sites. Auditory surveys were completed where access and survey timing allowed and were supplemented by nonacoustic surveys, where necessary. Both auditory and nonacoustic surveys were completed at five sites along the North Star Section 2. Only nonacoustic surveys could be completed at the Hidden Lake North Unit Addition since the area could not be accessed during the auditory survey window due to active local wildfires. However, given that construction is planned to begin outside of the breeding period for western toads (i.e., winter), further surveys are not deemed necessary. Amphibians seen or heard during the auditory and nonacoustic surveys were identified to species, where possible. Additional information recorded at each site included the date, the time, weather conditions, the global positioning system (GPS) location, and a description of the general habitat.

Yellow Rail Surveys

Yellow rail surveys were conducted in select areas of suitable habitat along the Red Earth Section 3 and Bear Canyon North Extension. Based on wildlife fieldwork completed in 2018, there is no suitable habitat for yellow rail along the PCF for North Star Section 2, and the Hidden Lake North Unit Addition is located outside of the expected range of yellow rail; therefore, yellow rail surveys were not conducted along these Project components.

The surveys followed the methods outlined in the Sensitive Species Inventory Guidelines (AESRD 2013) for yellow rail (call-playback surveys) with the exceptions that only one round of surveys was completed, and sites were located in select areas of suitable habitat only. The surveys were conducted beginning approximately 1 hour after sunset when yellow rails are most active, and under satisfactory weather conditions, including no precipitation and light winds less than 20 km per hour. The survey stations were spaced a minimum of 250 metres (m) apart where suitable habitat occurs. Upon arrival at each survey station, a 5-minute passive count was conducted, followed by a 3-minute call playback, then an additional 2-minute passive survey, for a total survey period of 10 minutes. The call playback consisted of a 5- second broadcasted call, followed by a 5-second passive listening period, repeated 18 times. Yellow rails and incidental wildlife species (i.e., nontarget species) seen or heard during the surveys were recorded. Additional information recorded at each station included the date, the time, weather conditions, the noise level, the GPS location, and a description of the general habitat.

Common Nighthawk and Short-eared Owl Surveys

Call-playback surveys for common nighthawk were paired with point-count surveys for short-eared owl and were conducted in select areas of suitable habitat along the PCF. The surveys followed the methods outlined in the Sensitive Species Inventory Guidelines (AESRD 2013) for common nighthawk (point count with call playback) and short-eared owl (roadside/point count) with the exceptions that only one round of surveys were completed at most sites, and sites were located in select areas of suitable

September 2019 Page 8-5

Section 8 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Environmental and Socio-Economic Matters North Corridor Expansion Project GH-002-2019 Additional Written Evidence

habitat only. The surveys were conducted approximately 1 hour before sunset and continued until 1 half-hour after sunset under satisfactory weather conditions, including little or no precipitation and light winds less than 20 km per hour. The survey locations were spaced a minimum of 800 m apart, where suitable habitat occurs. Upon arrival at each point-count station, a 3-minute passive count was conducted, followed by a 3-minute call-playback survey for common nighthawk for a total survey period of 6 minutes. The call playback included 30 seconds of common nighthawk call followed by 30 seconds of silence, repeated three times. During the survey period, the area was scanned visually (with the aid of binoculars) to observe common nighthawks or short-eared owls within 400 m. Common nighthawks, short-eared owls, and incidental wildlife species (i.e., nontarget species) seen or heard during the surveys were recorded. Additional information recorded at each station included the date, the time, weather conditions, the noise level, the GPS location, and a description of the general habitat.

Breeding Bird Surveys

Breeding bird survey locations were selected to represent the variety of habitat types that are crossed by the PCFs, maintaining a minimum separation of 300 m between point-count locations. Survey locations were selected based on a desktop review of satellite imagery and previous field information to include the following: · forested areas (e.g., young and mature upland forests, and treed wetlands) · open habitats (e.g., pasture and natural forest openings) · wetlands with open water components and low-lying wet areas on/adjacent to the proposed Project · watercourse crossings and drainages with well-defined riparian areas

Cultivated and hay lands were excluded from the breeding bird surveys as they provide limited value for wildlife. Breeding bird surveys followed the methods outlined in the Sensitive Species Inventory Guidelines (AESRD 2013) for boreal and foothills breeding songbirds and woodpeckers, with the exceptions that only one round of surveys were completed, and sites were located in select areas of representative habitat (as described above). Point counts were conducted in the morning between approximately 1 half-hour before sunrise to 10:00 a.m., under satisfactory weather conditions, including good visibility, little or no precipitation, and light winds less than 20 km per hour. Birds seen or heard at each point-count location during a 10-minute period following a 2-minute quiet period after arrival at the site were recorded. Species observed during the quiet period were recorded as incidental observations. The approximate location, species, age, sex (where possible), and number of all birds detected within a 50 m radius were recorded at each point- count station and binoculars were used to observe species at a distance to confirm identification, where feasible. Birds outside of a 50 m radius, detected outside of the 10-minute survey period, flyovers, and fly-throughs, were recorded as incidental

Page 8-6 September 2019

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Section 8 North Corridor Expansion Project Environmental and Socio-Economic Matters Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

observations. Additional information recorded at each site included the date, the time, weather conditions, the noise level, the GPS location, and a description of the general habitat.

Ground Searches and Incidental Wildlife Observations

Ground searches for wildlife habitat features (e.g., stick nests, dens, and mineral licks) were conducted concurrently with other wildlife surveys in areas of interest (e.g., forested areas and wetlands) along the PCFs and adjacent areas up to 100 m from the PCF.

Incidental wildlife observations include wildlife observations recorded when travelling to and from survey locations, nonfocal species observed during species- specific surveys (e.g., amphibians observed during breeding bird survey), and observations that occurred outside of the specified survey time period (e.g., the 10-minute survey period for breeding birds). Incidental wildlife observations and sign, as well as habitat features, were recorded during the supplemental wildlife surveys. Where possible, information recorded for each observation included the date, time, species, number, age, and sex, a general habitat description, and the GPS location.

8.2.3 Vegetation

Vegetation ground surveys were conducted in July and August 2019. New vegetation features identified during the additional vegetation surveys that may be affected by the proposed Project (e.g., identified weed locations) will be added to the Project- specific EPPs and EAS prior to construction, as warranted. However, no additional mitigation measures beyond those presented in the ESA and Project-specific EPPs are warranted based on the results of the additional 2019 vegetation ground surveys. A summary of field results is presented in Table 8-4.

Table 8-4: Summary of 2019 Vegetation Survey Results

North Central Corridor Loop Northwest Mainline Loop No. 2 (Bear Hidden Lake North Canyon North Compressor Station Survey Type North Star Section 2 Red Earth Section 3 Extension) Unit Addition Vegetation Ground No species No species No species designated No species designated Survey designated under designated under under COSEWIC, under COSEWIC, COSEWIC, SARA, or COSEWIC, SARA, or SARA, or the Alberta SARA, or the Alberta the Alberta Wildlife the Alberta Wildlife Wildlife Act were Wildlife Act were Act were observed Act were observed observed during the observed during the during the 2019 during the 2019 2019 vegetation 2019 vegetation vegetation ground vegetation ground ground survey. No ground survey. No survey. No vascular survey. No vascular vascular plant species vascular plant or plant species tracked plant or bryophyte tracked by ACIMS bryophyte species

September 2019 Page 8-7

Section 8 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Environmental and Socio-Economic Matters North Corridor Expansion Project GH-002-2019 Additional Written Evidence

Table 8-4: Summary of 2019 Vegetation Survey Results (cont'd)

North Central Corridor Loop Northwest Mainline Loop No. 2 (Bear Hidden Lake North Canyon North Compressor Station Survey Type North Star Section 2 Red Earth Section 3 Extension) Unit Addition by Alberta species tracked by were observed during tracked by ACIMS Conservation ACIMS were the 2019 vegetation were observed during Information observed during the ground survey. No rare the 2019 vegetation Management System 2019 vegetation ecological communities ground survey. No rare (ACIMS) were ground survey. No were observed during ecological communities observed during the rare ecological the 2019 vegetation were observed during 2019 vegetation communities were ground survey. the 2019 vegetation ground survey. No observed during the ground survey. rare ecological 2019 vegetation Two liverwort species communities were ground survey. tracked by ACIMS One lichen species observed during the were observed. Two tracked by ACIMS was 2019 vegetation One lichen species lichen species tracked observed. ground survey. tracked by ACIMS by ACIMS were One Noxious weed, and one lichen observed. scentless chamomile, One liverwort species species not currently Two Noxious weeds, was observed. tracked by ACIMS listed as occurring in Canada (creeping) was observed. Two Alberta by ACIMS due thistle, and perennial lichen species tracked to taxonomic sow-thistle, were by ACIMS were uncertainty, were observed. observed. observed. Two Noxious weeds, No Noxious weed Canada (creeping) species were thistle, and perennial observed. sow-thistle, were observed. Vegetation Ground No species No species No species designated No species designated Survey designated under designated under under COSEWIC, under COSEWIC, COSEWIC, SARA, or COSEWIC, SARA, or SARA, or the Alberta SARA, or the Alberta the Alberta Wildlife the Alberta Wildlife Wildlife Act were Wildlife Act were Act were observed Act were observed observed during the observed during the during the 2019 during the 2019 2019 vegetation 2019 vegetation vegetation ground vegetation ground ground survey. No ground survey. No survey. No vascular survey. No vascular vascular plant species vascular plant species plant species tracked plant species tracked tracked by ACIMS tracked by ACIMS by ACIMS were by ACIMS were were observed during were observed during observed during the observed during the the 2019 vegetation the 2019 vegetation 2019 vegetation 2019 vegetation ground survey. No rare ground survey. No rare ground survey. No ground survey. No ecological communities ecological communities rare ecological rare ecological were observed during were observed during communities were communities were the 2019 vegetation the 2019 vegetation observed during the observed during the ground survey. ground survey. 2019 vegetation 2019 vegetation ground survey. ground survey. Two liverwort species Scentless chamomile tracked by ACIMS was observed. One liverwort species were observed. tracked by ACIMS was observed. Canada (creeping) thistle, and Perennial Canada (creeping) sow-thistle were thistle, and Perennial observed. sow-thistle were observed.

Page 8-8 September 2019

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Section 8 North Corridor Expansion Project Environmental and Socio-Economic Matters Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

8.2.3.1 Vegetation Survey Methods

Vegetation Ground Survey

Vegetation ground surveys were conducted in July and August 2019, by foot, and were focused on the PCFs and adjacent areas (up to 50 m from the PCF). Fieldwork was conducted for the: · North Star Section 2 from August 3 to 4 · Red Earth Section 3 from August 5 to 6 · Bear Canyon North Extension Section from July 30 to August 1 · Hidden Lake North Unit Addition on August 2

The vegetation ground surveys included ecosystem classification, rare plant and rare ecological community surveys, weed surveys, and forest condition assessments, as described in the following subsections. Data were recorded on field data sheets, Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) locations were recorded with a handheld GPS unit, and photographs were taken for recordkeeping.

Ecosystem Classification

Vegetation community classification was completed within the PCFs. Vegetation specialists traversed each targeted segment of the PCFs, noted the dominant vegetation communities, and recorded the characteristic species within these plant communities.

Rare Vegetation and Rare Ecological Communities

Vegetation survey methodology is based on the Alberta Native Plant Council Guidelines for Rare Vascular Plant Surveys in Alberta – 2012 UPDATE (ANPC 2012). Vegetation specialists traversed each selected segment of the Project, noted the dominant ecological communities, recorded all identifiable species, and searched for rare species and uncommon habitats. A purposeful meander technique was used to survey the PCFs. At locations where potentially important microsites were observed, more detailed searches were performed. All vegetation surveys were conducted during biologically appropriate timing for the region and species being surveyed.

Records provided by ACIMS indicated that tracked bryophyte and lichen species are known to occur in the vicinity of the Project. Therefore, the range and habitat of these species were reviewed, and the likelihood of encountering these species within the proposed PCFs was assessed. Bryophyte and lichen collections were conducted within the areas surveyed and focused primarily on habitats with a high potential to support tracked bryophyte and lichen species, and representative ecosystems encountered by the PCFs.

Where rare species were observed, thorough searches were conducted to determine the extent of the populations. The populations were mapped and photographed, UTM

September 2019 Page 8-9

Section 8 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Environmental and Socio-Economic Matters North Corridor Expansion Project GH-002-2019 Additional Written Evidence

coordinates were recorded, and detailed reporting forms were completed for future submission to ACIMS. Voucher specimens of rare species were generally collected. Species identification was confirmed by other established vegetation specialists, or by comparison with specimens at an appropriate herbarium, when necessary.

Where rare ecological communities were observed, the communities were mapped and photographed, and their locations were recorded. Full species lists were recorded and percent cover for each species was estimated.

Non-native and Invasive Species

Provincially listed weed species were recorded at locations where they were observed during the 2019 vegetation ground survey.

Numerical distribution classes were assigned for each listed weed species in each quarter-section or land use where they were observed during the survey, following the Rangeland Health Assessment Guide provided by AEP (Adams et al. 2016).

Forest Condition

Forest Maturity

Forest stands with the potential to be mature and late-successional were identified during the desktop review2 and visited during the 2019 vegetation ground survey. Where late-successional forests were observed during field surveys, they were recorded with photographs and documented on field sheets, including notes on the composition class, the height and size of trees, and the structural diversity of the canopy.

Forest Pests

Vegetation specialists looked for trees with symptoms of forest pests (for example, discoloured needles, pitch tubes, and cankers). Occurrences are noted on field sheets and locations are marked on field maps.

8.3 HERITAGE RESOURCES

A Historic Resources Application for the Project was submitted to Alberta Culture, Multiculturalism and Status of Women (ACMSW) on February 28, 2019. Approval with conditions for North Star Section 2 under the Historical Resources Act (HRA) was granted on June 4, 2019. Requirements were issued for North Star Section 2 by ACMSW for a palaeontological Historic Resources Impact Assessment. Approval with standard requirements for the reporting of the discovery of historic resources

2 NEB Filing ID: A98641-18, PDF pages 84 to 155 of 202.

Page 8-10 September 2019

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Section 8 North Corridor Expansion Project Environmental and Socio-Economic Matters Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

was granted under the Historical Resources Act for the Red Earth Section 3, the Bear Canyon North Extension, and the Hidden Lake North Unit Addition on May 24, May 23, and May 7, 2019, respectively. No requirements with respect to Historic Resource Impact Assessments were issued for the Red Earth Section 3, the Bear Canyon North Extension, and the Hidden Lake North Unit Addition. See Appendix 8-9 for copies of the HRA Approvals

8.4 TRADITIONAL LAND AND RESOURCE USE

Since the filing of the Application, NGTL has received additional TK reports from eight Aboriginal groups that have conducted TK studies for the Project. These groups are: · Beaver First Nation · Cadotte Lake Métis Local 1994 · Doig River First Nation · Horse Lake First Nation · Métis Nation of Alberta Region 6 · Peerless Trout First Nation · Sawridge First Nation · Tallcree First Nation

NGTL has reviewed the results of these studies in the context of ESA and for consideration and incorporation into Project planning, as appropriate. Concerns and recommendations identified in the TK reports received since the Application filing are summarized in Appendix 8-1 to 8-8, along with NGTL’s responses and proposed applicable mitigation measures from the EPP.

Overall, NGTL notes that the traditional land and resource use activities, resources, and features identified in each Aboriginal group’s TK study are generally consistent with those assessed in the ESA and for which the suite of mitigation measures was developed. As such, it has been determined at this time that no changes are required to the residual effects characterizations or significance conclusions of the ESA. Traditional use sites or features which require site-specific mitigation additional to the existing measures in the EPP will be included in the EPP and Environmental Alignment Sheets (EAS) filed prior to construction.

Information gathering during ongoing TK studies and engagement will continue to be considered in Project planning, including the EPP and EAS, as appropriate. NGTL will continue to address questions and concerns from potentially affected Aboriginal groups through its ongoing engagement efforts, should any arise. If sites not previously identified are found on the Project construction footprint during construction, the measures in the Cultural Resource Discovery Contingency Plan will be implemented.

September 2019 Page 8-11

Section 8 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Environmental and Socio-Economic Matters North Corridor Expansion Project GH-002-2019 Additional Written Evidence

8.5 CONCLUSION

Overall, the results of the additional field surveys and ongoing engagement for the Project have not resulted in any changes to the conclusions of the assessment of residual and cumulative effects of the Project. No new interactions were identified between the Project and the elements identified in the ESA. The potential effects, effect pathways, and predicted residual effects associated with the Project fall within the scope of those previously identified. Consequently, the significance conclusions provided within the ESA remain the same.

8.6 LITERATURE CITED

Adams, B.W., G. Ehlert, C. Stone, M. Alexander, D. Lawrence, M. Willoughby, D. Moisey, C. Hinez, A. Burkinshaw, J. Richman, K. France, C. DaMaere, T. Kupsch, T. France, T. Broadbent, L. Blonski, and A.J. Miller. 2016. “Rangeland Health Assessment for Grassland, Forest, and Tame Pasture. Revised March 2016.” AEP, Rangeland Resource Stewardship Section. Accessed June 2018. https://open.alberta.ca/dataset/51cad211-09f6-49bd- 86ef-ca3162f2ea7a/resource/2cadf8f4-ef65-4e48-812e- 10f8daf027a8/download/rangelandhealthassessment-2017.pdf.

Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development (AESRD). 2013. Sensitive Species Inventory Guidelines. April 2013. 128 pp.

Alberta Native Plant Council (ANPC). 2012. Alberta Native Plant Council Guidelines for Rare Vascular Plant Surveys in Alberta – 2012 Update. Edmonton, Alberta. 22 pp.

Page 8-12 September 2019

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Appendix 2-1 North Corridor Expansion Project Moody’s Investors Service Credit Opinion Report Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

Appendix 2-1

Moody’s Investors Service Credit Opinion Report

September 2019

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-1 Additional Written Evidence Moody's Credit Service Investors Report INFRASTRUCTURE AND PROJECT FINANCE

CREDIT OPINION TransCanada PipeLines Limited 5 April 2019 Update following downgrade to Baa1; outlook changed to Update stable Summary TransCanada PipeLines Limited's (TCPL) credit profile is driven by its predictable and growing cash flow, owing to the regulated and contracted nature of its businesses, and its large size and portfolio diversification benefits. Cash flow is typically underpinned by either cost of RATINGS service regulation or long term contracts. Offsetting these strengths are weak financial TransCanada PipeLines Limited metrics and a large CAD36 billion capital program that has experienced execution challenges. Domicile Alberta, Canada This has led to delays in EBITDA growth and some cost overruns. Long Term Rating Baa1 Type LT Issuer Rating Moody’s sees financial metrics improving as the company continues to execute this capital Outlook Stable program over the period 2019-2023, which we expect to be primarily funded with cash

Please see the ratings section at the end of this report flow from operations, assets sales, equity, hybrids and some incremental debt. TCPL’s rating for more information. The ratings and outlook shown incorporates our expectation that EBITDA will grow towards CAD10 billion over this period reflect information as of the publication date. from CAD8.9 billion in 2018, that debt will remain close to CAD50 billion, and that debt to EBITDA will improve from 5.6x in 2018 to about 5x in 2019.

Contacts Our forecasts exclude about CAD20 billion of projects that have not yet been fully Gavin Macfarlane +1.416.214.3864 committed, most notably Keystone XL, and have risks that either make construction VP-Sr Credit Officer uncertain or have a long term spending profile. Large projects like Keystone XL could place [email protected] pressure on financial metrics during construction. Lesley Ritter +1.212.553.1607 AVP-Analyst Exhibit 1 [email protected] Historical Total Debt, EBITDA and Total Debt to EBITDA (CAD Million)

Jim Hempstead +1.212.553.4318 Total Debt EBITDA Debt / EBITDA Downgrade trigger Upgrade trigger $60,000 7.0x

MD-Utilities 6.6x

[email protected] 6.0x $49,820 6.0x $50,000 5.8x $46,267 5.6x 5.4x Yulia Rakityanskaya +1.416.214.3627 $43,159 5.0x Associate Analyst $40,000

$36,780 [email protected] 4.0x $30,622 $30,000 CLIENT SERVICES 3.0x

$20,000 Americas 1-212-553-1653 2.0x

$8,923 $10,000 $7,491 Asia Pacific 852-3551-3077 $6,991 1.0x $5,645 $6,107 Japan 81-3-5408-4100 $- 0.0x Dec-14 Dec-15 Dec-16 Dec-17 Dec-18 EMEA 44-20-7772-5454 Based on consolidated financial data of TransCanada Corporation. Source: Moody's Financial Metrics™

This document has been prepared for the use of Jon Wrathall and is protected by law. It may not be copied, transferred or disseminated unless authorized under a contract with Moody's or otherwise authorized in writing by Moody's. September 2019 Page 1 of 12 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-1 Additional Written Evidence Moody's Credit Service Investors Report MOODY'S INVESTORS SERVICE INFRASTRUCTURE AND PROJECT FINANCE

Credit Strengths » Scale of the company provides financial and operating flexibility

» Portfolio diversification benefits reduce the volatility of the company's overall performance

» Low business risk drives predictable and growing EBITDA

Credit Challenges » Large capital program that has experienced execution challenges

» Weak financial metrics that we expect to improve

» Moderate carbon transition risk

Rating Outlook TCPL’s stable outlook reflects Moody’s expectation that debt to EBITDA will be about 5x in 2019. The stable outlook does not reflect any incremental growth capital projects, including the proposed Keystone XL pipeline. The stable outlook of parent TransCanada, and affiliates NGTL and TransCanada Trust reflects either guarantees or strategic relationships with TCPL. Moody’s has revised the financial metrics it associates with TCPL following the downgrade to reflect changes in its credit profile. Factors that Could Lead to an Upgrade A rating upgrade would require the successful completion of the capital program and a ratio of debt to EBITDA below 4.5x on a sustained basis. Factors that Could Lead to a Downgrade TCPL’s ratings could be downgraded if leverage remains at or above 5.5x. The rating could also be downgraded if there are material changes or additions to the capital program; if the company experiences increased cash flow variability in its core businesses or if the company changes its financial policies. Key Indicators

Exhibit 2 TransCanada PipeLines Limited [1] Dec-14 Dec-15 Dec-16 Dec-17 Dec-18 Net Property Plant and Equipment (USD Million) 36,827 32,866 41,154 46,101 49,038 EBITDA (USD Million) 5,114 4,785 5,279 5,777 6,888 EBITDA / Interest Expense 3.7x 3.6x 3.2x 3.4x 3.8x Debt / EBITDA 5.4x 6.0x 6.6x 5.8x 5.6x (FFO - Maintenance CAPEX) / Distributions 2.0x 2.0x 1.9x 2.1x 3.2x

[1] Based on consolidated financial data of TransCanada Corporation. All ratios are based on 'Adjusted' financial data and incorporate Moody's Global Standard Adjustments for Non- Financial Corporations. Source: Moody's Financial Metrics™

Profile TCPL is the principal subsidiary and debt issuer of TransCanada, headquartered in Calgary, Alberta. TransCanada is an energy infrastructure company with three business segments: Natural Gas Pipelines (70% of 2018 EBITDA including regulated gas storage of 535 Bcf), Liquids Pipelines (21% of 2018 EBITDA), and Energy (9% of 2018 EBITDA including unregulated gas storage of 118 Bcf). TCPL is the General Partner of and owner of a 25.5% interest in TC PipeLines, LP (TCP: Baa2 stable), a publicly traded master limited partnership (MLP) that owns a portfolio of TransCanada's US interstate gas pipelines.

This publication does not announce a credit rating action. For any credit ratings referenced in this publication, please see the ratings tab on the issuer/entity page on www.moodys.com for the most updated credit rating action information and rating history.

2 5 April 2019 TransCanada PipeLines Limited: Update following downgrade to Baa1; outlook changed to stable This document has been prepared for the use of Jon Wrathall and is protected by law. It may not be copied, transferred or disseminated unless authorized under a contract with Moody's or otherwise authorized in writing by Moody's. September 2019 Page 2 of 12 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-1 Additional Written Evidence Moody's Credit Service Investors Report MOODY'S INVESTORS SERVICE INFRASTRUCTURE AND PROJECT FINANCE

Exhibit 3 Exhibit 4 TransCanada Corporation's 2018 Comparable EBITDA by segment TransCanada's rated subsidiaries

% of 2018 Comparable Subsidiary Rating EBITDA Segment Nova Gas Transmission Ltd Baa1/Stable 14% Canadian Natural Gas Pipelines Gas Transmission Northwest LLC A3/Stable 3% U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines Energy ANR Pipeline Company A3/Stable 8% U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines 9% Canadian TC PipeLines, LP Baa2/Stable 6% U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines Natural Gas Columbia Pipeline Group, Inc. Baa1/Positive 17% U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines Pipelines Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P. [1] A3/Stable 1% U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines 28% Bruce Power L.P. [1] Baa2/Stable 4% Energy TransCanada Trust Baa3/Stable 0% Corporate TransCanada American Inv. Ltd. P-2 0% Corporate TransCanada PipeLine USA Ltd P-2 0% Corporate Liquids Pipelines 21% [1] % of EBITDA was calculated based on Income/(Loss) from Equity Investments from the respective entity Source: Moody's Investors Service, TransCanada Corporation's 2018 annual report

Mexico Natural Gas Pipelines U.S. Natural Gas 7% Pipelines 35%

Source: TransCanada Corporation's 2018 annual report

Detailed Credit Considerations Scale and portfolio diversification benefits Substantial financial resources with last twelve months adjusted EBITDA of about CAD8.5 billion, economies of scale from its large and diverse asset base with CAD67 billion of net property, plant and equipment, and strong market access all support current credit quality. Portfolio diversification by geography, business line and counterparty reduces overall cash flow volatility, a key credit strength. While some assets may have moderate levels of correlation, substantial portions of the portfolio are uncorrelated due to the specific business line fundamentals.

Predictable and growing cash flow Cash flow from low business risk assets that are primarily regulated or contracted provides a high degree of certainty, a key credit strength. The regulated NGTL system will continue to expand its rate base of CAD10 billion at FYE 2018, compared to less than CAD4 billion currently for the Mainline. These pipelines are expected to generate stable and growing returns driven by ongoing rate base investments. We expect that a cost of service framework, supported by contracts and a favorable competitive position, will enable the Mainline to continue to earn its allowed ROE. US pipeline earnings should continue to grow with significant investments in the Columbia Pipeline Group driving earnings growth. The US gas pipeline segment generally benefits from a mix of contracts and a strong underlying competitive position. While small, the Mexican gas business is expected to continue to grow and it is not immune to execution risk as evidenced by delays on several projects. Despite these construction delays, the company is receiving payments, highlighting both challenges in completing pipelines and the strong contractual profile often associated with TransCanada's projects.

The liquids segment, currently dominated by the Keystone Base system, is expected to provide relatively stable cash flow until the end of the 20 year contracts in 2030. Key contract terms that support our assumption of stable cash flow generation are the take or pay nature of the contracts covering more than 90%, or 555kbpd, of the 590kbpd pipeline capacity. TCPL is not exposed to underlying commodity prices and key variable costs including power, property taxes and maintenance are flow through costs to shippers. At the end of the contract term TCPL will have fully recovered the capital costs of its initial investment. However the smaller, marketlink portion of the liquids system has short term contracts and more exposure to volume risk. The company was successfully able to monetize capacity driving more than a CAD200 million increase in EBITDA in 2018. The business risk profile of the energy segment has improved significantly over the past several years with the sale and turnback of riskier assets. The remaining power assets are largely contracted. The company has moderate exposure to carbon transition risk that does not have a meaningful impact on operating assets, however they do contribute to an increasingly challenging framework for the development of new projects.

3 5 April 2019 TransCanada PipeLines Limited: Update following downgrade to Baa1; outlook changed to stable This document has been prepared for the use of Jon Wrathall and is protected by law. It may not be copied, transferred or disseminated unless authorized under a contract with Moody's or otherwise authorized in writing by Moody's. September 2019 Page 3 of 12 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-1 Additional Written Evidence Moody's Credit Service Investors Report MOODY'S INVESTORS SERVICE INFRASTRUCTURE AND PROJECT FINANCE

Large capital program has experienced execution challenges The company continues to move forward with its large capital program that supports the company's low business risk profile. The large slate of secured capital projects total about CAD36 billion over the period 2019-2023, of which CAD13 billion has already been spent. These figures are inflated by projects that were originally expected to be placed in service in 2018.

Of the remaining capital expenditure, more than half consists of lower risk NGTL, maintenance modernization and other capacity capital that generally have a lower execution risk profile. Other projects have more execution risk, including the Bruce nuclear refurbishment (CAD2.2 billion), Coastal Gaslink (CAD6.2 billion) and the in-service of three Mexican natural gas pipeline assets (USD3 billion).

Exhibit 5 TransCanada Corporation's Near-term capital projects as of 31 December 2018

Carrying value at (unaudited - billions of CAD) Expected in-service date Estimated project cost December 31, 2018 Canadian Natural Gas Pipelines

Canadian Mainline 2019 - 2021 0.3 - NGTL System 2019 2.8 1.4 2020 1.7 0.2 2021 2.8 - 2022 1.3 - Coastal GasLink 2023 6.2 0.1 Regulated maintenance capital expenditures 2019 - 2021 1.8 - U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines

Columbia Gas Mountaineer XPress 2019 US 3.2 US 2.9 Modernization II 2019 - 2020 US 1.1 US 0.5 Columbia Gulf Gulf XPress 2019 US 0.6 US 0.5 Other capacity capital 2019 - 2022 US 0.9 US 0.1 Regulated maintenance capital expenditures 2019 - 2021 US 2.0 - Mexico Natural Gas Pipelines

Sur de Texas 2019 US 1.5 US 1.4 Villa de Reyes 2019 US 0.8 US 0.6 Tula 2020 US 0.7 US 0.6 Liquids Pipelines

White Spruce 2019 0.2 0.1 Other capacity capital 2020 0.1 - Recoverable maintenance capital expenditures 2019 - 2021 0.1 - Energy

Napanee 2019 1.7 1.6 Bruce Power – life extension 2019 - 2023 2.2 0.6 Other

Non- recoverable maintenance capital expenditures 2019 - 2021 0.7 0.2 32.7 10.8

Foreign exchange impact on secured projects 3.9 2.4 Total near-term projects (billions of CAD) 36.6 13.2

Reflects U.S./Canada foreign exchange rate of 1.36 at December 31, 2018. Source: TransCanada Corporation's 2018 annual report

We have not included in our forecasts about CAD20 billion of projects under development that either do not have a clear path to execution or have an investment horizon beyond 2023. Accounting for about half of the total is the very high profile Keystone XL (KXL) pipeline project. This project, similar to other large infrastructure projects, is exposed to very high levels of environmental, social and governance (ESG) risks that makes the ultimate in-service prospects of the project uncertain. Large projects like it may be harder to

4 5 April 2019 TransCanada PipeLines Limited: Update following downgrade to Baa1; outlook changed to stable This document has been prepared for the use of Jon Wrathall and is protected by law. It may not be copied, transferred or disseminated unless authorized under a contract with Moody's or otherwise authorized in writing by Moody's. September 2019 Page 4 of 12 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-1 Additional Written Evidence Moody's Credit Service Investors Report MOODY'S INVESTORS SERVICE INFRASTRUCTURE AND PROJECT FINANCE

execute on time and within budget and will put pressure on key financial metrics during construction, both negatives for credit quality. KXL continues to make progress, and received a new presidential permit on 29 March 2019 that may mitigate challenges the project has faced in Montana. The next significant step could be a decision from the Nebraska Supreme Court, on an appeal of the Nebraska PSC route approval as the only significant legal/regulatory challenge to the pipeline outstanding. The decision appears likely early in the second quarter of 2019.

The company has been challenged to execute its capital program. In March of 2018, the company expected to complete discrete projects totaling about CAD10 billion during the remainder of 2018 that would contribute EBITDA. However, only CAD2 billion of those projects were fully complete and in service contributing EBITDA in 2018. The CAD10 billion of projects had cost-overruns of 15-20%. These projects were generally smaller projects with a lower profile that we would generally have expected to be completed on time and budget. The rationale for the projects delays and overruns vary, but clearly the company has been challenged to execute its capital program. The company is receiving payments on all of its Mexican assets under terms of the contracts. However because Force Majeure has been declared on these 3 projects and the assets are not yet in service the payments will not be reflected in revenue and EBITDA until the assets are placed into service. Cost recovery provisions, if any, vary among the projects and are often reflected as higher tolls.

Exhibit 6 2018 Discrete projects forecast to be completed as of March 2018

March 2018 Estimated cost expected in (bn) as of March Estimated cost service date 2018 (bn) FYE 2018 Currency Full in service date of assets NGTL System 2018 0.6 0.6 CAD on time

Columbia Gas

WB Express 2018 0.8 0.9 USD Q4 2018 Mountaineer Express 2018 2.6 3.2 USD Mar-19 Cameron Access 2018 0.3 0.3 USD Q1 2018 Gulf Express 2018 0.6 0.6 USD Mar-19

Mexico

Sur de Texas 2018 1.3 1.5 USD Q2 2019 Villa de Reyes 2018 0.6 0.8 USD 2019 Tula 2019 0.7 0.7 USD 2020

Energy

Napanee Q4 2018 1.3 1.7 CAD Q2 2019

Discrete projects expected to be completed in 2018 (as 10.3 12.2 of March 2018)

Projects fully completed and contributing to EBITDA in 2.1 2018 For simplicity this assumes a constant FX rate of 1.3 Source: Moody's Investors Service, TransCanada Corporation

Weak financial metrics expected to improve Financial metrics are currently weak with a ratio of Debt/EBITDA of 5.6x at FYE 2018, above our previous expectations for year-end and above the revised downgrade threshold of 5.5x. Our analysis incorporates our expectation that Debt/EBITDA will improve to about 5x in 2019. Adjusting to eliminate EBITDA associated with the CAD630 milllion sale of Cartier wind in October of 2018 has a negligible impact on financial metrics.

We expect projects going into service to drive transparent increases in EBITDA over the next few years. Moody’s has assumed that the majority of the capital program is funded with cash from operations and equity in the form of a DRIP or further hybrid issuance, assets sales (including joint ventures) and some incremental debt financing. Key variables that could change our forecasts include a positive final investment decision on KXL, material assets sales, clarity on financing for Coastal Gaslink and new additions to the capital program. The company has indicated that they have identified CAD500 million of EBITDA generating assets that could be sold to support the balance sheet, however currently only the sale of the Coolidge Generating Station for US465 million has been announced

5 5 April 2019 TransCanada PipeLines Limited: Update following downgrade to Baa1; outlook changed to stable This document has been prepared for the use of Jon Wrathall and is protected by law. It may not be copied, transferred or disseminated unless authorized under a contract with Moody's or otherwise authorized in writing by Moody's. September 2019 Page 5 of 12 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-1 Additional Written Evidence Moody's Credit Service Investors Report MOODY'S INVESTORS SERVICE INFRASTRUCTURE AND PROJECT FINANCE

and is expected to close in mid-2019. Our analysis also incorporates some foreign exchange movements that had a negative impact on financial metrics at FYE 2018.

In our forward calculations of maintenance capex we have assumed maintenance capex of CAD1.7 billion. This figure includes both recoverable and non-recoverable capex, while the company reported only non-recoverable capex of CAD254 million for FYE 2018 which is reflected in FYE 2018 calculations. Inclusive of the DRIP, our distribution metric declines to 1.7x from 2.5x and declines further to 1.5x when using depreciation instead of maintenance capex. We consider these other metrics and place greater emphasis on these other metrics in the future. Directionally, distribution coverage metrics are expected to decline, leading to less financial metric flexibility on a forecast basis. Prior to 2018 the company reported both non-recoverable and recoverable maintenance capex and the change led to the significant improvement in the distribution coverage metric in 2018.

Moderate exposure to carbon transition risk We view the midstream sector, including TCPL, as having moderate risk exposure to carbon transition risks. TCPL’s exposure is indirect as change in commodity prices affect its shippers, which may then have an impact on volumes through its systems and counterparty risks. A key issue for the sector is that regulations can drive competitive changes among basins. TCPL is somewhat insulated from this issue as a result of its diversification.

Structural considerations TCPL is the sole source of funds to support hybrids at TransCanada, and as such we include these hybrids (CAD2.5 billion) in our consolidated financial analysis of TCPL. We do not notch TCPL down for structural subordination and complexity given the relatively straightforward organizational structure and structural subordination that is partially offset by unlevered assets, assets with low levels of leverage and diversity. However the company does plan to increase its complexity and structural subordination with, for example, the planned sell-down of its 100% interest and subsequent project finance of Coastal Gaslink and plans to issue incremental new debt at the Columbia Pipeline Group (Baa1 positive) in the next few years. These actions may lead us to reassess our view of structural subordination and lead us to emphasize a proportionately consolidated approach to financial metrics. At FYE 2018 proportionately consolidated debt/EBITDA was very similar to consolidated debt/EBITDA.

TransCanada’s Baa2 Issuer Rating reflects a 1-notch adjustment below the rating of TCPL as a result of its structural subordination to TCPL. The rated obligations of TransCanada Trust, TransCanada Pipelines USA Ltd (TCPL USA) and TransCanada American Investments Ltd reflect a guarantee provided by TCPL. The TransCanada Trust Baa3 rating is two notches lower than TCPL’s Baa1 senior unsecured rating and is consistent with a 2-notch differential we apply to preferred shares with investment grade companies. The TransCanada Trust notes are guaranteed by TCPL on a subordinated basis however the TransCanada Trust notes have an automatic exchange provision that converts the notes into preferred shares of TCPL in the event of financial distress. The Prime-2 short-term commercial paper rating for TCPL USA and TransCanada American Investments Ltd reflects the guarantee provided by TCPL. NGTL’s rating is strongly correlated with that of TCPL based on its strategic importance and TCPL’s position as a key creditor. Liquidity Analysis TransCanada currently has an adequate liquidity profile; however, its current committed sources of alternate liquidity are modest relative to its capital program and the company relies in part on a short-term facility that must be renewed annually. This liquidity arrangement is based on the company's continued ability to extend its expiring 364-day facility and refinance its upcoming debt maturities, which is a liquidity weakness. For example, TransCanada has a US$4.5 billion credit facility expiring at the end of 2019. The company has historically not experienced difficulty in extending its facilities and we believe that it continues to have strong access to the capital markets a key consideration in our adequate assessment of the company's liquidity profile.

At the end of December 2018, TransCanada reported cash on hand of CAD 446 million. In 2018, the company generated negative free cash flow of CAD 5.3 billion as a result of CFO of CAD6.6 billion, capital expenses of CAD9.9 billion, and dividends of CAD2 billion (all figures are Moody's adjusted). In accordance with the reference above, TransCanada continues to have a large slate of secured capital projects totaling about CAD36 billion over the period 2019-2023.

At 11 February 2019, TransCanada had CAD10.5 billion (CAD10.5 billion of unused capacity) of committed revolving credit facilities.

6 5 April 2019 TransCanada PipeLines Limited: Update following downgrade to Baa1; outlook changed to stable This document has been prepared for the use of Jon Wrathall and is protected by law. It may not be copied, transferred or disseminated unless authorized under a contract with Moody's or otherwise authorized in writing by Moody's. September 2019 Page 6 of 12 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-1 Additional Written Evidence Moody's Credit Service Investors Report MOODY'S INVESTORS SERVICE INFRASTRUCTURE AND PROJECT FINANCE

Exhibit 7 Available committed revolving credit facilities as of 11 February 2019

Borrower Amount Unused capacity Description Matures TCPL CAD3.0 billion CAD3.0 billion Supports TCPL's Canadian dollar commercial paper program and December 2023 is used for general corporate purposes TCPL/TCPL US$4.5 billion US$4.5 billion Supports TCPL and TCPL USA's U.S. dollar commercial paper December 2019 USA/Columbia/TAIL programs, and is used for general corporate purposes of the borrowers, guaranteed by TCPL TCPL/TCPL US$1.0 billion US$1.0 billion Used for general corporate purposes of the borrowers, December 2021 USA/Columbia/TAIL guaranteed by TCPL Total CAD10.5 billion CAD10.5 billion

Source: TransCanada Corporation's 2018 annual report

The facilities do not require the company to represent and warrant as to a material adverse event at each borrowing, which supports liquidity. These facilities include a single financial covenant setting the maximum consolidated debt/capitalization at 75%. TransCanada has ample headroom under that covenant. In the next 12 months TransCanada has about CAD1.7 billion of long-term debt coming due and we expect TransCanada to refinance these debt obligations as they mature. Rating Methodology and Scorecard Factors

Exhibit 8 Rating Factors TransCanada PipeLines Limited

Current Moody's 12-18 Month Forward View Energy, Oil & Gas - Midstream [MLP] Industry Grid [1][2] FY 12/31/2018 As of Date Published [3] Factor 1 : Scale (25%) Measure Score Measure Score a) Net Property Plant and Equipment (USD Million) $49,037.8 Aa $51,000 - $55,000 Aa b) EBITDA (USD Million) $6,887.7 Aa $7,300 - $7,700 Aaa Factor 2 : Business Profile (25%) a) Estimated Price & Volume Risk Exposure A A A A Factor 3 : Financial Leverage & Distribution Profile (40%) a) EBITDA / Interest Expense 3.8x Ba 3.9x - 4.2x Ba b) Debt / EBITDA 5.6x B 5x Ba c) (FFO - Maintenance CAPEX) / Distributions 3.2x A 2.3x A Factor 4 : Financial Policy (10%) a) Financial Policy Baa Baa Baa Baa Rating: a) Indicated Outcome from Scorecard Baa1 A3 b) Actual Rating Assigned Baa1 Baa1

[1] Based on consolidated financial data of TransCanada Corporation. All ratios are based on 'Adjusted' financial data and incorporate Moody's Global Standard Adjustments for Non- Financial Corporations. [2] As of 12/31/2018. [3] This represents Moody's forward view; not the view of the issuer; and unless noted in the text, does not incorporate significant acquisitions and divestitures. Source: Moody's Financial Metrics™

7 5 April 2019 TransCanada PipeLines Limited: Update following downgrade to Baa1; outlook changed to stable This document has been prepared for the use of Jon Wrathall and is protected by law. It may not be copied, transferred or disseminated unless authorized under a contract with Moody's or otherwise authorized in writing by Moody's. September 2019 Page 7 of 12 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-1 Additional Written Evidence Moody's Credit Service Investors Report MOODY'S INVESTORS SERVICE INFRASTRUCTURE AND PROJECT FINANCE

Appendix

Exhibit 9 Peer Comparison Table [1]

TransCanada PipeLines Limited (based on TransCanada Enbridge Inc. Kinder Morgan, Inc. Corporation's financial statements)

Baa1 Stable Baa2 Positive Baa2 Stable

FYE FYE FYE FYE FYE FYE FYE FYE FYE (in US millions) Dec-16 Dec-17 Dec-18 Dec-16 Dec-17 Dec-18 Dec-16 Dec-17 Dec-18 Revenue 9,381 10,324 10,537 26,118 33,617 36,141 13,058 13,705 14,144 EBITDA 5,279 5,777 6,888 5,505 7,471 9,661 7,638 7,640 8,063 Net Property Plant and Equipment 41,154 46,101 49,038 48,261 72,809 69,631 39,319 40,756 38,598 EBITDA / Interest Expense 3.2x 3.4x 3.8x 3.5x 3.2x 4.0x 4.1x 4.1x 4.1x Debt / EBITDA 6.6x 5.8x 5.6x 6.2x 7.0x 5.2x 5.8x 5.5x 5.1x (FFO - Maintenance CAPEX) / Distributions 1.9x 2.1x 3.2x 2.0x 1.3x 1.6x 3.5x 3.1x 2.2x [1] All figures & ratios calculated using Moody’s estimates & standard adjustments. FYE = Financial Year-End. LTM = Last Twelve Months. RUR* = Ratings under Review, where UPG = for upgrade and DNG = for downgrade. Source: Moody’s Financial Metrics™

Exhibit 10 TransCanada PipeLines Limited Moody's-Adjusted Debt Breakdown FYE FYE FYE FYE FYE FYE (In CN $ Millions) Dec-13 Dec-14 Dec-15 Dec-16 Dec-17 Dec-18 As Reported Debt 25,770.0 28,384.0 35,083.0 44,855.0 43,511.0 50,241.0

Pensions 72.0 260.0 189.0 248.0 195.0 332.0 Operating Leases 651.7 1,140.0 1,117.5 890.7 657.9 596.9 Hybrid Securities 737.8 837.5 390.5 345.3 -1,200.5 -1,423.0 Non-Standard Adjustments 0.0 0.0 0.0 -72.0 -4.0 73.0 Moody's - Adjusted Debt 27,231.5 30,621.5 36,780.0 46,266.9 43,159.4 49,819.9

2018 non-standard adjustments number includes an adjustment for the following items: unamortized debt discount and issue costs, fair value adjustment related to the acquisition of Columbia. Based on consolidated financial data of TransCanada Corporation. All figures are calculated using Moody’s estimates and standard adjustments. Source: Moody’s Financial Metrics™

Exhibit 11 TransCanada PipeLines Limited Moody's-Adjusted EBITDA Breakdown FYE FYE FYE FYE FYE FYE (In CN $ Millions) Dec-13 Dec-14 Dec-15 Dec-16 Dec-17 Dec-18 As Reported Debt 5,013.0 5,633.0 2,029.0 4,774.0 7,430.0 8,564.0

Pensions 38.0 15.0 20.0 -1.0 -1.0 -50.0 Operating Leases 98.0 114.0 131.0 145.0 93.0 84.0 Stock Compensation 0.0 0.0 56.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 Unusual 0.0 -117.0 3,870.0 2,073.0 -31.0 325.0 Moody's - Adjusted Debt 5,149.0 5,645.0 6,106.8 6,991.0 7,491.0 8,923.0

2018 unusual adjustments number includes an adjustment for the following unusual items: unrealized gains/losses from commodities and foreign exchange derivative instruments, gain/ (loss) on assets held for sale/sold, impairment losses and allowance for funds used during construction. Based on consolidated financial data of TransCanada Corporation. All figures are calculated using Moody’s estimates and standard adjustments. Source: Moody’s Financial Metrics™

8 5 April 2019 TransCanada PipeLines Limited: Update following downgrade to Baa1; outlook changed to stable This document has been prepared for the use of Jon Wrathall and is protected by law. It may not be copied, transferred or disseminated unless authorized under a contract with Moody's or otherwise authorized in writing by Moody's. September 2019 Page 8 of 12 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-1 Additional Written Evidence Moody's Credit Service Investors Report MOODY'S INVESTORS SERVICE INFRASTRUCTURE AND PROJECT FINANCE

Exhibit 12 TransCanada PipeLines Limited Selected Historic Moody's Adjusted Financial Data

FYE FYE FYE FYE FYE CAD (Million) Dec-14 Dec-15 Dec-16 Dec-17 Dec-18 INCOME STATEMENT Revenue 10,185.0 11,300.0 12,424.0 13,387.0 13,651.0 EBITDA 5,645.0 6,106.8 6,991.0 7,491.0 8,923.0 EBIT 3,957.9 4,250.7 4,938.8 5,364.6 6,515.9 Interest expense 1,527.2 1,695.8 2,167.5 2,192.9 2,330.7 BALANCE SHEET Cash & Cash Equivalents 489.0 850.0 1,016.0 1,089.0 446.0 Total Debt 30,621.5 36,780.0 46,266.9 43,159.4 49,819.9 Total Liabilities 41,356.3 49,468.0 63,778.9 60,515.4 68,815.3 CASH FLOW Capital Expenditures (CAPEX) 4,154.1 4,240.1 5,239.2 7,427.4 9,847.1 Cash from Investing Activities (3,961.1) (4,690.1) (18,720.2) (3,597.4) (9,952.1) Dividends 1,586.9 1,764.3 1,859.6 1,855.5 2,048.9 Retained Cash Flow (RCF) 2,431.1 2,735.1 2,949.2 3,677.4 4,671.1 RCF / Debt 7.9% 7.4% 6.4% 8.5% 9.4% Free Cash Flow (FCF) (1,875.0) (1,807.0) (2,044.0) (4,021.0) (5,313.0) FCF / Debt -6.1% -4.9% -4.4% -9.3% -10.7% PROFITABILITY % Change in Sales (YoY) 15.8% 10.9% 9.9% 7.8% 2.0% EBIT Margin % 38.9% 37.6% 39.8% 40.1% 47.7% EBITA Margin % 38.9% 37.6% 39.8% 40.1% 47.7% EBITDA Margin % 55.4% 54.0% 56.3% 56.0% 65.4% INTEREST COVERAGE EBIT / Interest Expense 2.6x 2.5x 2.3x 2.4x 2.8x EBITDA / Interest Expense 3.7x 3.6x 3.2x 3.4x 3.8x (EBITDA - CAPEX) / Interest Expense 1.0x 1.1x 0.8x 0.0x -0.4x LEVERAGE Debt / EBITDA 5.4x 6.0x 6.6x 5.8x 5.6x Net Debt/EBITDA 5.3x 5.9x 6.5x 5.6x 5.5x Debt / (EBITDA - CAPEX) 20.5x 19.7x 26.4x 678.6x -53.9x Avg.Assets / Avg.Equity 3.2x 3.7x 3.8x 3.4x 3.3x

Based on consolidated financial data of TransCanada Corporation. All figures are calculated using Moody’s estimates and standard adjustments. Source: Moody’s Financial Metrics™

9 5 April 2019 TransCanada PipeLines Limited: Update following downgrade to Baa1; outlook changed to stable This document has been prepared for the use of Jon Wrathall and is protected by law. It may not be copied, transferred or disseminated unless authorized under a contract with Moody's or otherwise authorized in writing by Moody's. September 2019 Page 9 of 12 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-1 Additional Written Evidence Moody's Credit Service Investors Report MOODY'S INVESTORS SERVICE INFRASTRUCTURE AND PROJECT FINANCE

Ratings

Exhibit 13 Category Moody's Rating TRANSCANADA PIPELINES LIMITED Outlook Stable Issuer Rating Baa1 Senior Unsecured Baa1 Jr Subordinate Baa2 Commercial Paper P-2 PARENT: TRANSCANADA CORPORATION Outlook Stable Issuer Rating Baa2 TRANSCANADA TRUST Outlook Stable Bkd Subordinate Baa3 COLUMBIA PIPELINE GROUP, INC. Outlook Positive Senior Unsecured Baa1 TC PIPELINES, LP Outlook Stable Senior Unsecured Baa2 NOVA GAS TRANSMISSION LTD. Outlook Stable Senior Unsecured Baa1 ANR PIPELINE COMPANY Outlook Stable Senior Unsecured A3 GAS TRANSMISSION NORTHWEST LLC Outlook Stable Senior Unsecured A3 TRANSCANADA AMERICAN INV. LTD. Outlook No Outlook Bkd Commercial Paper P-2 TRANSCANADA PIPELINE USA LTD. Outlook No Outlook Bkd Commercial Paper P-2 Source: Moody's Investors Service

10 5 April 2019 TransCanada PipeLines Limited: Update following downgrade to Baa1; outlook changed to stable This document has been prepared for the use of Jon Wrathall and is protected by law. It may not be copied, transferred or disseminated unless authorized under a contract with Moody's or otherwise authorized in writing by Moody's. September 2019 Page 10 of 12 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-1 Additional Written Evidence Moody's Credit Service Investors Report MOODY'S INVESTORS SERVICE INFRASTRUCTURE AND PROJECT FINANCE

© 2019 Moody’s Corporation, Moody’s Investors Service, Inc., Moody’s Analytics, Inc. and/or their licensors and affiliates (collectively, “MOODY’S”). All rights reserved. CREDIT RATINGS ISSUED BY MOODY'S INVESTORS SERVICE, INC. AND ITS RATINGS AFFILIATES (“MIS”) ARE MOODY’S CURRENT OPINIONS OF THE RELATIVE FUTURE CREDIT RISK OF ENTITIES, CREDIT COMMITMENTS, OR DEBT OR DEBT-LIKE SECURITIES, AND MOODY’S PUBLICATIONS MAY INCLUDE MOODY’S CURRENT OPINIONS OF THE RELATIVE FUTURE CREDIT RISK OF ENTITIES, CREDIT COMMITMENTS, OR DEBT OR DEBT-LIKE SECURITIES. MOODY’S DEFINES CREDIT RISK AS THE RISK THAT AN ENTITY MAY NOT MEET ITS CONTRACTUAL FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS AS THEY COME DUE AND ANY ESTIMATED FINANCIAL LOSS IN THE EVENT OF DEFAULT OR IMPAIRMENT. SEE MOODY’S RATING SYMBOLS AND DEFINITIONS PUBLICATION FOR INFORMATION ON THE TYPES OF CONTRACTUAL FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS ADDRESSED BY MOODY’S RATINGS. CREDIT RATINGS DO NOT ADDRESS ANY OTHER RISK, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO: LIQUIDITY RISK, MARKET VALUE RISK, OR PRICE VOLATILITY. CREDIT RATINGS AND MOODY’S OPINIONS INCLUDED IN MOODY’S PUBLICATIONS ARE NOT STATEMENTS OF CURRENT OR HISTORICAL FACT. MOODY’S PUBLICATIONS MAY ALSO INCLUDE QUANTITATIVE MODEL-BASED ESTIMATES OF CREDIT RISK AND RELATED OPINIONS OR COMMENTARY PUBLISHED BY MOODY’S ANALYTICS, INC. CREDIT RATINGS AND MOODY’S PUBLICATIONS DO NOT CONSTITUTE OR PROVIDE INVESTMENT OR FINANCIAL ADVICE, AND CREDIT RATINGS AND MOODY’S PUBLICATIONS ARE NOT AND DO NOT PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS TO PURCHASE, SELL, OR HOLD PARTICULAR SECURITIES. NEITHER CREDIT RATINGS NOR MOODY’S PUBLICATIONS COMMENT ON THE SUITABILITY OF AN INVESTMENT FOR ANY PARTICULAR INVESTOR. MOODY’S ISSUES ITS CREDIT RATINGS AND PUBLISHES MOODY’S PUBLICATIONS WITH THE EXPECTATION AND UNDERSTANDING THAT EACH INVESTOR WILL, WITH DUE CARE, MAKE ITS OWN STUDY AND EVALUATION OF EACH SECURITY THAT IS UNDER CONSIDERATION FOR PURCHASE, HOLDING, OR SALE. MOODY’S CREDIT RATINGS AND MOODY’S PUBLICATIONS ARE NOT INTENDED FOR USE BY RETAIL INVESTORS AND IT WOULD BE RECKLESS AND INAPPROPRIATE FOR RETAIL INVESTORS TO USE MOODY’S CREDIT RATINGS OR MOODY’S PUBLICATIONS WHEN MAKING AN INVESTMENT DECISION. IF IN DOUBT YOU SHOULD CONTACT YOUR FINANCIAL OR OTHER PROFESSIONAL ADVISER. ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS PROTECTED BY LAW, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, COPYRIGHT LAW, AND NONE OF SUCH INFORMATION MAY BE COPIED OR OTHERWISE REPRODUCED, REPACKAGED, FURTHER TRANSMITTED, TRANSFERRED, DISSEMINATED, REDISTRIBUTED OR RESOLD, OR STORED FOR SUBSEQUENT USE FOR ANY SUCH PURPOSE, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, IN ANY FORM OR MANNER OR BY ANY MEANS WHATSOEVER, BY ANY PERSON WITHOUT MOODY’S PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT. CREDIT RATINGS AND MOODY’S PUBLICATIONS ARE NOT INTENDED FOR USE BY ANY PERSON AS A BENCHMARK AS THAT TERM IS DEFINED FOR REGULATORY PURPOSES AND MUST NOT BE USED IN ANY WAY THAT COULD RESULT IN THEM BEING CONSIDERED A BENCHMARK. All information contained herein is obtained by MOODY’S from sources believed by it to be accurate and reliable. Because of the possibility of human or mechanical error as well as other factors, however, all information contained herein is provided “AS IS” without warranty of any kind. MOODY'S adopts all necessary measures so that the information it uses in assigning a credit rating is of sufficient quality and from sources MOODY'S considers to be reliable including, when appropriate, independent third-party sources. However, MOODY’S is not an auditor and cannot in every instance independently verify or validate information received in the rating process or in preparing the Moody’s publications. To the extent permitted by law, MOODY’S and its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, licensors and suppliers disclaim liability to any person or entity for any indirect, special, consequential, or incidental losses or damages whatsoever arising from or in connection with the information contained herein or the use of or inability to use any such information, even if MOODY’S or any of its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, licensors or suppliers is advised in advance of the possibility of such losses or damages, including but not limited to: (a) any loss of present or prospective profits or (b) any loss or damage arising where the relevant financial instrument is not the subject of a particular credit rating assigned by MOODY’S. To the extent permitted by law, MOODY’S and its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, licensors and suppliers disclaim liability for any direct or compensatory losses or damages caused to any person or entity, including but not limited to by any negligence (but excluding fraud, willful misconduct or any other type of liability that, for the avoidance of doubt, by law cannot be excluded) on the part of, or any contingency within or beyond the control of, MOODY’S or any of its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, licensors or suppliers, arising from or in connection with the information contained herein or the use of or inability to use any such information. NO WARRANTY, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, AS TO THE ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE OF ANY CREDIT RATING OR OTHER OPINION OR INFORMATION IS GIVEN OR MADE BY MOODY’S IN ANY FORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER. Moody’s Investors Service, Inc., a wholly-owned credit rating agency subsidiary of Moody’s Corporation (“MCO”), hereby discloses that most issuers of debt securities (including corporate and municipal bonds, debentures, notes and commercial paper) and preferred stock rated by Moody’s Investors Service, Inc. have, prior to assignment of any rating, agreed to pay to Moody’s Investors Service, Inc. for ratings opinions and services rendered by it fees ranging from $1,000 to approximately $2,700,000. MCO and MIS also maintain policies and procedures to address the independence of MIS’s ratings and rating processes. Information regarding certain affiliations that may exist between directors of MCO and rated entities, and between entities who hold ratings from MIS and have also publicly reported to the SEC an ownership interest in MCO of more than 5%, is posted annually at www.moodys.com under the heading “Investor Relations — Corporate Governance — Director and Shareholder Affiliation Policy.” Additional terms for Australia only: Any publication into Australia of this document is pursuant to the Australian Financial Services License of MOODY’S affiliate, Moody’s Investors Service Pty Limited ABN 61 003 399 657AFSL 336969 and/or Moody’s Analytics Australia Pty Ltd ABN 94 105 136 972 AFSL 383569 (as applicable). This document is intended to be provided only to “wholesale clients” within the meaning of section 761G of the Corporations Act 2001. By continuing to access this document from within Australia, you represent to MOODY’S that you are, or are accessing the document as a representative of, a “wholesale client” and that neither you nor the entity you represent will directly or indirectly disseminate this document or its contents to “retail clients” within the meaning of section 761G of the Corporations Act 2001. MOODY’S credit rating is an opinion as to the creditworthiness of a debt obligation of the issuer, not on the equity securities of the issuer or any form of security that is available to retail investors. Additional terms for Japan only: Moody's Japan K.K. (“MJKK”) is a wholly-owned credit rating agency subsidiary of Moody's Group Japan G.K., which is wholly-owned by Moody’s Overseas Holdings Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of MCO. Moody’s SF Japan K.K. (“MSFJ”) is a wholly-owned credit rating agency subsidiary of MJKK. MSFJ is not a Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organization (“NRSRO”). Therefore, credit ratings assigned by MSFJ are Non-NRSRO Credit Ratings. Non-NRSRO Credit Ratings are assigned by an entity that is not a NRSRO and, consequently, the rated obligation will not qualify for certain types of treatment under U.S. laws. MJKK and MSFJ are credit rating agencies registered with the Japan Financial Services Agency and their registration numbers are FSA Commissioner (Ratings) No. 2 and 3 respectively. MJKK or MSFJ (as applicable) hereby disclose that most issuers of debt securities (including corporate and municipal bonds, debentures, notes and commercial paper) and preferred stock rated by MJKK or MSFJ (as applicable) have, prior to assignment of any rating, agreed to pay to MJKK or MSFJ (as applicable) for ratings opinions and services rendered by it fees ranging from JPY125,000 to approximately JPY250,000,000. MJKK and MSFJ also maintain policies and procedures to address Japanese regulatory requirements.

REPORT NUMBER 1162361

11 5 April 2019 TransCanada PipeLines Limited: Update following downgrade to Baa1; outlook changed to stable This document has been prepared for the use of Jon Wrathall and is protected by law. It may not be copied, transferred or disseminated unless authorized under a contract with Moody's or otherwise authorized in writing by Moody's. September 2019 Page 11 of 12 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-1 Additional Written Evidence Moody's Credit Service Investors Report MOODY'S INVESTORS SERVICE INFRASTRUCTURE AND PROJECT FINANCE

CLIENT SERVICES

Americas 1-212-553-1653 Asia Pacific 852-3551-3077 Japan 81-3-5408-4100 EMEA 44-20-7772-5454

12 5 April 2019 TransCanada PipeLines Limited: Update following downgrade to Baa1; outlook changed to stable

This document has been prepared for the use of Jon Wrathall and is protected by law. It may not be copied, transferred or disseminated unless authorized under a contract with Moody's or otherwise authorized in writing by Moody's. September 2019 Page 12 of 12 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Appendix 2-2 North Corridor Expansion Project Fitch Ratings Report Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

Appendix 2-2

Fitch Ratings Report

September 2019

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-2 Additional Written Evidence Fitch Ratings Report

Fitch Affirms TC Energy Corporation at 'A-'; Outlook Stable

Fitch Ratings-New York-26 June 2019: Fitch Rating has affirmed the 'A-' Long-Term Issuer Default Rating (IDR) of TC Energy Corporation (formerly known as TransCanada Corporation; TRP) and 'BBB' preferred share rating. The TRP senior unsecured rating is withdrawn, as a consequence of there being no such debt. Fitch has affirmed the IDR of TransCanada PipeLines Limited (TCPL) at 'A-', the senior unsecured rating at 'A-' and the short-term IDR and CP rating at 'F2'. Fitch has also affirmed TransCanada Trust's (Trust) junior subordinated rating at 'BBB'. Trust's junior subordinated notes are guaranteed by TCPL on a subordinated basis. The Rating Outlook for TRP and TCPL is Stable.

The ratings on TRP, TCPL and Trust reflect the group's large scale and cash flow predictability. The predictable quality of TRP's cash flow stems from the company's strong portfolio of assets, which generate approximately 95% of cash flows from either regulatory rate orders or long-term contracts. The regulatory-based cash flows and the contract cash flows remove almost all customer-demand variability from TRP's earnings. Concerns include contract management issues for the Mexico Natural Gas Pipelines segment, execution of a large capital investment program and rapid dividend growth rate guidance, while also improving leverage metrics. TRP expects to grow dividends by at least 8% per annum through 2021.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Recent Report of an Arbitration Request Gives Rise to Political Risk Concern: News outlets are reporting that TRP's partner in the Sur de Texas project has disclosed that Comision Federal de Electricidad (CFE) has requested arbitration regarding a project or projects that TransCanada is building in Mexico. Fitch's rating case expects slightly under 10% of adjusted EBITDA to come from the Mexico Natural Gas Pipelines segment. This EBITDA is a mix of old, seasoned, and well-utilized pipelines, as well as three that are under construction (with the largest one reported to be mechanically complete). The projects under construction have been receiving force majeure payments from CFE for approximately one year. The advent of an arbitration proceeding raises political risk over the entire Mexico segment, and the possibility of the stoppage, and potentially, the disgorgement of past payments (whether by offset or otherwise) have implications for Fitch's views on overall business risk and leverage forecasts. Regarding leverage forecasts, TransCanada is expected to be somewhat weakly positioned against the negative leverage sensitivity. Fitch will monitor this reported arbitration request closely. For context, TransCanada's business in Mexico has been in existence for decades, and it has been without material negative credit impact during that time.

Diversified Operations Pay Off: While all of TRP's five segments exhibit low business risk, there are

September 2019 Page 1 of 8 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-2 Additional Written Evidence Fitch Ratings Report

some residual risks that are impossible to extinguish. For instance, on some regulated U.S. pipelines, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) requires 10% of capacity be left open for spot market nominations. Of importance in assessing the company's overall business risk is that some of these residual risks are behaving with a lack of correlation. Compared to Fitch's expectations for 2018 adjusted EBITDA, the Liquids segment did much better than expected, slightly offsetting the negative impacts of higher unplanned outage days at the Bruce Nuclear Power Station, and force majeure status at Sur de Texas. Fitch regards TransCanada's business risk as among the lowest in the midstream sector.

Moreover, the two largest natural gas pipeline segments (Canada and U.S.) are assessed to have extremely low business risk. Since the FERC changed the way it regulates natural gas pipelines in the mid-1990s, there have been no material FERC-regulated natural gas pipeline bankruptcies. This track record is impressive given the many new entrants as the industry vastly increased the service available to customers. The Canadian utility (all types of utilities) sector bankruptcy frequency is lower than that of the U.S. (as adjusted for the size difference between the countries).

Positive Surprise from the Footprint's Opportunity: TransCanada's expansive business is throwing off more profitable opportunities than expected. Comparing the roster of secured projects versus a listing of about a year ago, the 2019 building slate in the multi-year Nova Gas Transmission Ltd expansion has increased by $400 million (with more increases in the out years). The Bruce life extension multi-year program has increased by $1.3 billion. Various parts of the Columbia network have raised Fitch's estimate for 2019 newly-sanctioned capex. While some of the increased capex (excluding investments in joint ventures) is due to late completions, it is evident that the footprint requires Fitch to revise its forecast of run-rate capex. In parallel, Fitch is boosting its leverage negative sensitivity from 4.5x to 5.0x.

Beneficial Size and Scope: TRP is one of the largest North American midstream companies. TRP's three Natural Gas Pipelines segments transport product that fulfills over one-quarter of continental natural gas demand. TRP's two other segments also feature world-scale assets that furnish stable cash flows. For instance, the Energy segment contains Bruce Power (6,400 megawatts), which annually vies for the status of the world's largest nuclear power station by kilowatt-hour production. Twenty percent of western Canadian crude oil exports are transported on the Liquids Pipelines segment's Keystone Pipeline system.

Successful Execution on Growth Projects: The rating is further supported by TRP's development, construction and operational execution ability. Execution has been good during two years in which TRP administered the acquired large construction program of Columbia Pipeline Group, Inc.'s (CPG; IDR BBB+/Stable). In terms of operational execution, TRP took advantage of good market conditions recently to take bids, and then execute contracts, on additional firm long-term service on the Marketlink crude oil pipeline. The Liquids Pipelines segment has successfully extended the reach of the base Keystone Pipeline. The Energy segment features many plants that TransCanada caused to be built from either a "green field," or, in the case of Bruce Power, expanded in size by bringing "laid up" units back into commercial operation.

Equity and Subordinated Debt Issuance Trails Off: As was widespread across the midstream sector in 2018, the aggregate equity content from TransCanada's issuance of equity and subordinated debt fell compared to the previous year. Positively, TransCanada's common equity issuance placed in the

September 2019 Page 2 of 8 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-2 Additional Written Evidence Fitch Ratings Report

market in 2018 was greater than in 2017, as was cash retained in the business by use of the dividend reinvestment plan. More than offsetting those flows was lower equity content from the issuance of subordinated debt. Given the high run-rate growth capex that Fitch now forecasts, Fitch expects TransCanada to be balanced in its mix of senior debt, and other securities that are equity or have equity content. Fitch expects 2020 total debt to adjusted EBITDA to be in a range of 4.7x-4.9x.

DERIVATION SUMMARY

TransCanada's credit profile compares well with its peers on the factors of scale and breadth of operations. The company is the most geographically diverse in the midstream sector, being unique in having a material business outside of the U.S. and Canada. The Mexico business is mature, and has a stable history; Fitch expects that business to continue to be strong. Construction and operating risk in the business segments range from low-to-medium complexity, with Bruce Power being the primary driver of "medium" risk. Regulatory risk with respect to permitting is of moderate difficulty in the current politicized environment for energy. Fitch believes that TCPL has good relations with each of the National Energy Board (NEB) and the FERC.

TransCanada Corporation (TRP) is similar to Enterprise Products Operating LLC (EPO; BBB+/Stable) on many points of comparison. Both are very large companies, each has for many years had a relatively simple structure, each demonstrates a good track record of execution and each implements balanced financial policies. The two companies have little segmental overlap, with the one segment that is common to both companies being Crude Oil Pipelines (and for each company this segment was the last one added to the portfolio of segments). TRP obtains about 95% of its run-rate cash flow from regulatory rate orders or very long-term contracts (measured at inception). This cash flow profile is the main reason that TRP is one notch higher than EPO, at 'A-'. The cash flow profile offsets the large leverage profile advantage EPO enjoys. TRP had adjusted debt to EBITDA leverage of approximately 5.5x in 2018, and the company has a target to delever further this year. EPO's leverage in 2018 was approximately 3.5x. As to relevant common stock beta against the S&P 500, both issuers have the exact same value of 0.83 (the measured stock is TRP's U.S. dollar stock). Capital access and cost of capital are strong for each company.

TransCanada is weakly positioned in its ratings category and EPO is strongly positioned in its rating category. The roughly two turns of leverage, which for fiscal 2018 EPO was superior to TRP, almost equals the importance of the revenue-assurance features that serve as the solid foundation for TRP.

KEY ASSUMPTIONS

Fitch's Key Assumptions Within Our Rating Case for the Issuer --Canadian and U.S. natural gas pipelines earn the returns/profit levels underlying their recent rate cases, including successful re-contracting at the U.S. pipelines. --Contracted cash flows are obtained through successful operational performance at the Liquids Pipelines and Energy operations. --Approximately $6.5 billion-$7.0 billion in capex (and excluding investments in joint ventures) in 2019. --Coastal GasLink joint venture is established, and asset-level financing is raised, on TRP's

September 2019 Page 3 of 8 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-2 Additional Written Evidence Fitch Ratings Report

announced plan. --Northern Courier partial monetization plans are fulfilled. --Balanced funding of common equity (including retaining cash via the dividend reinvestment plan), subordinated debt and senior debt. --CAD/USD rate of $1.30.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Developments That May, Individually or Collectively, Lead to Positive Rating Action --A positive rating action is not anticipated in the medium term; however, total debt to adjusted EBITDA sustained below 3.5x could lead to a positive rating action.

Developments That May, Individually or Collectively, Lead to Negative Rating Action --Adverse regulatory outcomes. --An arbitration request from CFE gives rise to a shortfall in cash flows from the Mexico Natural Gas Pipelines segment that threatens to cause a breaching of the negative sensitivity on leverage (below), and, more generally, the relationship with CFE becomes one where the business risk of the entire division rises meaningfully. --An acquisition that represents a change in the current business strategy of operating businesses that are based on cost-of-service principles or very long-term take-or-pay contracts. --Setting a lower performance standard for on-time, on-budget construction completion. --Lack of sufficient issuance of common equity (including the dividend reinvestment plan) and subordinated debt. --An inability to raise non-recourse debt for Coastal GasLink, or, post-debt-raise, a placement of the project debt on-balance sheet; or the injection of partner equity for significant cost over-runs. --In the context of a run-rate of capex (and excluding investments in joint ventures) of more than $6 billion, a sustained period of total debt to adjusted EBITDA of 5.0x or above. Fitch notes that an end- of-period significant strengthening of the U.S. dollar generally drives LTM leverage higher. Fitch expects TRP to manage its positioning of the balance sheet with this effect of exchange rates factored in.

LIQUIDITY

Liquidity is adequate. On a consolidated basis, TRP had $11.7 billion of unutilized, unsecured credit facilities and $872 million of cash on hand. The credit facilities support CP programs for several subsidiaries and are guaranteed at the TCPL-level. Revolving credit facilities mature at TCPL mature in December 2019, December 2021, and December 2023, and demand credit facilities are rolled over every year. TCPL's liquidity is adequate to cover its debt maturities in 2019.

FULL LIST OF RATING ACTIONS

Fitch has taken the following rating actions: TC Energy Corporation --Long-term IDR affirmed at 'A-';

September 2019 Page 4 of 8 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-2 Additional Written Evidence Fitch Ratings Report

--Senior unsecured 'A-' withdrawn;; --Preferred stock affirmed at 'BBB'.

TransCanada PipeLines Limited --Long-term IDR affirmed at 'A-'; --Short-term IDR affirmed at 'F2'; --Senior unsecured rating affirmed at 'A-'; --CP rating affirmed at 'F2'.

TransCanada Trust --Junior subordinated notes affirmed at 'BBB'.

The Rating Outlook is Stable.

Contact:

Primary Analyst Thomas Brownsword Senior Director +1 646-582-4881 Fitch Ratings, Inc. 33 Whitehall Street New York, NY 10004

Secondary Analyst Michael Ruggirello, CFA Associate Director +1 416-644-6586

Committee Chairperson Phil Smyth, CFA Senior Director +1 212-908-0531

Summary of Financial Statement Adjustments - As per Fitch's "Treatment and Notching of Hybrids in Non-Financial Corporate and REIT Credit Analysis" sector-specific criteria, Fitch treats the relevant securities for TRP and Trust as 50% debt and 50% equity. Referenced leverage metrics are adjusted as follows: consolidated balances and flows are used; hybrids get 50% debt credit, 50% equity credit; distributions from investees accounted for under the equity method of accounting are included in EBITDA, and equity earnings from these entities are excluded. Fitch looks at a variety of leverage calculations but features in its commentary the foregoing calculation.

Additional information is available on www.fitchratings.com. For regulatory purposes in various jurisdictions, the supervisory analyst named above is deemed to be the primary analyst for this issuer; the principal analyst is deemed to be the secondary.

September 2019 Page 5 of 8 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-2 Additional Written Evidence Fitch Ratings Report

Media Relations: Elizabeth Fogerty, New York, Tel: +1 212 908 0526, Email: [email protected]

Additional information is available on www.fitchratings.com Applicable Criteria Corporate Hybrids Treatment and Notching Criteria (pub. 09 Nov 2018) Corporate Rating Criteria (pub. 19 Feb 2019) Corporates Notching and Recovery Ratings Criteria (pub. 23 Mar 2018) Parent and Subsidiary Rating Linkage (pub. 16 Jul 2018) Short-Term Ratings Criteria (pub. 02 May 2019)

Additional Disclosures Dodd-Frank Rating Information Disclosure Form Solicitation Status Endorsement Policy

ALL FITCH CREDIT RATINGS ARE SUBJECT TO CERTAIN LIMITATIONS AND DISCLAIMERS. PLEASE READ THESE LIMITATIONS AND DISCLAIMERS BY FOLLOWING THIS LINK: HTTPS://WWW.FITCHRATINGS.COM/UNDERSTANDINGCREDITRATINGS. IN ADDITION, RATING DEFINITIONS AND THE TERMS OF USE OF SUCH RATINGS ARE AVAILABLE ON THE AGENCY'S PUBLIC WEB SITE AT WWW.FITCHRATINGS.COM. PUBLISHED RATINGS, CRITERIA, AND METHODOLOGIES ARE AVAILABLE FROM THIS SITE AT ALL TIMES. FITCH'S CODE OF CONDUCT, CONFIDENTIALITY, CONFLICTS OF INTEREST, AFFILIATE FIREWALL, COMPLIANCE, AND OTHER RELEVANT POLICIES AND PROCEDURES ARE ALSO AVAILABLE FROM THE CODE OF CONDUCT SECTION OF THIS SITE. DIRECTORS AND SHAREHOLDERS RELEVANT INTERESTS ARE AVAILABLE AT HTTPS://WWW.FITCHRATINGS.COM/SITE/REGULATORY. FITCH MAY HAVE PROVIDED ANOTHER PERMISSIBLE SERVICE TO THE RATED ENTITY OR ITS RELATED THIRD PARTIES. DETAILS OF THIS SERVICE FOR RATINGS FOR WHICH THE LEAD ANALYST IS BASED IN AN EU-REGISTERED ENTITY CAN BE FOUND ON THE ENTITY SUMMARY PAGE FOR THIS ISSUER ON THE FITCH WEBSITE.

Copyright © 2019 by Fitch Ratings, Inc., Fitch Ratings Ltd. and its subsidiaries. 33 Whitehall Street, NY, NY 10004. Telephone: 1-800-753-4824, (212) 908-0500. Fax: (212) 480-4435. Reproduction or retransmission in whole or in part is prohibited except by permission. All rights reserved. In issuing and maintaining its ratings and in making other reports (including forecast information), Fitch relies on factual information it receives from issuers and underwriters and from other sources Fitch believes to be credible. Fitch conducts a reasonable investigation of the factual information relied upon by it in accordance with its ratings methodology, and obtains reasonable verification of that information from independent sources, to the extent such sources are available for a given security or in a given jurisdiction. The manner of Fitch's factual investigation and the scope of the third-party verification it obtains will vary depending on the nature of the rated security and its issuer, the requirements and practices in the jurisdiction in which the rated security is offered and sold and/or the issuer is located, the availability and nature of relevant public information, access to the management of the issuer and its advisers, the availability of pre-existing third-party verifications such as audit reports, agreed-upon procedures letters, appraisals, actuarial reports, engineering

September 2019 Page 6 of 8 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-2 Additional Written Evidence Fitch Ratings Report

reports, legal opinions and other reports provided by third parties, the availability of independent and competent third- party verification sources with respect to the particular security or in the particular jurisdiction of the issuer, and a variety of other factors. Users of Fitch's ratings and reports should understand that neither an enhanced factual investigation nor any third-party verification can ensure that all of the information Fitch relies on in connection with a rating or a report will be accurate and complete. Ultimately, the issuer and its advisers are responsible for the accuracy of the information they provide to Fitch and to the market in offering documents and other reports. In issuing its ratings and its reports, Fitch must rely on the work of experts, including independent auditors with respect to financial statements and attorneys with respect to legal and tax matters. Further, ratings and forecasts of financial and other information are inherently forward-looking and embody assumptions and predictions about future events that by their nature cannot be verified as facts. As a result, despite any verification of current facts, ratings and forecasts can be affected by future events or conditions that were not anticipated at the time a rating or forecast was issued or affirmed. The information in this report is provided "as is" without any representation or warranty of any kind, and Fitch does not represent or warrant that the report or any of its contents will meet any of the requirements of a recipient of the report. A Fitch rating is an opinion as to the creditworthiness of a security. This opinion and reports made by Fitch are based on established criteria and methodologies that Fitch is continuously evaluating and updating. Therefore, ratings and reports are the collective work product of Fitch and no individual, or group of individuals, is solely responsible for a rating or a report. The rating does not address the risk of loss due to risks other than credit risk, unless such risk is specifically mentioned. Fitch is not engaged in the offer or sale of any security. All Fitch reports have shared authorship. Individuals identified in a Fitch report were involved in, but are not solely responsible for, the opinions stated therein. The individuals are named for contact purposes only. A report providing a Fitch rating is neither a prospectus nor a substitute for the information assembled, verified and presented to investors by the issuer and its agents in connection with the sale of the securities. Ratings may be changed or withdrawn at any time for any reason in the sole discretion of Fitch. Fitch does not provide investment advice of any sort. Ratings are not a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security. Ratings do not comment on the adequacy of market price, the suitability of any security for a particular investor, or the tax-exempt nature or taxability of payments made in respect to any security. Fitch receives fees from issuers, insurers, guarantors, other obligors, and underwriters for rating securities. Such fees generally vary from US$1,000 to US$750,000 (or the applicable currency equivalent) per issue. In certain cases, Fitch will rate all or a number of issues issued by a particular issuer, or insured or guaranteed by a particular insurer or guarantor, for a single annual fee. Such fees are expected to vary from US$10,000 to US$1,500,000 (or the applicable currency equivalent). The assignment, publication, or dissemination of a rating by Fitch shall not constitute a consent by Fitch to use its name as an expert in connection with any registration statement filed under the United States securities laws, the Financial Services and Markets Act of 2000 of the United Kingdom, or the securities laws of any particular jurisdiction. Due to the relative efficiency of electronic publishing and distribution, Fitch research may be available to electronic subscribers up to three days earlier than to print subscribers. For Australia, New Zealand, Taiwan and South Korea only: Fitch Australia Pty Ltd holds an Australian financial services license (AFS license no. 337123) which authorizes it to provide credit ratings to wholesale clients only. Credit ratings information published by Fitch is not intended to be used by persons who are retail clients within the meaning of the Corporations Act 2001 Fitch Ratings, Inc. is registered with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission as a Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organization (the "NRSRO"). While certain of the NRSRO's credit rating subsidiaries are listed on Item 3 of Form NRSRO and as such are authorized to issue credit

September 2019 Page 7 of 8 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-2 Additional Written Evidence Fitch Ratings Report

ratings on behalf of the NRSRO (see https://www.fitchratings.com/site/regulatory), other credit rating subsidiaries are not listed on Form NRSRO (the "non-NRSROs") and therefore credit ratings issued by those subsidiaries are not issued on behalf of the NRSRO. However, non-NRSRO personnel may participate in determining credit ratings issued by or on behalf of the NRSRO.

SOLICITATION STATUS

The ratings above were solicited and assigned or maintained at the request of the rated entity/issuer or a related third party. Any exceptions follow below.

Endorsement Policy

Fitch's approach to ratings endorsement so that ratings produced outside the EU may be used by regulated entities within the EU for regulatory purposes, pursuant to the terms of the EU Regulation with respect to credit rating agencies, can be found on the EU Regulatory Disclosures page. The endorsement status of all International ratings is provided within the entity summary page for each rated entity and in the transaction detail pages for all structured finance transactions on the Fitch website. These disclosures are updated on a daily basis.

Fitch Updates Terms of Use & Privacy Policy

We have updated our Terms of Use and Privacy Policies which cover all of Fitch Group's websites. Learn more.

September 2019 Page 8 of 8 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Appendix 2-3 North Corridor Expansion Project DBRS Report Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

Appendix 2-3

DBRS Report

September 2019

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-3 Additional Written Evidence DBRS Report

Rating Report TC Energy Corporation & TransCanada PipeLines Limited

Ram Vadali, CFA, CPA Ravikanth Rai, CFA Guru Durairaj, CFA +1 416 597 7526 +1 416 597 7388 +1 416 597 7357 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Ratings

Issuing Entity Debt Rating Rating Action Trend TransCanada PipeLines Limited Issuer Rating A (low) Confirmed Stable TransCanada PipeLines Limited Unsecured Debentures & Notes A (low) Confirmed Stable TransCanada PipeLines Limited Junior Subordinated Notes 1 BBB Confirmed Stable TransCanada PipeLines Limited Commercial Paper 2 R-1 (low) Confirmed Stable TC Energy Corporation Preferred Shares - Cumulative Pfd-2 (low) Confirmed Stable 1 The Junior Subordinated Notes rating of TransCanada PipeLines Limited pertains to the Junior Subordinated Notes that are due in 2067. 2 Commercial Paper rating pertains to the $2 billion Canadian CP program.

Rating Update

On June 5, 2019, DBRS Limited (DBRS) confirmed the ratings (Keystone XL)) in the 2019–2023 period ($9.9 billion spent as at of TC Energy Corporation (TCC) and its wholly owned subsid- Q1 2019). The Company plans to spend approximately $7.1 billion iary, TransCanada PipeLines Limited (TCPL), as listed above. All in capex for 2019 and placed approximately $5.3 billion of growth trends remain Stable. The Preferred Shares - Cumulative rating projects in service in Q1 2019. of TCC, which owns 100% of TCPL and holds no other material assets, is based on the credit strength of TCPL and the expecta- DBRS is concerned that TCC’s medium-term capital intensity, tion that no debt will be issued by TCC. DBRS ratings are deter- combined with its guidance to grow dividends by 8% to 10% an- mined using the consolidated credit profile of TCC. nually through 2021, is expected to result in free cash flow defi- cits and constrain any significant improvement in credit metrics. TCC’s ratings reflect the relatively stable cash flow generation TCC plans to self-fund a majority of its large capital program supported by the Company’s diversified energy infrastructure as- with operating cash flow and portfolio management involving set portfolio of natural gas pipelines, liquids pipelines and power asset divestitures and joint ventures without issuing discrete generation assets in North America. The Company’s credit met- equity. TCC has identified assets generating approximately rics have modestly improved in the past three years and DBRS $500 million in EBITDA for these portfolio management initia- expects further improvement in metrics to support the current tives. DBRS expects to see gradual improvement in credit met- rating. A majority of TCC’s operating cash flow is underpinned rics, as the Company benefits from cash flow growth from major by cost of service rate-regulated and long-term contracted assets capital projects placed in service in the next two years and con- with no commodity risk. Liquefied natural gas exports, the power certed debt reduction initiatives. sector and the petrochemical sector continue to drive end-user natural gas demand growth in North America. TCC’s infrastruc- While DBRS does not anticipate an upgrade to the ratings in the ture assets are difficult to replicate and provide connectivity near term, TCC’s ratings could be negatively affected by delays from prolific basins of the Marcellus/Utica Shale Formation, in execution of capital projects, adverse regulatory decisions and the Permian Basin and Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin weaker contract profiles. TCC’s ratings could also be pressured (WCSB) to strong and growing demand markets. should the Company fail to maintain operating cash flow to debt at or above 15% and debt to capital at or below 60% by the end TCC continues to execute on $30.3 billion of commercially se- of 2019. cured capital projects (excluding the Keystone XL Pipeline

Financial Information 12 mos. 3 mos. ended March 31 ended March 31 Year ended December 31 2019 2018 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 Cash flow/total debt & equivalents 14.6% 14.7% 13.9% 13.6% 13.0% 10.8% 13.6% Total debt & equivalents/capital 59.7% 59.0% 59.7% 59.9% 58.8% 61.0% 64.2% EBIT interest coverage 1 3.22 3.03 2.87 2.83 2.56 2.55 2.75 1 Includes dividends/distributions received from equity investments in numerator.

Corporate Finance: Energy June 14, 2019 September 2019 Page 1 of 19 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-3 Additional Written Evidence DBRS Report

Rating Report | TC Energy Corporation & TransCanada PipeLines Limited DBRS.COM 2

Issuer Description

TCPL is a leading integrated energy services company in North America involved in natural gas and liquids transmission as well as electricity generation. TCC is TCPL’s parent company and holds no material assets other than TCPL’s common shares.

Rating Considerations

before interest and taxes (EBIT)-to-interest at 2.87 times (x) for Strengths the last 12 months (LTM) ended March 31, 2019. TCC is expected to improve its financial profile through self-funding a major- 1. Regulated and contractual earnings The Company benefits from the regulatory and/or contractual ity of its capex needs using operating cash flow and portfolio framework within its three operating segments. Approximately management initiatives. 95% of TCC’s EBITDA is derived from regulated assets and long-term contracts. The Company’s $30.3 billion of near-to- Challenges medium-term growth projects are underpinned by long-term contracts or cost of service regulated rates. Mexican pipe- 1. Competition in Natural Gas Pipelines segment lines are underpinned by 25-year take-or-pay contracts with Changing gas flow dynamics resulting from large-scale shale Comisión Federal de Electricidad (CFE), Mexico’s state-owned gas production and demand levels have resulted in a highly utility. The National Energy Board (NEB) and the Federal Energy competitive market for natural gas pipelines in North America. Regulatory Commission (FERC) have been relatively supportive Increased connectivity to new supply basins closer to markets in providing the regulatory framework necessary for pipelines traditionally supplied by TCC has resulted in higher basin-on- to have the opportunity to recover their costs and earn an ad- basin competition, negatively affecting netbacks for WCSB pro- equate return on equity (ROE). A substantial proportion of the ducers and volumes flowing on TCC’s Canadian Mainline. CPG EBITDA from TCC’s Energy segment is supported by long-term faces competition from existing pipelines in the Marcellus and power contracts with creditworthy parties (e.g., the Independent Utica basins, namely the Texas Eastern Transmission, Tennessee Electricity System Operator (IESO) and Hydro-Québec, both Gas, the Vector Pipeline, Dominion Transmission, Energy rated A (high) with Stable trends by DBRS). DBRS notes that Transfer Partners’ 3.25 billion cubic feet per day (bcf/d) Rover Columbia Pipeline Group (CPG) has a weaker counterparty risk Pipeline and the 1.5 bcf/d NEXUS Gas Transmission Pipeline profile and shorter-duration contracts, which include a material owned by Enbridge Inc. (rated BBB (high) with Stable trend by percentage of non-investment-grade shippers. DBRS) and DTE Energy. A number of new natural gas pipeline projects, including expansions, are coming into service in the 2. Well-diversified infrastructure portfolio next two years in the Appalachian and Permian basins to expand The Company’s diversified infrastructure assets cover the connectivity to demand markets, which could result in increased Canadian, U.S. and Mexican Natural Gas Pipelines, Liquids competitive conditions. Pipelines and Energy segments. With the acquisition of CPG, TCC has one of the largest natural gas pipeline networks in North 2. Potential medium-term pressure on credit metrics America, with access to key producing basins and connectivity TCC’s capital program consists of $30.3 billion of commercially to strong demand markets. TCC’s natural gas pipelines serve secured projects and over $20.0 billion of projects under devel- approximately 25% of U.S. natural gas demand. CPG’s major as- opment. DBRS believes that the capex, combined with 8% to 10% set, the Columbia Gas Transmission (CGT) system, connects the dividend growth, could pressure credit metrics. TCC’s credit Marcellus and Utica shale gas production basin to the Gulf Coast metrics will likely be pressured in the medium term, particularly and also meets the utility demand in the Northeastern United if final investment decisions are made on some of its large-scale States. TCC’s liquids pipelines handle approximately 20% of projects such as Keystone XL. DBRS expects that the length of western Canadian crude oil exported to the United States. TCC is time for credit metrics being pressured would be dependent on also one of the largest independent power generators in Canada, the timing of approval, funding plan, the capex spending pat- with approximately 5,100 megawatts (MW) of power generation. tern for the projects and the date on which projects are placed An additional 900 MW of contracted generation capacity will into service. come into service when the Napanee, Ontario, gas-fired genera- tion project is expected to be commissioned in 2H 2019. 3. Rising environmental, regulatory and political risks TCC faces environmental, regulatory and political risks with re- 3. Reasonable balance sheet and credit metrics spect to several projects. These risks are more pronounced for The Company’s financial profile remains reasonable, with debt- liquids pipeline projects and large U.S. interstate pipeline proj- to-capital at 59.7%, cash flow-to-debt at 13.9% and earnings ects than intrastate pipelines, as evidenced by the delays for the

Corporate Finance: Energy June 14, 2019 September 2019 Page 2 of 19 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-3 Additional Written Evidence DBRS Report

Rating Report | TC Energy Corporation & TransCanada PipeLines Limited DBRS.COM 3

Rating Considerations (CONTINUED)

Trans Mountain Expansion, Keystone XL and Enbridge Line 3 only come into effect when Keystone XL is completed. There is Replacement projects. Furthermore, in 2018, the Government some volume and commodity risk in TCC’s liquids marketing ac- of Canada released Bill C-69 to enact the Impact Assessment tivities. In the Power and Storage segment, there could be vari- Act and the Canadian Energy Regulator Act and to amend the ability at Bruce Power L.P. (Bruce Power, rated BBB with a Stable Navigation Protection Act. Should Bill C-69 be enacted, major trend by DBRS) as a result of plant availability, which will fluc- projects are expected to have a longer, more complex regula- tuate as work is carried out under its life-extension agreement tory approval process and could cause significant uncertainty with the IESO. CPG’s revenues can be affected by contracted vol- for new energy infrastructure projects in Canada. These chal- umes, volumes delivered and seasonality. There is volume risk lenges could also affect the long-term growth potential of the associated with CPG’s fee-based storage and midstream opera- energy sector. tions and the Columbia Gulf transmission system has some un- contracted volumes. 4. Volume risk The Company faces moderate volume risk within some of its assets. Volumes flowing on the southern leg of the Keystone Pipeline System in the United States (the Cushing-Marketlink Pipeline segment) are underpinned by short-term contracts or move on an uncontracted (spot) basis, while long-term contracts

Earnings and Outlook

12 mos. ended Income Statement 3 mos. ended March 31 March 31 Year ended December 31 ($ millions, US GAAP, DBRS-adjusted) 2019 2018 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 Canadian Natural Gas Pipelines 556 494 2,441 2,379 2,144 2,182 2,216 U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines 972 804 3,211 3,043 2,357 1,682 970 Mexico Natural Gas Pipelines 146 160 593 607 519 332 213 Liquids Pipelines EBITDA before extras 563 431 1,981 1,849 1,348 1,152 1,308 Power and Storage EBITDA before extras 151 184 719 752 1,030 1,281 1,254 Segment EBITDA before extras 2,388 2,073 8,945 8,630 7,398 6,629 5,961 Corporate and other (190) (161) (680) (651) (743) (525) (529) Distributions from equity investments 277 234 1,028 985 970 844 793 EBITDA before extras 1 2,475 2,146 9,293 8,964 7,625 6,948 6,225 Depreciation & amortization (608) (535) (2,423) (2,350) (2,048) (1,939) (1,765) EBIT before extras 1 1,867 1,611 6,870 6,614 5,577 5,009 4,460 Interest expense, net (543) (505) (2,255) (2,217) (2,002) (1,787) (1,339) Net income before extras and taxes 1,324 1,106 4,615 4,397 3,575 3,222 3,121 Other income (expense) (68) (23) (106) (61) 121 (164) (369) Income taxes recovered (paid) (228) (173) (748) (693) (839) (841) (903) Net income before extraordinary items 1,028 910 3,761 3,643 2,857 2,217 1,849 Extraordinary items 17 (136) 212 59 300 (1,984) (2,995) Reported net income 1,045 774 3,973 3,702 3,157 233 (1,146)

Segment EBITDA Breakdown % Canadian Natural Gas Pipelines 23% 24% 27% 28% 29% 33% 37% % U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines 41% 39% 36% 35% 32% 25% 16% % Mexico Natural Gas Pipelines 6% 8% 7% 7% 7% 5% 4% % Liquids Pipelines 24% 21% 22% 21% 18% 17% 22% % Power and Storage 6% 9% 8% 9% 14% 19% 21% 1 Includes dividends/distributions received from equity investments.

Corporate Finance: Energy June 14, 2019 September 2019 Page 3 of 19 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-3 Additional Written Evidence DBRS Report

Rating Report | TC Energy Corporation & TransCanada PipeLines Limited DBRS.COM 4

Earnings and Outlook (CONTINUED)

2018 Summary • TCC’s earnings are supported by a diversified infrastructure • Earnings from the Canadian Natural Gas Pipelines segment in- asset portfolio of pipelines and power assets in Canada, the creased because of higher rates approved in both the Mainline United States and Mexico. NEB 2018 Decision and the Nova Gas Transmission Limited • Net income (before extras) for 2018 was higher compared with (NGTL) 2018-2019 settlement, partially offset by lower incen- 2017, mainly driven by higher earnings contribution from all tive earnings and flow-through income taxes. business segments, except Power and Storage, partially offset • Earnings from the Mexico Natural Gas Pipelines segment rose by higher depreciation from new projects placed in service because of incremental earnings from a CFE tariff increase and and higher interest expense. as a result of changes in timing of revenue recognition. • Earnings from the U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines segment • Earnings from Power and Storage segment decreased year over (EBITDA) were significantly higher because of incremental year (YOY), primarily reflecting the sale of U.S. Northeast pow- earnings from Columbia Gas and Columbia Gulf growth proj- er generation assets in Q2 2017 and reduced contribution from ects placed in service and additional contract sales on the ANR Bruce Power due to lower volumes from higher outage days. Pipeline and Great Lakes. • Earnings from the Liquids Pipelines segment also increased 2019 Outlook significantly, reflecting higher volumes on the Keystone • Q1 2019 earnings before extras increased YOY due to higher Pipeline System, increased contribution from liquids market- contribution from the Natural Gas and Liquids Pipelines seg- ing activities and a full-year contribution from intra-Alberta ments, higher earnings from assets placed in service and high- pipelines placed in service in the second half of 2017. er volumes on the Keystone System. These higher earnings were partially offset by lower Power and Storage earnings. • DBRS expects TCC’s earnings to be higher in 2019 because of (1) incremental revenues from the completion of (i) expan- sion projects on the Columbia Gas and Columbia Gulf sys- tems; (ii) the Napanee generating station; (iii) the Sur de Texas Pipeline; (2) higher equity income from Bruce Power due to increased contract pricing in April 2019 to $75 per megawatt hour (MWh) from $68 per MWh; and (3) growth in the rate base for the NGTL System, partially offset by higher interest expense from recent long-term debt issuances and lower earn- ings in the Power and Storage segment because of the sale of the Cartier Wind Farms and the Coolidge Generating Station.

Corporate Finance: Energy June 14, 2019 September 2019 Page 4 of 19 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-3 Additional Written Evidence DBRS Report

Rating Report | TC Energy Corporation & TransCanada PipeLines Limited DBRS.COM 5

Financial Profile 12 mos. ended Consolidated Financial Profile 3 mos. ended March 31 March 31 Year ended December 31 ($ millions, US GAAP, DBRS-adjusted) 2019 2018 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 Net income before extras 1,028 910 3,761 3,643 2,857 2,217 1,849 Depreciation and amortization 608 535 2,423 2,350 2,055 1,939 1,765 Deferred income taxes, NCI and other 171 174 661 664 591 665 1,116 Cash Flow from Operations 1,807 1,619 6,845 6,657 5,503 4,821 4,730 Capex and equity investments (2,211) (1,975) (11,044) (10,808) (8,848) (5,340) (4,913) Dividends (common, preferred & NCI) (515) (483) (2,020) (1,988) (1,839) (1,889) (1,792) Gross free cash flow (before working capital) (919) (839) (6,219) (6,139) (5,184) (2,408) (1,975) Changes in non-cash working capital items 142 (207) 247 (102) (273) 248 (346) Gross Free Cash Flow (777) (1,046) (5,972) (6,241) (5,457) (2,160) (2,321) Business acquisitions, net of cash 0 0 0 0 0 (13,608) (236) Proceeds on sale of invest. and other (33) 139 690 862 5,110 38 382 Net Free Cash Flow (810) (907) (5,282) (5,379) (347) (15,730) (2,175)

Inc. (dec.) in total debt 1,168 679 3,994 3,505 (2,404) 4,851 1,558 Inc. (dec.) in non-controlling int. financing 0 49 0 49 225 215 55 Inc. (dec.) in hybrid debt securities 0 0 0 0 3,468 1,549 917 Inc. (dec.) in preferred shares 0 0 0 0 0 1,474 243 Inc. (dec.) in common shares 68 357 893 1,182 (869) 7,807 (237) Inc. (dec.) in other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Dec. (inc.) in cash balances (426) (178) 395 643 (73) (166) (361) Funding Sources 810 907 5,282 5,379 347 15,730 2,175

Total debt & equivalents 1 49,396 44,114 49,396 49,019 42,441 44,532 34,760 Total equity 1 33,408 30,655 33,408 32,821 29,692 28,445 19,417 Cash flow/total debt & equivalents 14.6% 14.7% 13.9% 13.6% 13.0% 10.8% 13.6% Total debt & equivalents/capital 59.7% 59.0% 59.7% 59.9% 58.8% 61.0% 64.2% EBIT interest coverage 2 3.22 3.03 2.87 2.83 2.56 2.55 2.75 Cash flow interest coverage 4.12 4.05 3.86 3.84 3.53 3.46 3.92 Fixed-charges coverage (EBIT-based) 2 2.94 2.75 2.63 2.58 2.33 2.37 2.55 Common & pref divs/net income (before extras) 71.4% 71.9% 73.0% 73.1% 82.0% 83.1% 84.6% Note: NCI = Noncontrolling Interests. Common equity and total capital exclude accumulated other comprehensive income for ratio calculations. 1 Calculated as per DBRS Criteria: Preferred Share and Hybrid Security Criteria for Corporate Issuers. 2 Includes dividends/distributions received from equity investments in numerator.

2018 Summary TCC’s financial profile remains reasonable, as it is supported by amount includes $6.2 billion towards Coastal GasLink, which the Company’s diversified infrastructure asset portfolio of pipe- represents 100% of capex prior to potential joint-venture (JV) lines and power assets in Canada, the United States and Mexico. partners or project financing. • At 13.6%, cash flow-to-debt improved in 2018 from the previ- • TCPL expects to spend approximately $7.1 billion (including ous year, reflecting the higher operating cash flow as a result equity investment) for growth capex in 2019 related largely to of strong contributions from most operating segments, despite Natural Gas Pipeline projects (including CPG, NGTL, Coastal higher debt. GasLink and Mexico) and Liquids Pipelines projects (includ- • The strong operating earnings during 2018 helped bring down ing Keystone XL and Power and Storage projects, including TCC’s dividend payout ratio: 73.1% of net income before extras Bruce Power). in 2018 versus 82% in 2017. • TCC plans to self-fund a majority of its large capital pro- gram with its operating cash flow and portfolio management 2019 Outlook initiatives that involve asset divestitures and JVs without is- • TCC has $30.3 billion (including maintenance capital) of com- suing discrete equity. In addition to the recently closed sale mercially secured capital projects under execution, which of the Coolidge Generating Station, TCC has identified as- are expected to provide meaningful cash flow growth. The sets with approximately $500 million in EBITDA for these

Corporate Finance: Energy June 14, 2019 September 2019 Page 5 of 19 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-3 Additional Written Evidence DBRS Report

Rating Report | TC Energy Corporation & TransCanada PipeLines Limited DBRS.COM 6

Financial Profile (CONTINUED) portfolio-management initiatives. In addition to refinancing • TCC expects to grow its dividends by 8% to 10% annually maturing debt, TCC expects to issue approximately $3 bil- through 2021. lion of incremental senior debt during the next three years. • DBRS expects gradual improvement in credit metrics follow- The Company also plans to issue $1.5 billion of hybrid securi- ing the deleveraging from recent asset sale proceeds and growth ties to fund its capital projects and intends to use its dividend projects coming into service. reinvestment plan program, taking into consideration the tim- ing of asset sales and growth projects coming into service.

Bank Lines and Long-Term Debt Maturities

TCPL has adequate financing and cash flows available to meet its purposes. Each borrower listed above has access to draw liquidity needs. As at April 30, 2019, TCPL and its consolidated the full USD 4.5 billion available, less any amounts currently subsidiaries had the following committed revolving credit facili- drawn. All borrowings by TCPL USA, CPG and TAIL are guar- ties, part of which were allocated to backstop its commercial pa- anteed by TCPL. per (CP) programs. • TCPL, TCPL USA, CPG and TAIL have an additional shared • TCPL has a $3.0 billion facility maturing in December 2023 to USD 1 billion facility maturing in December 2021 for general backstop its $2.0 billion CP program (rated by DBRS) and for corporate purposes, which is also guaranteed by TCPL. general corporate purposes. • TCPL, TransCanada PipeLine USA Ltd. (TCPL USA), CPG and TransCanada American Investments Ltd. (TAIL) have a shared USD 4.5 billion facility maturing in December 2019 to back- stop TCPL and TCPL USA’s USD-denominated USD 3.5 billon CP program (not rated by DBRS) and for general corporate

Long-Term Debt Maturities As at December 31, 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023+ Total Long-term debt maturities* (C$ millions) 3,465 2,834 2,098 2,100 29,474 39,971 % of long-term debt 8.7% 7.1% 5.2% 5.3% 73.7% 100.0% * Excludes the CPs backstopped by various credit facilities.

• TCC’s debt maturities are staggered and refinancing risk • In April 2019, TCPL issued $1.00 billion of Medium-Term is manageable. Notes. During Q1 2019, TCPL repaid $0.10 billion of Debentures • In 2018, TCPL issued USD 3.90 billion of Senior Unsecured and USD 1.15 billion of Senior Unsecured Notes. Notes and $1.00 billion of Medium-Term Notes. During the same period, TCPL repaid USD 1.60 billion of Senior Unsecured Notes and $0.15 billion of Debentures.

Corporate Finance: Energy June 14, 2019 September 2019 Page 6 of 19 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-3 Additional Written Evidence DBRS Report

Rating Report | TC Energy Corporation & TransCanada PipeLines Limited DBRS.COM 7

Simplified Ownership Structure

Long-Term Debt As at December 31, 2018 (100% owned unless otherwise indicated)

TC Energy Corporation (TCC) Canada Pfd 2 (low) Preferred Shares: CAD 4.0 bn

TransCanada PipeLines Limited (TCPL) Canada A (low), BBB, R1 (low) Total LT Debt: CAD 39.5 bn Direct LT Debt: CAD 31.9 bn Junior Subordinated Notes: CAD 7.6 bn CAD 3.0 bn committed credit facility USD 4.5 billion committed credit facility* USD 1.0 billion committed credit facility*

TransCanada PipeLine USA Ltd. NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. (TCPL USA) Nevada (NGTL) Alberta USD 4.5 billion committed credit facility* A (low) USD 1.0 billion committed credit facility* Direct External Debt: CAD 0.9 bn

TransCanada American Investments Ltd. Columbia Pipeline Group Inc. (TAIL) TransCanada Oil PipeLine Inc. Direct External Debt: USD 2.25 bn Delaware Delaware USD 4.5 billion committed credit facility* USD 4.5 billion committed credit facility* USD 1.0 billion committed credit facility* USD 1.0 billion committed credit facility*

TransCanada Keystone PipeLine, LLC Delaware

* Both USD 4.5 billion and USD 1.0 billion committed credit facilities are shared among TCPL, TCPL USA, CPG and TAIL and are guaranteed by TCPL.

Corporate Finance: Energy June 14, 2019 September 2019 Page 7 of 19 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-3 Additional Written Evidence DBRS Report

Rating Report | TC Energy Corporation & TransCanada PipeLines Limited DBRS.COM 8

Regulation — Canadian Mainline and NGTL System

The Canadian Mainline, NGTL System and other Canadian nat- reasonable opportunity for TCPL to recover related Canadian ural gas pipelines owned and/or operated by TCPL are regulat- Mainline costs. ed by the NEB, which regulates the construction and operation • TCPL retains pricing flexibility for discretionary services to of facilities and the terms and conditions of service (including implement certain toll changes and new services as required rates) that are expected to provide TCPL with the opportunity by the terms of the settlement. to recover the costs of transporting natural gas, including both return of and return on capital. • TCC’s Dawn Long-Term Fixed-Price (LTFP) service, which commenced on November 1, 2017, enables Western Canadian Canadian Mainline producers to transport up to 1.4 bcf/d of natural gas at a simpli- In November 2014, the NEB approved the Canadian Mainline’s fied toll of $0.77/gigajoule from the Empress receipt point in 2015–2030 Tolls and Tariff Application, under which TCPL and Alberta to the Dawn hub in Southern Ontario. The service is the three largest Canadian local distribution companies agreed underpinned by ten-year contracts that have early termination to the following terms: rights after five years. Any early termination will result in an • New fixed tolls for 2015 to 2020, as well as certain parameters increased toll for the last two years of the contract. for a toll-setting methodology to 2030. • In December 2018, TCPL announced the North Bay Junction • Tolls to be calculated on a 10.1% base allowed ROE on 40% Long Term Fixed Price service, which will transport 625 million deemed common equity. cubic feet per day (MMcf/d) of natural gas from WCSB to mar- kets in Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and the • Includes an incentive mechanism that requires a $20 million Northeastern United States on the Canadian mainline and (after-tax) annual contribution by TCPL from 2015 to 2020, new compression facilities. Customers have committed with which could result in ROE outcomes ranging from 8.7% 15-years precedent agreements towards the project with an es- to 11.5%. timated capital cost $96 million. The Company filed an appli- • Toll stabilization through continued use of deferral accounts cation for approval in January 2019 and a decision is expected — namely the Long-Term Adjustment Account (LTAA) and the in Q3 2019. Bridging Amortization Account — to capture the surplus (or shortfall) between revenues and cost of service for each year NGTL System over the six-year term of the decision. In June 2018, the NEB approved the 2018–2019 Revenue • In December 2018, the NEB, after the hearing process for the Requirement Settlement Application, as filed. The settle- 2018–2020 toll review, approved all the elements of the appli- ment structure, which is effective from January 1, 2018 to cation, including cost and volume forecasts, higher deprecia- December 31, 2019, is similar to the previous 2016–2017 Revenue tion rate (3.2% to 3.9%) and continuation of pricing discretion, Requirement Settlement Application, with fixed annual oper- with the exception of the amortization period for the LTAA, ating, maintenance and administration (OM&A) costs; allowed which will now be amortized over 2018 to 2020. The decision ROE; and deemed common equity. resulted in lower tolls, effective February 1, 2019. As directed • Allowed ROE was fixed at 10.1% on 40% deemed common eq- by the NEB, TCPL filed a compliance filing in January 2019, uity (same as for 2016 to 2017). which was approved in March 2019. • Depreciation expense was increased to the forecast composite • TCPL committed to increasing pipeline capacity to eastern rate of 3.45% in 2018 and 2019 compared with the composite Canadian markets for supplies from the Dawn, Ontario, and rate of 3.18% in 2017. Niagara, Ontario, regions. • OM&A costs for $225 million for 2018 and $230 million for • Provides a market-driven, stable, long-term accommodation 2019 were fixed, with any variances above and below the of future demand in the region in combination with the an- fixed amounts to be 50/50 shared. All other costs were passed ticipated lower demand for transportation on the Prairies through to the shippers on a flow-through basis. Line and the Northern Ontario Line while providing a

Corporate Finance: Energy June 14, 2019 September 2019 Page 8 of 19 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-3 Additional Written Evidence DBRS Report

Rating Report | TC Energy Corporation & TransCanada PipeLines Limited DBRS.COM 9

Major Capital Projects

The following table summarizes TCC’s commercially secured Mexico Natural Gas Pipelines (13%) and Power and Storage and projects as at March 31, 2019. The capital cost composition of Other (16%). The total estimated capital cost is $30.3 billion over these projects by segment is Liquids Pipelines (1%), Canadian the 2019–2023 period. Natural Gas Pipelines (55%), U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines (15%),

Secured Projects Capital Invested Status at Expected Revenue ($ billions, unless mentioned otherwise) Cost to Date March 31, 2019 In-Service Date Stream Canadian Natural Gas Pipelines Canadian Mainline 0.3 0.1 Under construction 2019-2021 Cost of Service NGTL System - 2019 2.8 2.0 Under construction 2019 Cost of Service NGTL System - 2020 1.8 0.3 Permitting and pre-construction phase 2020 Cost of Service NGTL System - 2021 2.6 - Permitting and pre-construction phase 2021 Cost of Service NGTL System - 2022+ 1.4 - Permitting and pre-construction phase 2022+ Cost of Service Coastal GasLink 6.2 0.2 Under construction 2023 Contracted Regulated maintenance capital expenditures 1.6 0.2 2019-2021 Cost of Service U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines Columbia Gas - Modernization II USD 1.1 USD 0.5 Under construction 2019-2020 Cost of Service Other capacity capital USD 0.5 - 2019-2021 Cost of Service Regulated maintenance capital expenditures USD 1.8 USD 0.1 2019-2021 Cost of Service Mexico Natural Gas Pipelines Sur de Texas USD 1.5 USD 1.4 Under construction 2019 Contracted Villa de Reyes USD 0.8 USD 0.7 Under construction 2019-2020 Contracted Tula USD 0.7 USD 0.6 Under construction 2020 Fully contracted Liquids Pipelines White Spruce 0.2 0.2 Under construction 2019 Contracted Other capacity capital 0.1 - 2020 Contracted Recoverable maintenance capital expenditures 0.1 - 2019-2021 Contracted Power and Storage Napanee 1.7 1.7 Under construction 2019 Fully contracted Bruce Power - life extension 2.2 0.7 Under construction 2019-2023 Fully contracted Other Non-recoverable maintenance capital expenditures 0.7 0.1 2019-2021 Contracted Foreign exchange impact 2.2 1.1 Total (CAD) 30.3 9.9

• The WB XPress project is a 47 kilometre (km; 29 mile) natural • The White Spruce project is a 20-inch, 72 km (45 mile) crude gas pipeline between Virginia and West Virginia. It includes oil pipeline to transport light synthetic crude oil from the construction of 5 km (3 miles) of new pipeline, two compres- Canadian Natural Resources Limited’s Horizon facility in sor stations and replacement of 42 km (26 miles) of existing northeast Alberta into the Grand Rapids pipelines. It received pipeline to increase capacity by approximately 1.3 bcf/d and a permit for the construction from Alberta Energy Regulator in was placed in service in late-2018. February 2018 and was placed in service in May 2019. • The Mountaineer XPress project is a 36-inch, 275 km (171 mile) • The Coastal GasLink Pipeline project, underpinned by 25-year natural gas pipeline in West Virginia to transport approxi- TSAs (with additional renewal provisions) with each of the mately 2.7 bcf/d of Marcellus and Utica gas supply. The Gulf five LNG Canada participants, will initially transport up to XPress project includes construction of seven new compressor 2.1 bcf/d of natural gas 670 km (416 miles), with potential ex- stations in Kentucky, Tennessee and Mississippi. Both were pansion capacity of up to 5.0 bcf/d, from the North Montney placed in service in Q1 2019. gas-producing region near Dawson Creek, ,

Corporate Finance: Energy June 14, 2019 September 2019 Page 9 of 19 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-3 Additional Written Evidence DBRS Report

Rating Report | TC Energy Corporation & TransCanada PipeLines Limited DBRS.COM 10

Major Capital Projects (CONTINUED)

to the proposed LNG Canada export facility near Kitimat, • The Tula Pipeline project is a 36-inch 324 km (201 mile) natu- British Columbia, to be owned by Shell Canada Limited and its ral gas pipeline in Mexico with a 16-inch, 24 km (15 mile) lat- partners. Following positive final investment decision (FID) by eral, supported by a 25-year contract for 886 million MMcf/d LNG Canada, the construction began in December 2018, with capacity with Mexico’s state-owned utility. The project is un- a planned in-service date in 2023. The capital cost estimate for der force majeure and TCPL is receiving fixed capacity charg- the project is $6.2 billion, and TCPL is exploring JV partners es, beginning Q1 2018. The completion of the project has been and project financing as part of the funding plan. revised to the end of 2020. • The NGTL System currently has a $8.6 billion of near-term cap- • The Villa de Reyes Pipeline project is a 36-inch and 24-inch ital programs approved by the NEB for completion by 2022+. 420 km (261 mile) bi-directional natural gas pipeline in Mexico, • In May 2018, the NEB approved construction to begin on the supported by a 25-year contract for 886 MMcf/d capacity with $1.6 billion North Montney project. The project is underpinned CFE. Construction was delayed due to archeological inves- by 20-year commercial contracts with shippers and is not de- tigations by state authorities, which triggered force majeure pendent on the Pacific North West LNG project proceeding. and payment of fixed capacity charges beginning Q1 2018. The The first and second phases of the project are anticipated to be project is expected to be in service in H2 2019-2020. in service by Q4 2019 and Q2 2020, respectively. • The Sur de Texas Pipeline project (60% ownership interest) • The Napanee Generating Station is a 900 MW natural gas– is a 42-inch, 775 km (482 mile) natural gas pipeline in Mexico, fired combined-cycle power plant in Eastern Ontario, support- supported by a 25-year contract with CFE. Construction and ed by a 20-year contract with the IESO. The commencement of commissioning activities are progressing with mechanical commercial operation will be delayed into the second half of completion expected in May 2019 and commencement of op- 2019 (H2 2019), after repair of damaged equipment. erations in June 2019. • Bruce Power entered into an agreement in December 2015 with the IESO to extend the operating life of the facility to The following table summarizes TCC’s projects under devel- the end of 2064. In September 2018, the IESO approved the opment. The capital cost composition of these projects by seg- $2.2 billion cost and schedule duration estimates for the Unit ment is Liquids Pipelines (50%), Canadian Natural Gas Pipelines 6 major component replacement (MCR) program, which is (28%) and Energy (22%). scheduled to be completed in late 2023.

Projects Under Development Capital Invested Status at Revenue ($ billions, unless mentioned otherwise) Cost to Date March 31, 2019 Stream Canadian Natural Gas Pipelines NGTL System - Merrick 1.9 - In development Largely Contracted U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines Other capacity capital USD 0.7 - Contracted Liquids Pipelines Keystone XL * USD 8.0 USD 0.7 In development Fully Contracted Heartland and TC Terminals 0.9 0.1 In development Largely Contracted Grand Rapids Phase 2 0.7 - In development Largely Contracted Keystone Hardisty Terminal 0.3 0.1 In development Largely Contracted Power and Storage Bruce Power - life extension 6.0 - In development Fully Contracted Foreign Exchange impact 3.0 0.2 Total (CAD) 21.5 1.1 * Invested to date reflects amount remaining after impairment charge.

Corporate Finance: Energy June 14, 2019 September 2019 Page 10 of 19 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-3 Additional Written Evidence DBRS Report

Rating Report | TC Energy Corporation & TransCanada PipeLines Limited DBRS.COM 11

Major Capital Projects (CONTINUED)

• The NGTL System Merrick Mainline Pipeline (Merrick) proj- Terminals facility in the Edmonton/Heartland crude oil mar- ect would be an extension from the existing Groundbirch ket region to facilities in Hardisty, Alberta. TCPL has obtained Mainline section of the NGTL System, beginning near Dawson the required regulatory approval and pursuing additional com- Creek to its endpoint near Summit Lake, British Columbia. mercial support for the project. NGTL has signed agreements for 1.9 bcf/d of firm service • As part of the life extension program for Bruce Power, approx- to ship natural gas to the inlet of the proposed Pacific Trail imately $6 billion is estimated to be spent for the remaining Pipeline terminating near Kitimat, British Columbia. Merrick five-unit MCR program after 2023. Future MCR investments is dependent on regulatory approval and a positive FID from will be subject to discrete decisions for each unit with speci- the Kitimat LNG project. fied off-ramps available for Bruce Power and the IESO. • The Heartland Pipeline and TC Terminals will consist of a 200 km (125 mile) crude oil pipeline to connect the new TC

Corporate Finance: Energy June 14, 2019 September 2019 Page 11 of 19 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-3 Additional Written Evidence DBRS Report

Rating Report | TC Energy Corporation & TransCanada PipeLines Limited DBRS.COM 12

Business Segments

12 mos. ended 3 mos. ended March 31 Year ended December 31 Segmented EBITDA March 31 ($ millions, US GAAP, DBRS-adjusted) 2019 2018 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 Canadian Mainline 237 10% 193 9% 1,117 12% 1,073 12% 1,043 14% 1,105 17% 1,193 20% NGTL System 292 12% 271 13% 1,218 14% 1,197 14% 996 13% 968 15% 900 15% Other Canadian pipelines 27 1% 30 1% 106 1% 109 1% 110 1% 116 2% 131 2% Business Development Costs 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% - 0% (5) 0% (7) 0% (8) 0% Cdn Gas Pipe EBITDA 556 23% 494 24% 2,441 27% 2,379 28% 2,144 29% 2,182 33% 2,216 37% before extras Columbia Pipeline 506 21% 363 18% 1,592 18% 1,450 17% 1,030 14% 443 7% ANR Pipeline and Storage 204 9% 178 9% 686 8% 660 8% 520 7% 425 6% 282 5% Great Lakes (66.7% owned) 40 2% 44 2% 122 1% 126 1% 83 1% 80 1% 81 1% TC Pipelines, LP (25.5% owned) 48 2% 49 2% 178 2% 179 2% 143 2% 156 2% 136 2% Other (Bison, GTN, Iroquis, Portland) 25 1% 19 1% 95 1% 88 1% 140 2% 98 1% 112 2% Other (non-controlling interests) 149 6% 149 7% 539 6% 540 6% 443 6% 484 7% 375 6% Business Development Costs 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% - 0% (3) 0% (4) 0% (15) 0% U.S. Gas Pipe EBITDA 972 41% 804 39% 3,211 36% 3,043 35% 2,357 32% 1,682 25% 970 16% bef. Extras Tamazunchale 41 2% 39 2% 167 2% 165 2% 146 2% 140 2% 140 2% Topolobampo 53 2% 56 3% 221 2% 223 3% 204 3% 108 2% (4) 0% Guadalajara 21 1% 24 1% 89 1% 92 1% 88 1% 89 1% 90 2% Mazatlan 24 1% 25 1% 100 1% 101 1% 85 1% 7 0% (3) 0% Sur de Texas 7 0% 11 1% 16 0% 21 0% 10 0% 0 0% 0 0% Other Mexico pipelines 0 0% 5 0% 0 0% 5 0% (14) 0% (4) 0% 5 0% Business Development Costs 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% - 0% 0 0% (7) 0% (16) 0% Mexico Gas Pipe EBITDA 146 6% 160 8% 593 7% 607 7% 519 7% 332 5% 213 4% bef. Extras Subtotal (Natural Gas Pipelines) 1,674 70% 1,458 70% 6,245 70% 6,029 70% 5,020 68% 4,196 63% 3,399 57% Keystone Pipeline System 424 18% 340 16% 1,527 17% 1,443 17% 1,283 17% 1,155 17% 1,332 22% Intra-Alberta pipelines 39 2% 39 2% 160 2% 160 2% 33 0% 0 0% 0 0% Liquids marketing & BD 100 4% 52 3% 294 3% 246 3% 32 0% (3) 0% (24) 0% Subtotal (Liquids Pipelines) 563 24% 431 21% 1,981 22% 1,849 21% 1,348 18% 1,152 17% 1,308 22% Western and Eastern Power 77 3% 119 6% 386 4% 428 5% 444 6% 423 6% 460 8% Bruce Power 60 3% 54 3% 317 4% 311 4% 434 6% 293 4% 285 5% Cdn Power EBITDA 137 6% 173 8% 703 8% 739 9% 878 12% 716 11% 745 12% before extras U.S. Power EBITDA before extras 0 0% 8 0% (8) 0% 0 0% 130 2% 522 8% 525 9% Gas Storage EBITDA before extras 17 1% 7 0% 37 0% 27 0% 55 1% 58 1% 14 0% Business Development Costs (3) 0% (4) 0% (13) 0% (14) 0% (33) 0% (15) 0% (30) -1% Subtotal (Power and Storage) 151 6% 184 9% 719 8% 752 9% 1,030 14% 1,281 19% 1,254 21% Subtotal of segments 2,388 100% 2,073 100% 8,945 100% 8,630 100% 7,398 100% 6,629 100% 5,961 100% Corporate and Other 87 73 348 334 227 319 264 EBITDA before extras 1 2,475 2,146 9,293 8,964 7,625 6,948 6,225 Extraordinary items 17 (136) 212 59 300 (1,984) (2,995) EBITDA 1 2,492 2,010 9,505 9,023 7,925 4,964 3,230 1 EBITDA includes dividends/distributions received from equity investments.

Corporate Finance: Energy June 14, 2019 September 2019 Page 12 of 19 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-3 Additional Written Evidence DBRS Report

Rating Report | TC Energy Corporation & TransCanada PipeLines Limited DBRS.COM 13

Business Segments (CONTINUED)

1. Natural Gas Pipelines – Canada (27% of EBITDA for the • ANR is regulated by the FERC on a complaint basis with an LTM ending March 31, 2019) estimated 15% ROE. Pipeline services are provided under tar- iffs that set limits on the rates for services and allow for non- Canadian Mainline (12% of segment EBITDA; 5% of net income discriminatory negotiations and discounts. The value of ANR’s before extras) storage services is based on market conditions that could re- • The Canadian Mainline extends 14,082 km (8,750 miles) from sult in reduced rates and terms. In January 2016, ANR Pipeline the Alberta/ border to the Québec/Vermont filed a Section 4 Rate Case that requests an increase to ANR’s border and connects with other pipelines in Canada and in the maximum transportation rates. In February 2016, the FERC is- United States. sued an order that accepted and suspended the rate and tariff changes effective August 1, 2016, subject to a refund and the • Canadian Mainline net income (before extras) decreased by outcome of a hearing. ANR reached a settlement with its ship- 9% in 2018 compared with 2017 due to a lower average invest- pers effective August 1, 2016. Per the settlement, transmission ment base and lower incentive earnings, partly offset by lower reservation rates will increase by 34.8% and storage rates will carrying charges to shippers. However, the higher deprecia- remain the same for contracts one to three years in length, tion rate led to a marginal increase in 2018 EBITDA compared while increasing slightly for contracts of less than one year with 2017. and decreasing slightly for contracts more than three years in • Canadian Mainline net income (before extras) and EBITDA duration. There is a moratorium on any further rate changes increased by 19% and 23%, respectively, in Q1 2019 compared until August 1, 2019. ANR may file for new rates after that date with Q1 2018 primarily because of higher incentive earnings if it has spent more than USD 0.8 billion in capital additions and no incentive earnings recorded in Q1 2018 because of the but must file for new rates no later than an effective date of pending NEB decision on the 2018–2020 tolls. August 1, 2022. • ANR’s EBITDA rose significantly by 27% in 2018 compared NGTL System (14% of segment EBITDA; 10% of net income with 2017 mainly driven by additional contract sales. before extras) • ANR’s EBITDA increased by 9% on a U.S.-dollar basis (14% on • The NGTL System connects the Canadian Mainline and a Canadian-dollar basis) in Q1 2019 compared with Q1 2018. Foothills systems, along with third-party natural gas pipelines, through 24,568 km (15,266 miles) of pipeline, mostly within Alberta and partly in British Columbia. CPG (18% of segment EBITDA) • Columbia operates approximately 24,500 km (15,200 miles) of • NGTL is well positioned to link WCSB supply to proposed natural gas pipelines, 285 bcf of natural gas storage facilities Canadian West Coast LNG projects. and related midstream assets. • NGTL System net income (before extras) and EBITDA were • CPG’s EBITDA rose significantly by 41% in 2018 compared higher by 13% and 20%, respectively, in 2018 compared with with 2017 because of increased earnings from Columbia Gas 2017, mainly because of higher average investment base, as a and Columbia Gulf growth projects placed in service, partially result of continued system expansions. offset by a reduction in certain rates on Columbia Gas as a re- • NGTL System net income (before extras) and EBITDA rose by sult of U.S. tax reform. 23% and 8%, respectively, in Q1 2019 compared with Q1 2019, • CPG’s EBITDA increased by 32% on a U.S.-dollar basis (39% mainly because of higher average investment base. on a Canadian-dollar basis) in Q1 2019 compared with Q1 2018 mainly because of Columbia Gas and Columbia Gulf growth 2. Natural Gas Pipelines – United States (36% of EBITDA for projects placed in service. the LTM ending March 31, 2019) Columbia Gas Transmission owns and operates an interstate ANR (8% of segment EBITDA) natural gas transportation pipeline and storage system, which • ANR consists of 15,075 km (9,367 miles) of pipeline trans- operates from the Gulf Coast and from the Appalachian region to porting natural gas primarily from Texas and Oklahoma on markets in the Midwest, Atlantic and Northeast regions. its southwest leg and in the Gulf of Mexico on its southeast leg to Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois, Ohio and Indiana. ANR Columbia Gulf owns and operates a long-haul interstate natu- also connects with other pipelines, providing access to other ral gas transportation pipeline system now transitioning and gas sources. expanding to accommodate supply from the Appalachian basin • ANR owns and operates underground gas-storage facilities in and its interconnect with Columbia Gas and other pipelines to Michigan, with 250 bcf of capacity. deliver gas across Gulf Coast markets.

Corporate Finance: Energy June 14, 2019 September 2019 Page 13 of 19 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-3 Additional Written Evidence DBRS Report

Rating Report | TC Energy Corporation & TransCanada PipeLines Limited DBRS.COM 14

Business Segments (CONTINUED)

Columbia Midstream provides natural gas services, includ- • The Houston Lateral extends the Keystone Pipeline System to ing gathering, treating, conditioning, processing, compressing Houston-area refineries, and the Houston Terminal has initial and liquids handling in the Appalachian basin. It also includes storage capacity for 700,000 barrels of crude oil. 47.5% of the Millennium pipeline, which transports natural gas • Liquids Pipelines’ EBIT and EBITDA increased by 45% and from the Marcellus Formation to markets in New York and the 37%, respectively, in 2018 compared with 2017 because of (1) Hudson Valley, New York. higher contracted and uncontracted volumes on Keystone Pipeline System; (2) higher earnings from the liquids market- Crossroads owns and operates an interstate natural gas pipeline ing business; and (3) contribution from intra-Alberta pipelines, in Indiana and Ohio. Grand Rapids and Northern Courier, which were placed in service in second half of 2017; and (4) lower business develop- Columbia Storage provides regulated underground gas-storage ment costs as a results of capitalizing Keystone XL expendi- service to customers in key eastern markets. It also operates and tures in 2018. owns a 50% interest in the 12 bcf Hardy Storage, a natural gas stor- age field in the Hardy and Hampshire counties in West Virginia. • Liquids Pipelines EBIT and EBITDA increased significantly by 37% and 31%, respectively, in Q1 2019 compared with Q1 2018 3. Natural Gas Pipelines – Mexico (7% of EBITDA in the LTM as a result of higher volumes on Keystone Pipeline System, im- ending March 31, 2019) proved earnings from liquids marketing and positive foreign • The 310 km (193 mile) Guadalajara Pipeline transports natural exchange impact. gas from Manzanillo, Colima, to Guadalajara, Jalisco. • The 430 km (267 mile) Mazatlán Pipeline transports natural 5. Power and Storage (8% of EBITDA for the LTM ending gas from El Oro, Sinaloa, to Mazatlán, Sinaloa, in Mexico. March 31, 2019) As at the end of March 31, 2019, TCPL’s operating power plants • The 370 km (230 mile) Tamazunchale Pipeline transports nat- have net capacity of approximately 6,040 MW, supported by ural gas from Naranjos, Veracruz, to El Sauz, Querétaro. low-cost base-load generation and long-term contracts with rel- • The 560 km (348 mile) Topolobampo Pipeline transports natu- atively stable earnings and cash flow. In addition, the segment ral gas from interconnections with third-party pipelines in El includes 118 bcf in total of unregulated natural gas storage capac- Oro and El Encino, Chihuahua, to Topolobampo. ity in Alberta contracted with a third party, with about one-third • EBITDA rose by 17% in 2018 compared with 2017, mainly be- of all storage capacity in the province. cause of incremental earnings from tariff increases, higher revenue as a result of favourable changes in timing of revenue Bruce Power (Ontario) (4% of segment EBITDA) recognition and the $12 million impairment recorded in 2017 • Bruce Power is a nuclear power generation facility comprising related to equity investment in TransGas Limited. eight nuclear units with a combined total capacity (gross) of approximately 6,400 MW. • EBITDA decreased modestly in Q1 2019, mainly because of lower revenue due to unfavourable changes in timing of • On December 3, 2015, Bruce Power entered into an agreement revenue recognition and lower equity income from Sur de with the IESO to extend the expected useful life of the facility Texas pipeline. to 2064. The amended agreement allows investment in life-ex- tension activities for Units 3 through 8 to support a long-term refurbishment program. 4. Liquids Pipelines (22% of EBITDA for the LTM ending March 31, 2019) • As part of the life-extension agreement, Bruce Power receives contracted prices, which are adjusted for return of and on Keystone Pipeline System (Base Keystone) and Gulf Coast capital invested, along with other pricing adjustments that • The Base Keystone, which extends from Hardisty to Wood allow for better matching revenues and costs over the long River, Illinois, and Patoka, Illinois, also extends to Cushing, term. Bruce Power’s current contract price of approximately Oklahoma, has a nominal capacity of 591,000 barrels per $68 per MWh is expected to increase to approximately $75 per day (b/d). MWh, effective April 1, 2019, to reflect Unit 6 MCR capital cost estimate and normal annual inflation adjustments. • The Gulf Coast Pipeline, which is an extension of the Base Keystone from Cushing to Nederland, Texas, in the U.S. Gulf • Bruce Power equity income decreased by $123 million (28%) in Coast, has an initial crude oil capacity of up to 700,000 b/d and 2018 compared with 2017 because of lower volumes from high- an ultimate capacity of 830,000 b/d. er outage days and lower results from contracting activities. • Cushing Marketlink transports crude oil from Cushing to • Bruce Power equity income increased modestly by $6 million the U.S. Gulf Coast refining market and forms part of the (11%) in Q1 2019 compared with Q1 2018, mainly because of Base Keystone. higher income on pension fund investments, partially offset by lower volumes from higher outage days.

Corporate Finance: Energy June 14, 2019 September 2019 Page 14 of 19 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-3 Additional Written Evidence DBRS Report

Rating Report | TC Energy Corporation & TransCanada PipeLines Limited DBRS.COM 15

Business Segments (CONTINUED)

Power Generation Capacity, as at March 31, 2019 Generating Generating Western Power Fuel Type Bruce Power Fuel Type Capacity (MW) Capacity (MW) Bear Creek 100 Natural gas Bruce Power 2 3,094 Nuclear Carseland 95 Natural gas Total Generation Capacity 6,040 MacKay River 207 Natural gas Redwater 46 Natural gas Generation Capacity, by fuel type Total Western Power 448 Natural gas 2,946 49% Nuclear 3,094 51% Total Generation Capacity 6,040 100% Eastern Power Napanee (20-year contract)* 900 Natural gas Halton Hills (contract to 2030) 683 Natural gas Bécancour (contract to 2026) 550 Natural gas Portlands Energy (contract to 2029) 1 275 Natural gas Grandview (contract to 2025) 90 Natural gas Total Eastern Power 2,498

* Expected in-service date is Q2 2019; contract is from in-service date. 1 50% share of the total 550 MW capacity. 2 48.3% share of the total 6,400 MW capacity.

Western and Eastern Power (4% of segment EBITDA) Cartier Wind Farms in October 2018, which was partially off- • The segment includes approximately 3,000 MW of natu- set by higher generation volumes and margins in the Western ral gas-fired cogeneration and combined-cycle power Power segment. plants. All Eastern Power assets are supported by long-term • Western and Eastern Power EBITDA decreased by $42 million contractual arrangements. (35%) in Q1 2019 compared with Q1 2018 because of the sale • Western and Eastern Power EBITDA decreased marginally by of stake in the Cartier Wind Farms in October 2018 and costs $16 million (4%) in 2018 compared with 2017, mainly because related to the Napanee generating station’s delayed in-service. of the sale of Ontario solar assets in December 2017 and the

Corporate Finance: Energy June 14, 2019 September 2019 Page 15 of 19 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-3 Additional Written Evidence DBRS Report

Rating Report | TC Energy Corporation & TransCanada PipeLines Limited DBRS.COM 16

TC Energy Corporation Consolidated Balance Sheet ($ millions, US GAAP, DBRS-adjusted) March 31 December 31 March 31 December 31 Assets 2019 2018 2017 Liabilities and Equity 2019 2018 2017 Cash and equivalents 872 446 1,089 Notes payable 5,587 2,762 1,763 Accounts receivable 2,214 2,535 2,522 A/P and accrued liab. 6,011 6,722 5,248 Inventories 407 431 378 L.t. debt due in one year 1,757 3,462 2,866 Other current assets 1,412 1,723 691 Current liabilities 13,355 12,946 9,877 Current assets 4,905 5,135 4,680 Other long-term liabs. 5,463 4,938 5,048 Deferred income taxes 5,995 6,026 5,403 Property, plant and equip., net 67,520 66,503 57,277 Long-term debt 35,857 36,509 31,875 Equity investments 6,966 7,113 6,366 Jnr. subordinated notes 7,380 7,508 7,007 Goodwill 13,881 14,178 13,084 Noncontrolling interests 1,660 1,655 1,852 Regulatory assets 1,557 1,548 1,376 Preferred shares 3,980 3,980 3,980 Intangibles and other assets 4,518 4,443 3,318 Common equity 25,657 25,358 21,059 Total 99,347 98,920 86,101 Total 99,347 98,920 86,101

12 mos. ended Balance Sheet and Liquidity Ratios 3 mos. ended March 31 March 31 Year ended December 31 ($ millions, US GAAP, DBRS-adjusted) 2019 2018 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 Current ratio 0.37 0.38 0.37 0.40 0.47 1.05 0.53 Net debt & equivalents/capital 59.2% 58.3% 59.2% 59.7% 58.2% 60.5% 63.6% Total debt & equivalents/capital 59.7% 59.0% 59.7% 59.9% 58.8% 61.0% 64.2% Adj. Total debt & equivalents/capital 2 n/a n/a n/a 60.1% 59.1% 61.4% 65.5% Common equity/capital 32.1% 31.5% 32.1% 31.7% 31.6% 29.1% 27.5% Cash flow/total debt & equivalents 14.6% 14.7% 13.9% 13.6% 13.0% 10.8% 13.6% Adj. Cash flow/total debt & equivalents 2 n/a n/a n/a 13.6% 13.0% 10.9% 13.1% (Cash flow - total dividends)/capex 0.49 0.56 0.40 0.40 0.42 0.56 0.71 Common divs/net income (before extras) 67.4% 67.5% 68.6% 68.7% 76.4% 78.2% 79.6% Pref. share divs/net income (before extras) 4.0% 4.4% 4.4% 4.5% 5.6% 4.9% 5.1% Common & pref divs/net income (before extras) 71.4% 71.9% 73.0% 73.1% 82.0% 83.1% 84.6% Dividends (common, pref. & NCI)/cash flow 28.5% 29.8% 29.5% 29.9% 33.4% 39.2% 37.9%

Coverage Ratios (times)

EBIT interest coverage 1 3.22 3.03 2.87 2.83 2.56 2.55 2.75 EBITDA interest coverage 1 4.27 4.04 3.89 3.83 3.51 3.54 3.84 Fixed-charges coverage (EBIT-based) 1 2.94 2.75 2.63 2.58 2.33 2.37 2.55 Cash flow interest coverage 4.12 4.05 3.86 3.84 3.53 3.46 3.92 Adj. EBIT interest coverage 1, 2 n/a n/a n/a 2.80 2.54 2.51 2.71

Profitability Ratios (before extras.) Operating margin 45.6% 40.2% 42.5% 41.2% 34.3% 33.2% 32.3% Profit margin 29.5% 26.6% 27.4% 26.6% 21.2% 17.7% 16.3% Return on common equity 16.9% 16.4% 15.0% 15.0% 13.0% 12.3% 11.4% Return on capital 7.4% 7.0% 6.9% 6.9% 6.0% 5.6% 5.4% Note: NCI = Noncontrolling Interests. n/a = not available. 1 EBIT and EBITDA include dividends/distributions received from equity investments. 2 Includes operating leases treated as debt.

Corporate Finance: Energy June 14, 2019 September 2019 Page 16 of 19 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-3 Additional Written Evidence DBRS Report

Rating Report | TC Energy Corporation & TransCanada PipeLines Limited DBRS.COM 17

12 mos. ended Segmented EBIT 3 mos. ended March 31 March 31 Year ended December 31 ($ millions) 2019 2018 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 Natural Gas Pipelines 269 253 1,266 1,250 1,236 1,307 1,367 Liquids Pipelines 475 348 1,635 1,508 1,039 860 1,025 Power and Storage 128 152 609 633 879 979 913 Corporate 995 858 3,360 3,223 2,423 1,863 1,155 EBIT before extras. 1 1,867 1,611 6,870 6,614 5,577 5,009 4,460

Selected Operating Statistics Cdn. Mainline Average Investment Base $3,665 $3,817 n/a $3,828 $4,184 $4,441 $4,784 NGTL System Average Investment Base $11,096 $9,091 n/a $9,669 $8,385 $7,451 $6,698 Canadian Mainline Volumes (Bcf/day) 0.0 0.0 n/a 0.0 4.4 4.5 4.4 NGTL System Volumes (Bcf/day) 0.0 0.0 n/a 0.0 11.4 11.1 10.6 Energy Sales Volumes (GWh) 5,260 5,696 n/a 23,486 24,368 61,543 65,345 Note: NCI = Noncontrolling Interests. n/a = not available. 1 EBIT and EBITDA include dividends/distributions received from equity investments. 2 Includes operating leases treated as debt.

Corporate Finance: Energy June 14, 2019 September 2019 Page 17 of 19 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-3 Additional Written Evidence DBRS Report

Rating Report | TC Energy Corporation & TransCanada PipeLines Limited DBRS.COM 18

Rating History

Current 2013–2017 2012 2009–2011 2007–2008 2006 TransCanada PipeLines Limited Issuer Rating A (low) A (low) A NR NR NR Unsecured Debentures & Notes A (low) A (low) A A A A Junior Subordinated Notes 1 BBB BBB BBB (high) BBB (high) BBB (high) NR Commercial Paper 2 R-1 (low) R-1 (low) R-1 (low) R-1 (low) R-1 (low) R-1 (low) TC Energy Corporation Preferred Shares - Cumulative Pfd-2 (low) Pfd-2 (low) Pfd-2 (low) Pfd-2 (low) NR NR

1 The Junior Subordinated Notes rating of TransCanada PipeLines Limited pertains to the Junior Subordinated Notes that are due in 2067. 2 Commercial Paper rating pertains to the $2 billion Canadian CP program.

Previous Action

• “DBRS Notes TransCanada Corporation’s Name Change to TC Energy Corporation,” May 6, 2019.

Related Research

• “DBRS Assigns Rating of A (low), Stable, to TransCanada PipeLines Limited $1.0 Billion Medium Term Note Debentures (Unsecured),” April 10, 2019. • “DBRS Assigns Rating of A (low), Stable to TransCanada PipeLines Limited’s $1.0 Billion Medium Term Note Debentures,” July 3, 2018. • Trans Québec & Maritimes Pipeline Inc.: Rating Report, November 19, 2018. • NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd.: Rating Report, July 3, 2018.

Authorized Principal CP Limit

• $2.0 billion for TCPL. USD 3.5 billion shared between TCPL and TCPL USA.

Previous Report

• TransCanada Corporation and TransCanada PipeLines Limited: Rating Report, June 18, 2018.

Corporate Finance: Energy June 14, 2019 September 2019 Page 18 of 19 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 2-3 Additional Written Evidence DBRS Report

Rating Report | TC Energy Corporation & TransCanada PipeLines Limited DBRS.COM 19

Notes: All figures are in Canadian dollars unless otherwise noted.

For the definition of Issuer Rating, please refer to Rating Definitions under Rating Policy on www.dbrs.com.

Generally, Issuer Ratings apply to all senior unsecured obligations of an applicable issuer, except when an issuer has a significant or unique level of secured debt.

The DBRS group of companies consists of DBRS, Inc. (Delaware, U.S.)(NRSRO, DRO affiliate); DBRS Limited (Ontario, Canada)(DRO, NRSRO affiliate); DBRS Ratings GmbH (Frankfurt, Germany)(CRA, NRSRO affiliate, DRO affiliate); and DBRS Ratings Limited (England and Wales)(CRA, NRSRO affiliate, DRO affiliate). For more information on regulatory registrations, recognitions and approvals, please see: http://www.dbrs.com/research/highlights.pdf.

© 2019, DBRS. All rights reserved. The information upon which DBRS ratings and other types of credit opinions and reports are based is obtained by DBRS from sources DBRS believes to be reliable. DBRS does not audit the information it receives in connection with the analytical process, and it does not and cannot independently verify that information in every instance. The extent of any factual investigation or independent verification depends on facts and circumstances. DBRS ratings, other types of credit opinions, reports and any other information provided by DBRS are provided “as is” and without representation or warranty of any kind. DBRS hereby disclaims any representation or warranty, express or implied, as to the accuracy, timeliness, completeness, merchantability, fitness for any particular purpose or non-infringement of any of such information. In no event shall DBRS or its directors, officers, employees, independent contractors, agents and representatives (collectively, DBRS Representatives) be liable (1) for any inaccuracy, delay, loss of data, interruption in service, error or omission or for any damages resulting therefrom, or (2) for any direct, indirect, incidental, special, compensatory or consequential damages arising from any use of ratings and rating reports or arising from any error (negligent or otherwise) or other circumstance or contingency within or outside the control of DBRS or any DBRS Representative, in connection with or related to obtaining, collecting, compiling, analyzing, interpreting, communicating, publishing or delivering any such information. Ratings, other types of credit opinions, other analysis and research issued or published by DBRS are, and must be construed solely as, statements of opinion and not statements of fact as to credit worthiness, investment advice or recommendations to purchase, sell or hold any securities. A report with respect to a DBRS rating or other credit opinion is neither a prospectus nor a substitute for the information assembled, verified and presented to investors by the issuer and its agents in connection with the sale of the securities. DBRS may receive compensation for its ratings and other credit opinions from, among others, issuers, insurers, guarantors and/or underwriters of debt securities. DBRS is not responsible for the content or operation of third party websites accessed through hypertext or other computer links and DBRS shall have no liability to any person or entity for the use of such third party websites. This publication may not be reproduced, retransmitted or distributed in any form without the prior written consent of DBRS. ALL DBRS RATINGS AND OTHER TYPES OF CREDIT OPINIONS ARE SUBJECT TO DISCLAIMERS AND CERTAIN LIMITATIONS. PLEASE READ THESE DISCLAIMERS AND LIMITATIONS AT http://www.dbrs.com/about/disclaimer. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING DBRS RATINGS AND OTHER TYPES OF CREDIT OPINIONS, INCLUDING DEFINITIONS, POLICIES AND METHODOLOGIES, ARE AVAILABLE ON http://www.dbrs.com.

Corporate Finance: Energy June 14, 2019 September 2019 Page 19 of 19 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Appendix 3-1 North Corridor Expansion Project Updated Pipeline Process Flow Diagrams Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

Appendix 3-1

Updated Pipeline Process Flow Diagrams

September 2019

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 3-1 Additional Written Evidence Updated Pipeline Process Flow Diagrams

September 2019 Page1 of 2 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 3-1 Additional Written Evidence Updated Pipeline Process Flow Diagrams

September 2019 Page2 of 2 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Appendix 4-1 North Corridor Expansion Project Updated Hidden Lake North Compressor Station Additional Written Evidence Unit Addition Preliminary Process Flow Diagram

Appendix 4-1

Updated Hidden Lake North Compressor Station Unit

Addition Preliminary Process Flow Diagram

September 2019 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Appendix 4-1 North Corridor Expansion Project Updated Hidden Lake North CS Process Flow Diagram Additional Written Evidence

September 2019 Page 1 of 2 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Appendix 4-1 North Corridor Expansion Project Updated Hidden Lake North CS Process Flow Diagram Additional Written Evidence

TAGH32-1-1SV2-NW

PRELIMINARY ONLY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

September 2019 Page 2 of 2 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Appendix 8-1 North Corridor Expansion Project Beaver First Nation Mitigation Table Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

Appendix 8-1

Beaver First Nation Mitigation Table

September 2019

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-1 Additional Written Evidence Beaver First Nation Mitigation Table

Beaver First Nation (BFN) Project-related Issues Summary for the North Corridor Expansion Project – North Central Corridor Loop (North Star Section 2, Red Earth Section 3, Bear Canyon Extension Section and the Hidden Lake North Unit Addition) (the Project) Where Addressed in the Environmental and Community Interests, Approximate Location Socio-economic Issue/Concern Identified Relative to the Project NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL) Response/Proposed Mitigation Measures Assessment (ESA)

Potential effects on a year- Sites identified relative to Red NGTL will verify the location and proximity of the spring to the PCF which was identified on the east end of Red Earth Section 3 and will evaluate if any necessary site-specific routing and/or mitigation Section 5.3 considerations need to be implemented prior to or during construction. Any necessary site-specific mitigation measures will be included in the EPP filed prior to construction. Pending the determination round spring. Earth Section 3: Section 6.0 of the of these considerations, existing general mitigation measures are available for other potential springs or groundwater issues in the PCF. BFN requests: • 10 meters from KP 6.3 (spring) Environmental Protection Before the initiation of ground disturbance activities, NGTL will ensure that all environmentally sensitive resource locations are properly identified and marked in the field before the initiation of ground Plan (EPP) • An adequate buffer around disturbance to avoid or minimize potential Project effects. The spring will be identified on the Environmental Alignment Sheets, in the site-specific mitigation tables of the EPP and/or other Project- the spring and that the area specific documents, and its boundaries will be clearly marked before the start of, and following, clearing activities. Spoil will not be stored on the spring. be avoided Following clearing, re-mark all sensitive resources as necessary and supplement markings with signage. The Environmental Inspector(s) [EI(s)] will confirm the accuracy of all environmentally sensitive resource locations, and will ensure marking is maintained during construction. General measures to address springs and groundwater include: • Leave gaps in windrows, at obvious drainages, on side-hill terrain and wherever seepage occurs to reduce interference with natural drainage patterns. • If springs and ground water are encountered, NGTL will review the area and determine the appropriate mitigation.

Potential effects on wildlife and North Star Section 2, Red Earth In their traditional knowledge (TK) study, BFN noted that wildlife continues to be very important for the community and that it is critical that ample wildlife populations be available for current and future Section 5.10 wildlife habitat, including: Section 3, Bear Canyon Extension generations for sustenance purposes. Several game trails were observed along the proposed North Corridor Expansion Project rights-of-way, however specific locations were not provided. Wildlife Sections 1.4, 1.8, 7.0, 8.0 Section and Hidden Lake North signs observed included animal trails, gnaw marks, nests, rubs, scat, sightings and tracks. Wildlife observed included deer (white-tailed and mule), elk, moose, black bear, fox, fisher, lynx, marten, • Beaver dams and Appendices 1E and Unit Addition Project Construction beaver, muskrat, skunk, weasel, wolf, wolverine, rabbit, and squirrel. Birds observed included ducks, geese, grouse, hawks, owls and woodpeckers. The Project area was identified as a good hunting 1F of the EPP • Wildlife patterns and/or Footprint (PCF), Local Study Area and trapping area. movements (LSA) and Regional Study Area North Star Section 2 has been designed to parallel existing disturbances for 100% of its length, Red Earth Section 3 has been designed to parallel existing disturbances for 98% of its length, the Bear BFN requests: (RSA) Canyon North Extension has been designed to parallel existing disturbances for 94% of its length, and the Hidden Lake North Unit Addition partially overlaps the existing station and the connectivity Sites identified relative to Red piping parallels existing rights-of-way and disturbances between the two existing stations. Clearing of vegetation for Project construction will result in an increase in the combined width (i.e., expansion) • All beaver dams be flagged, Earth Section 3: of existing linear disturbances. Following existing or proposed linear disturbances allows the Project Footprint to be reduced by utilizing temporary workspace on the adjacent disposition as much as provided an adequate possible, as well as minimizing the fragmentation of the landscape. Reclamation and cleanup will be completed to maintain equivalent land capability, ensuring the ability of the land to support various buffer and avoided • 20 meters from KP 5.8 (two land uses similar to the uses that existed before construction. beaver dams) • That a single lane winter NGTL will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential adverse effects of the Project on wildlife and wildlife habitat: road should only be used to access the area, keeping • Locate deck sites in previously-disturbed areas, wherever practical. the road to a maximum of 5 • Share existing access with other industrial users, where feasible. meters from the bush line and maximum retention • Schedule clearing and construction activities to avoid sensitive wildlife timing windows to the extent feasible. should be left for wildlife • In the event there is a timing conflict, consult with the appropriate regulatory agency to discuss practical options and mitigation measures. cover • Leave gaps in windrows (e.g., topsoil/strippings, grade spoil, rollback, snow) and strung pipe at obvious drainages and wildlife trails, and to allow for livestock and vehicle/machinery passage across • All game trails should be the construction footprint. Locations where wildlife gaps are appropriate will be determined in the field by the EI(s). These gaps should align. flagged and buffered prior to construction If previously unidentified listed or sensitive wildlife species or their site-specific habitat (e.g., dens, nests) are identified during construction of the Project, report to the EI(s) and implement the Wildlife Species of Concern Discovery Contingency Plan. • All nesting areas should be avoided Red Earth Section 3 and Bear Canyon North Extension are scheduled to be constructed from the fourth quarter of 2021 to the first quarter of 2022, under winter conditions, Construction of North Star Section 2 is scheduled from third quarter of 2021 to the fourth quarter of 2021. North Star Section 2 is primarily agricultural land where topsoil stripping will be necessary, which is best achieved in unfrozen conditions. NGTL notes the start of construction is planned for after the primary nesting period for birds and at the end of most breeding periods for wildlife. The Hidden Lake North Unit Addition is scheduled to be constructed from the first quarter of 2021 to the first quarter of 2022. In the event Project activities are scheduled to occur within the Primary Nesting Period for the Bird Conservation Region for migratory birds, refer to the Breeding Bird and Nest Management Plan. NGTL will only arrange to have beaver dams removed where the dams are creating an impediment to construction. NGTL will implement mitigation measures relevant to beaver dams and lodges, including the following: • In the event that beaver dams or lodges will be disturbed or removed, provide notification to or obtain the necessary permits from the responsible regulatory agency prior to commencing activities, if required. Engage the registered trapper(s). • Breach the beaver dam slowly to avoid the rapid release of water that could cause flooding, fish entrapments and/or erosion of the bed and banks resulting in subsequent siltation of downstream waters. No new permanent access is anticipated for the Project. Existing infrastructure will be used, where practical. Access to the Project will be from existing public and private access points and roads (respecting traffic safety and concern for other users) and controlled existing access and rights-of-way of others.

September 2019 Page 1 of 21 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-1 Additional Written Evidence Beaver First Nation Mitigation Table

Beaver First Nation (BFN) Project-related Issues Summary for the North Corridor Expansion Project – North Central Corridor Loop (North Star Section 2, Red Earth Section 3, Bear Canyon Extension Section and the Hidden Lake North Unit Addition) (the Project) Where Addressed in the Environmental and Community Interests, Approximate Location Socio-economic Issue/Concern Identified Relative to the Project NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL) Response/Proposed Mitigation Measures Assessment (ESA)

BFN requests: North Star Section 2, Red Earth NGTL recognizes the interests of Aboriginal groups in all aspects of Project activities and, in particular, environmental protection. NGTL is committed to continue discussions regarding BFN’s concern Section 9.0 of the EPP Section 3, Bear Canyon Extension about potential environmental impacts during construction, as well as mitigation measures to minimize any such impacts. • That a BFN Environmental Section and Hidden Lake North Monitor should be on-site Natural recovery is the preferred method of reclamation in non-agricultural areas on level terrain where erosion is not expected. Where natural recovery is not preferred, seed disturbed areas as per Unit Addition PCF pre, during and post site requirements and as specified by the Environmental Inspector(s) or designate(s). construction, in order to The Project will follow NGTL’s Post-Construction Monitoring (PCM) methodology as outlined in the ESA and/or other Project-specific environmental documents, which ensures compliance with specific ensure that potential reclamation performance expectations and applicable regulatory requirements. Mitigation methods will be based on the principle that success of land reclamation is measured against adjacent Project effects to wildlife, representative site conditions while taking into consideration the status of reclamation of the time of assessment. NGTL is available to meet with BFN to provide an overview of NGTL’s pipeline plants, streams and monitoring programs, if requested. BFN also has the opportunity to provide feedback post-construction through ongoing engagement with Regional Liaisons and NGTL’s Public Awareness Program. traditional land use are NGTL will remain available to discuss and, where possible, address any concerns BFN may have during operation and maintenance of the Project. minimized When the site has been determined safe for the public and after the first complete growing season following completion of final clean-up, NGTL will facilitate a post-construction site visit at the request • BFN must be actively of the community. engaged with all proposed reclamation activities

BFN requests: Hidden Lake North Unit Addition BFN identified that there were large ditches around the compressor station with wildlife potentially drinking water out of the ditches. Section 8.1 and Appendix PCF, LSA and RSA 1E of the EPP • That a berm be placed NGTL notes the ditch at the existing Hidden Lake North Compressor Station is necessary to maintain surface water drainage around the facility owing to the extensive wetlands in this area. The around the Hidden Lake compressor station and planned unit addition are part of the NGTL system for the transmission of sweet natural gas; The NGTL system does not transport oil, liquids, or condensates. Pipeline and North Unit Addition so that facility leaks or ruptures are unlikely, but in the event of a release, natural gas will disperse into the atmosphere. The facility design and construction, as well as preventative maintenance procedures, contaminated water and will limit the potential for a product release. Further, NGTL will implement the following general environmental protection mitigation measures to reduce the potential for contamination of soils during other liquids are contained construction: at the site and do not • During construction, the Chemical and Waste Management Plan will be implemented. contaminate the surrounding areas • The Contractor will ensure equipment is monitored regularly and free of fluid leaks. • Bulk fuel trucks, service vehicles, and pick-up trucks equipped with box mounted fuel tanks shall carry release prevention, containment, and clean up materials that are suitable for the volume of fuels or oils carried. • Release contingency material carried on bulk fuel and service vehicles, stationed near watercourses or waterbodies, or in environmental response units shall be suitable for use on land and water. In the event of a spill during construction, the Release Contingency Plan will be implemented.

Potential effects on freshwater North Star Section 2, Red Earth Fishing was identified as being very important to BFN in a variety of different watercourses. A large river was observed on the North Star Section 2. Watercourses observed on the Red Earth Section 3 Sections 5.3 and 5.7 rivers and streams, including: Section 3 and Bear Canyon included creeks, lakes, rivers, swamps and a year-round spring. Sections 1.4 and 8.1 of Extension Section PCF and LSA • Pipeline crossings The Hidden Lake North Unit Addition PCF and associated connectivity piping are not located within 30 m of any watercourses; therefore, water quality and fish habitat is not anticipated to be affected the EPP by construction and operation of the unit addition. BFN requests: Watercourse crossing methods considered include both trenched (i.e., open cut or isolated) and trenchless (e.g., horizontal directional drill) options. Watercourse crossing methods at each location • Degradation of rivers and were assessed considering watercourse sensitivity, presence of fish and fish habitat, feasibility, and past experience with reclamation and restoration success. Trenchless crossings are conducted in streams via pipeline accordance with the applicable sections of the Trenchless Crossing Management Plan. For pipeline crossings conducted using a trenched crossing method, apply applicable Fisheries and Oceans crossings be minimized Canada Measures to Avoid Causing Harm to Fish and Fish Habitat. NGTL determines the appropriate crossing method by considering and balancing a variety of technical, environmental, stakeholder and economic considerations, along with site-specific conditions. In most cases, a conventional trenched crossing is the preferred crossing method because it involves the least footprint, duration of installation and cost. NGTL can construct these crossings effectively and has a proven suite of mitigation measures and industry best practices to address conventional construction across most watercourses. Where minimal disturbance construction can be employed at these crossings, natural revegetation has been more successful and cost effective than the active reclamation measures needed at locations where stripping and grading occurs. Where warranted, a water quality monitoring plan will be developed where trenchless methods are used. NGTL will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential for adverse effects of the Project on fish and fish habitat: • The Contractor shall develop a detailed site-specific watercourse crossing plan and submit the plan to NGTL for approval prior to initiating watercourse crossing activities. • Conduct all hydrostatic testing activities in accordance with all applicable federal and/or provincial legislation and approval conditions, including the handling, containment and disposal of all test and drying mediums used. • Complete watercourse crossings in a timely manner. Before the installation of the watercourse crossing and the commencement of instream activity, the Contractor will ensure that all necessary equipment and materials are available and are onsite. • Develop water quality monitoring plans to monitor for sediment events during instream construction activities, where required by the applicable regulatory approvals or as identified by an Aquatic Resource Specialist. If monitoring reveals sediment values are approaching threshold values, the water quality monitors will alert the EI(s) or designate(s) and work with them to develop corrective actions. If corrective actions are not successful, construction activities will be temporarily suspended until effective solutions are identified. • Install erosion and sediment control at all watercourses and/or waterbodies as directed by the EI(s) or designate(s). Where water erosion is evident, and there is potential for runoff from the construction footprint to flow into a watercourse, refer to the Soil Erosion Contingency Plan.

Source: Beaver First Nation. 2019. Report to Nova Gas Transmission Ltd. on the Proposed North Corridor Expansion Projects. Prepared for Nova Gas Transmission Ltd. April. a Detailed mitigation measures are provided in the Project-specific EPP.

September 2019 Page 2 of 2 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Appendix 8-2 North Corridor Expansion Project Cadotte Lake Métis Local 1994 Mitigation Table Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

Appendix 8-2

Cadotte Lake Métis Local 1994 Mitigation Table

September 2019 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-2 Additional Written Evidence Cadotte Lake Metis Local 1994 MItigation Table

Cadotte Lake Métis Local 1994 (CLM1994) Project-related Issues Summary for the North Corridor Expansion Project – North Central Corridor Loop (North Star Section 2, Red Earth Section 3) and the Hidden Lake North Unit Addition (the Project) Where Addressed in the Environmental and Community Interests, Approximate Location Socio-economic Issue/Concern Identified Relative to the Project a NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL) Response/Proposed Mitigation Measures b Assessment (ESA)

Potential effects on North Star Section 2, Red Earth Section 3 and Hidden Lake North Unit Addition Project The CLM1994 hold and exercise a wide array of Aboriginal rights and continue to exercise these collective rights on the ground to meet the Section 3.0, 5.9, 5.10, CLM1994’s Aboriginal rights Construction Footprint (PCF), Local Study Area (LSA), and Regional Study Area (RSA) community’s sustenance, livelihood, cultural, spiritual, socio-economic and human health and safety needs and priorities. The CLM1994 undertake 5.14 and Appendix 10 and the ability to practice cultural practices and engage in traditional livelihood pursuits such as hunting, fishing, trapping, harvesting of food and medicinal plants, Sites identified relative to North Star Section 2: • Sections 8.2, 8.4 and those rights, including: establishing and maintaining camps, accessing and travelling across the lands and waters to support their traditional economy and way of life. Appendices 1E and 1F of • From KP 0 to KP 5 (hunting area) CLM1994 highlight the fact that the Project falls within the identified traditional territory of the CLM1994. • Hunting large mammals, the Environmental particularly caribou • At KP 19.5 (Notikewin River; fishing area) CLM1994 continue to hunt and trap animals including moose, caribou, elk, black bear, brown bear, grizzly bear, mule deer, bison, rabbits, beaver, Protection Plan (EPP) muskrat, lynx, weasels, marten, fisher, squirrels, wolverine, wolves, coyotes, partridge, geese, ducks, swans, whooping crane, sandhill cranes, wild • Hunting//trapping small • 11 kilometers south of KP 7.5 (moose hunting area) turkey, as well as harvesting duck eggs. CLM1994 continue to harvest plants including diamond willow fungus, rat root, peppermint tea, laboum tea, mammals • 25 kilometres northeast of KP 23.8 (Meikle River runs into the Peace River; fishing spruce, sweet grass, and sage in their traditional territories. CLM1994 continue to fish for jackfish/northern pike, trout, rainbow trout, bull trout, • Hunting birds area) grayling, pickerel/walleye, goldeye, ling cod, whitefish and sucker fish. • Fishing • 36 kilometres northwest of KP 0 (Chinchaga River; fishing area) On the Red Earth Section 3 site visit CLM1994 identified wildlife signs including wildlife trails, ungulate trails, a water site for animals in the early winter, a predator track sighting, and also caribou and moose sightings. Wildlife habitat that was identified on the Red Earth Section 3 included • • Harvesting berries 39 kilometers northeast of KP 23.8 (important movement corridor for moose) moose habitat, and a geese resting/migration area. • • Harvesting plants 54 kilometers north of KP 20.5 (hunting, fishing, and trapping area) North Star Section 2 has been designed to parallel existing disturbances for 100% of its length, Red Earth Section 3 has been designed to parallel • Harvesting wood • 64 kilometers south of KP 14 (winter hunting area) existing disturbances for 98% of its length, and the Hidden Lake North Unit Addition partially overlaps the existing station and the connectivity piping parallels existing rights-of-way and disturbances between the two existing stations. Clearing of vegetation for Project construction will result in an • • Quarrying rock 67 kilometres east of KP 20.5 (Peace River; fishing area) increase in the combined width (i.e., expansion) of existing linear disturbances. Following existing or proposed linear disturbances allows the • Collecting potable water • 71 kilometers south of KP 1 (hunting area) Project Footprint to be reduced by utilizing temporary workspace on the adjacent disposition as much as possible, as well as minimizing the fragmentation of the landscape. Reclamation and cleanup will be completed to maintain equivalent land capability, ensuring the ability of the land to • • Constructing, maintaining, 81 kilometers northwest of KP 0 (hunting area) support various land uses similar to the uses that existed before construction. and living in shelters • 97 kilometres northwest of KP 0 (moose hunting area) NGTL will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential adverse effects of the Project on wildlife and wildlife habitat: • Traveling and access • 105 kilometers northeast of KP 9 (hunting grounds) • Locate deck sites in previously-disturbed areas, wherever practical. CLM1994 requests: • 122 kilometers northeast of KP 0 (few good areas left in CLM1994 territory for • Share existing access with other industrial users, where feasible. • NGTL engage with hunting and camping area) CLM1994 and share • Schedule clearing and construction activities to avoid sensitive wildlife timing windows to the extent feasible. • 122 kilometres northwest of KP 0 (Pot holes lakes; fishing area) perspectives on the • In the event there is a timing conflict, consult with the appropriate regulatory agency to discuss practical options and mitigation measures. Project’s potential to result • 123 kilometres northwest of KP 0 (unnamed lake; fishing area) in adverse direct, indirect, • Leave gaps in windrows (e.g., topsoil/strippings, grade spoil, rollback, snow) and strung pipe at obvious drainages and wildlife trails, and to allow • 130 kilometres west of KP 0 (Doig River; fishing area) and cumulative impacts on for livestock and vehicle/machinery passage across the construction footprint. Locations where wildlife gaps are appropriate will be determined the rights and interests of • 134 kilometers west of KP 0 (hunting grounds) in the field by the Environmental Inspector(s). These gaps should align. the CLM1994 • 136 kilometres southwest of KP 0 (Meikle River; fishing area) If previously unidentified listed or sensitive wildlife species or their site-specific habitat (e.g. dens, nests) are identified during construction of the • NGTL discuss and propose Project, report to the Environmental Inspector(s) and implement the Wildlife Species of Concern Discovery Contingency Plan. measures and actions to In the event Project activities are scheduled to occur within the Primary Nesting Period for the Bird Conservation Region for migratory birds, refer to address adverse impacts the Breeding Bird and Nest Management Plan. on CLM1994’s rights, interests, and to CLM1994 identified that the Hidden Lake North Unit Addition access and the Red Earth Section 3 component overlap with caribou ranges. demonstratively advance CLM1994 noted that woodland caribou are listed as Threatened under the Alberta Wildlife Act, Schedule 1 of the Species at Risk Act (SARA) and the principles of by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC). reconciliation that may be shared by the two parties

September 2019 Page 1 of 41 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-2 Additional Written Evidence Cadotte Lake Metis Local 1994 MItigation Table

Potential effects on Sites identified relative to Red Earth Section 3: The Hidden Lake North Unit Addition is within the Chinchaga caribou range, but within an area of existing industrial development. Approximately See above CLM1994’s Aboriginal rights half of Red Earth Section 3 is located within the Red Earth caribou range. NGTL will implement the CHROMP, which was developed for the Project • From KP 8.3 to KP 13.6 (moose habitat) and the ability to practice and reflects ongoing consultation with the appropriate provincial agencies and Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) (ESA Appendix those rights (cont’d) • From KP 17.4 to 28.9 (moose habitat and caribou sighting area) 10). The CHROMP will be available for review on the NEB website as part of the Project Application. • 320 meters northeast of KP 3.1 (geese resting and migration area) In the event Project activities are scheduled to occur within the Primary Nesting Period for the Bird Conservation Region for migratory birds, refer to the Breeding Bird and Nest Management Plan. • 650 meters southeast of KP 0 (wildlife trail) NGTL will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential adverse effects of the Project on vegetation resources: • 660 metres north of KP 22.9 (moose sighting) • During clearing, fell trees towards the construction footprint wherever possible. Recover trees that inadvertently fall into adjacent undisturbed • 1.15 kilometers southwest of KP 0.5 (moose area) vegetation. • 2 kilometers southwest of KP 30.4 (hunting area) • Where practical, leave stumps in place, particularly on streambanks, to provide surface stability. Stumps that are removed will be used as • 2 kilometers southwest of KP 30.4 (moose habitat) rollback or will be disposed of by burning or chipping, where approved. • 2.3 kilometres north of KP 16.6 (predator track) • On Crown land allow for natural regeneration or seed as directed by the responsible Land Administrator. Natural recovery is the preferred method of reclamation in non-agricultural areas on level terrain where erosion is not expected. • 3.23 kilometers northeast of KP 0 (ungulate trail and a watering site) The Hidden Lake North Unit Addition PCF and associated connectivity piping is not located within 30 m of any watercourses; therefore, water • 5 kilometers northeast of KP 7.4 (moose hunting area) quality is not anticipated to be affected by construction and operation of the unit addition. • 26.9 kilometers southwest of KP 31.9 (moose kill from vehicle incident) Watercourse crossing methods considered include both trenched (i.e., open cut or isolated) and trenchless (e.g.., horizontal directional drill) • 17.5 kilometers north of KP 21.2 (community fishing area) options. Watercourse crossing methods at each location were assessed considering watercourse sensitivity, presence of fish and fish habitat, feasibility, and past experience with reclamation and restoration success. Trenchless crossings are conducted in accordance with the applicable sections of the Trenchless Crossing Management Plan. For pipeline crossings conducted using a trenched crossing method, apply applicable DFO Sites identified relative to Hidden Lake North Unit Addition: Measures to Avoid Causing Harm to Fish and Fish Habitat will be applied. • 12 kilometers southwest of the PCF (hunting grounds) NGTL will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential for adverse effects of the Project on water quality during construction: • 14 kilometres south of the PCF (Pot holes lakes; fishing area) • The Contractor shall develop a detailed site-specific watercourse crossing plan and submit the plan to NGTL for approval prior to initiating • 18 kilometers east of the PCF (hunting area) watercourse crossing activities. • 36 kilometres east of the PCF (Chinchaga River; fishing area) • All equipment shall arrive on the Project free of leaks and in good working condition. Any equipment which does not arrive free of leaks and in • 40 kilometres southwest of the PCF (Doig River; fishing area) good working conditions shall not be allowed on the construction footprint until it has been repaired, re-inspected by the Environmental Inspector(s) or designate(s), and deemed suitable for use. • 67 kilometers northwest of the PCF (few good areas left in CLM1994 territory for hunting and camping area) • Equipment to be used in or adjacent to a watercourse or waterbody will be clean or otherwise free of external grease, oil or other fluids, mud, soil and vegetation, prior to entering the waterbody. • 82 kilometers southeast of the PCF (moose hunting area) • Ensure no vehicles or equipment containing petroleum, oil, or lubricants are parked or stationed in a watercourse at any time except for • 100 kilometres southeast of the PCF (unnamed lake; fishing area) equipment that is required for that immediate phase of construction. • 124 kilometers northwest of the PCF (hunting area) • Conduct refuelling at least 100 m away from any watercourse or waterbody, when feasible. • 130 kilometers northeast of the PCF (moose hunting area) • Do not wash equipment or machinery within 30m of watercourses or waterbodies. • 133 kilometers northeast of the PCF (hunting area) NGTL will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential for sediment to enter watercourses and/or waterbodies: • 136 kilometres east of the PCF (Meikle River; fishing area) • Install erosion and sediment control at all watercourses and/or waterbodies as directed by the Environmental Inspector(s) or designate(s). • 158 kilometres east of the PCF (Meikle River runs into the Peace River; fishing • Where water erosion is evident, and there is potential for runoff from the construction footprint to flow into a watercourse, refer to the Soil Erosion area) Contingency Plan. • 160 kilometers southeast of the PCF (hunting, fishing and trapping area) • Prohibit clearing of extra temporary workspace within a 10m (minimum) riparian buffer from top of bank of the watercourse. This area shall be • 161 kilometres east of the PCF (Peace River; fishing area) clearly marked prior to clearing operations. The right-of-way will be narrowed through the riparian area, if feasible. • 162 kilometers northeast the PCF (winter hunting area) • Limit clearing at watercourse crossings to the removal of trees and shrubs at watercourse crossings to the trench line and work side areas required for vehicle crossings. • 166 kilometers east of the PCF (important movement corridor for moose) • If the working surface is unstable, do not permit clearing equipment within the 10 m riparian buffer, unless approved by the Environmental • 167 kilometers northeast of the PCF (hunting grounds) Inspector(s) or designate(s). • 319 kilometers southeast of the PCF (hunting and trapping area) • Following clearing, the 10 m riparian buffer will remain intact (i.e., consisting of low-lying understory vegetation). NGTL will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential for adverse effects of the Project on fish and fish habitat: • The Contractor shall develop a detailed site specific watercourse crossing plan and submit the plan to NGTL for approval prior to initiating watercourse crossing activities. • Conduct all hydrostatic testing activities in accordance with all applicable federal and/or provincial legislation and approval conditions, including the handling, containment and disposal of all test and drying mediums used. • Complete watercourse crossings in a timely manner. Before the installation of the watercourse crossing and the commencement of instream activity, the Contractor will ensure that all necessary equipment and materials are available and are onsite. • In fish-bearing watercourses, develop water quality monitoring plans to monitor for sediment events during instream construction activities, where required by the applicable regulatory approvals or as identified by an Aquatic Resource Specialist. If monitoring reveals sediment values are approaching threshold values, the water quality monitors will alert the Environmental Inspector(s) or designate(s) and work with them to develop corrective actions. If corrective actions are not successful, construction activities will be temporarily suspended until effective solutions are identified. • Install erosion and sediment control at all watercourses and/or waterbodies as directed by the Environmental Inspector(s) or designate(s).

September2 2019 Page 2 of 4 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-2 Additional Written Evidence Cadotte Lake Metis Local 1994 MItigation Table Cadotte Lake Métis Local 1994

Cadotte Lake Métis Local 1994 (CLM1994) Project-related Issues Summary for the North Corridor Expansion Project – North Central Corridor Loop (North Star Section 2, Red Earth Section 3) and the Hidden Lake North Unit Addition (the Project) Where Addressed in the Environmental and Community Interests, Approximate Location Socio-economic Issue/Concern Identified Relative to the Project a NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL) Response/Proposed Mitigation Measures b Assessment (ESA) Potential effects on See above • Where water erosion is evident, and there is potential for runoff from the construction footprint to flow into a watercourse, refer to the Soil Erosion See above CLM1994’s Aboriginal rights Contingency Plan. and the ability to practice those rights (cont’d) The following mitigation measures will reduce the potential adverse effects of the Project on hunting, trapping, fishing and plant harvesting: • Provide potentially affected Aboriginal groups with the proposed Project construction schedule and maps. • Project personnel are not permitted to hunt or fish on the construction footprint. • Notify registered trappers at least 10 days prior to construction. TransCanada’s Trapper Compensation Plan reimburses senior trap line holders based on the three elements of Project notification, pre- construction consultation/notification and post-construction fur loss negotiation/compensation. NGTL will implement the Traffic Control Management Plan which includes access control measures (e.g., signage, road closures, restrictions, access control) to manage and control Project-related construction traffic and to reduce unauthorized motorized access. If site-specific information is provided it will be reviewed and considered in the context of the ESA and for incorporation into Project planning, including the EPP and Environmental Alignment Sheets (EAS), as appropriate. Consideration of this information will include evaluating whether NGTL’s planned mitigation would effectively avoid the identified potential interactions, or whether additional or refined mitigation is warranted. Traditional use sites or features which require site-specific mitigation will be included in the EPP and EAS filed prior to construction. If traditional land use (TLU) sites not previously identified are found on the construction footprint during construction, implement the Cultural Resource Discovery Contingency Plan. Potential effects on Aboriginal and Treaty rights were considered in the ESA through the assessment of potential Project effects on current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes. The ESA assessed potential Project effects on the current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes by Aboriginal peoples in accordance with the NEB Filing Manual. With the implementation of recommended mitigation, adverse effects of the Project on TLRU are predicted to be not significant. NGTL is available to meet with CLM1994 to discuss the mitigation measures outlined in this table and is committed to continue discussions regarding CLM1994’s concerns about potential Project-related effects, as well as mitigation measures to minimize any such impacts. NGTL will continue to address questions and concerns from CLM1994 through its ongoing engagement efforts.

September 2019 Page 3 of 43 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-2 Additional Written Evidence Cadotte Lake Metis Local 1994 MItigation Table

Cadotte Lake Métis Local 1994 (CLM1994) Project-related Issues Summary for the North Corridor Expansion Project – North Central Corridor Loop (North Star Section 2, Red Earth Section 3) and the Hidden Lake North Unit Addition (the Project) Where Addressed in the Environmental and Community Interests, Approximate Location Socio-economic Issue/Concern Identified Relative to the Project a NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL) Response/Proposed Mitigation Measures b Assessment (ESA)

Potential cumulative effects, Sites identified relative to North Star Section 2: CLM1994 identified hunting, fishing, trapping, caribou, and increase accessibility to hunting areas to be directly impacted by cumulative effects of Section 6 including: multiple projects in their traditional territory. CLM1994 indicated that the additional pipeline capacity has a high likelihood of introducing and shaping • 30 kilometers east of KP 23.8 (heavy all-terrain vehicle [ATV] use and human further natural gas exploration and development, which will in turn have additional impacts in the same landscape area. CLM1994 identified areas • Hunting access area) that have lower levels of pre-existing disturbance that have potential to support CLM1994 member’s ability to exercise their rights and practice and • Fishing • 74 kilometres northeast of KP 23.8 (old hunting grounds, no longer good) transmit their culture. • Trapping • 81 kilometers northwest of KP 0 (old caribou hunting grounds) Resource-specific mitigation outlined in this table will be implemented to reduce the potential adverse effects of the Project on wildlife and wildlife habitat, vegetation, water quality, and fish and fish habitat. • Caribou • 88 kilometers northeast of KP 23.8 (old plant gathering areas no longer good) The ESA included a cumulative effects assessment which considered the effects of past, present and reasonably foreseeable future projects, • Increased accessibility including the Project’s contribution to those effects. The cumulative effects methodology following the Canadian Environmental Assessment Sites identified relative to Red Earth Section 3: Agency’s Operational Policy Statement for Assessing Cumulative Environmental Effects under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 and the NEB Filing Manual. Cumulative effects are evaluated for significance using the same definition used for significance determination for • From KP 0.6 to KP 4.4 (existing cumulatively disturbed area) residual effects. • 101.13 kilometers northwest of KP 31.9 (heavy ATV use and human access area) The ESA assumes that other companies and other NGTL projects and activities considered (i.e., not the Project itself) will employ similar mitigation measures as those described in Section 7.0 to control effects on the environment from the specific project. Potential Project-related cumulative Sites identified relative to Hidden Lake North Unit Addition: effects are minimized with the implementation of the following design and construction measures: • • 32 kilometers northwest of PCF (old caribou hunting grounds) Maximizing the use of adjacent existing right-of-way and reducing the width of additional clearing as much as possible (North Star Section 2 has been designed to parallel existing disturbances for 100% of its length, the Red Earth Section 3 has been designed to parallel existing • 142 kilometers southwest of PCF (old caribou country) disturbances for 98% of its length, and the Hidden Lake North Unit Addition partially overlaps the existing compressor station while the • 168 kilometres west of PCF (old hunting grounds, no longer good) connectivity piping parallels existing rights-of-way and disturbance between two existing compressor stations). • Avoiding construction during critical wildlife timing windows when feasible. • Adhering to the approved construction footprint and access. No new permanent access is anticipated for the Project. Access to the Project will be from existing public and private access points and roads (respecting traffic safety and concern for other users) and controlled existing access and rights-of-way of others. Following construction, NGTL will implement access management measures where applicable to deter an increase in motorized public access along new pipeline rights-of-way, on new temporary construction access, and into existing linear disturbances that intersect the Project right-of-way. This is in keeping with commitments to mitigate the potential for new access as a result of the Project. NGTL will implement mitigation measures relevant to access management, including the following: • Clearly delineate areas that have access restrictions. • Restrict access to construction personnel only. • Remove bar ditch ramps and reclaim all temporary access trails and shoo-flies to stable conditions. Re-contour to preconstruction conditions and seed accordingly. • Remove all temporary vehicle crossing structures

Source: Cadotte Lake Métis. 2019. North Corridor Expansions (Hidden Lake North Unit Addition, North Star Section 2 & Red Earth Section 3). Cadotte Lake Métis Filed Survey and Cultural Data Summary. March 2019. a Distances to sites identified are approximate for the Hidden Lake North Unit Addition and the North Star Section 2 since specific locations were not provided by CLM1994 in their report. b Detailed mitigation measures are provided in the Project-specific EPP.

September4 2019 Page 4 of 4 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Appendix 8-3 North Corridor Expansion Project Doig River First Nation Mitigation Table Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

Appendix 8-3

Doig River First Nation Mitigation Table

September 2019

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-3 Additional Written Evidence Diog River First Nation Mitigation Table

Doig River First Nation (DRFN) Project-related Issues Summary for the North Corridor Expansion Project – North Central Corridor Loop (Hidden Lake North Unit Addition) and Northwest Mainline Loop No. 2 (Bear Canyon North Extension) (the Project) Where Addressed in the Environmental Approximate Location and Socioeconomic Community Interests, Issue/Concern Identified Relative to the Project NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL) Response/Proposed Mitigation Measures Assessment (ESA)

DRFN requests: N/A NGTL is committed to continue discussions regarding DRFN’s concerns about potential Project-related effects, as well as mitigation measures to minimize any such impacts. N/A NGTL will continue to address questions and concerns from DRFN through its ongoing engagement efforts. • A DRFN-TCPL Projects Working Group be established and funded to improve the efficacy of collaboration and responses to concerns by both organizations. The purpose of the Committee is to create a collaborative working group to ensure there is adequate and accountable consultation throughout the course of project development.

Potential cumulative effects on: Hidden Lake North Unit Resource-specific mitigation outlined in this table will be implemented to reduce the potential adverse effects of the Project on wildlife and wildlife habitat, vegetation, water Section 6 Addition and Bear Canyon quality, and fish and fish habitat. • Caribou habitat North Extension Regional The ESA included a cumulative effects assessment which considered the effects of past, present and reasonably foreseeable future projects, including the Project’s contribution • Caribou herds Study Area (RSA) to those effects. The cumulative effects assessment methodology follows the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency’s Operational Policy Statement for Assessing • Grizzly bears Cumulative Environmental Effects under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 and the NEB Filing Manual. Cumulative effects are evaluated for significance using the same definition used for significance determination for residual effects. • Wetlands The ESA assumes that other companies and other NGTL projects and activities considered (i.e., not the Project itself) will employ similar mitigation measures as those • Fisheries described in Section 5.0 of the ESA to control effects on the environment from the specific project. Potential Project-related cumulative effects are minimized with the implementation of the following design and construction measures: • Maximizing the use of adjacent existing right-of-way and reducing the width of additional clearing as much as possible (the Bear Canyon North Extension parallels existing or proposed linear disturbances for 94% of its length and the Hidden Lake North Unit Addition partially overlaps the existing compressor station while the connectivity piping parallels existing rights-of-way and disturbance between two existing compressor stations). • Avoiding construction during critical wildlife timing windows when feasible. • Adhering to the approved construction footprint and access.

September 2019 Page 1 of 61 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-3 Additional Written Evidence Diog River First Nation Mitigation Table

Potential effects on wildlife and wildlife habitat, including: Hidden Lake North Unit DRFN observed a moose on the Hidden Lake North Unit Addition site visit, as well as wildlife signs including deer, rabbit, lynx, and mouse tracks, deer scat and a beaver den. Sections 5.6, 5.10, Addition, and Bear Canyon On the Bear Canyon North Extension, DRFN observed bee hives, grouse, whiskey jacks, and a magpie. Wildlife signs observed on the Bear Canyon North Extension include 5.11, and Appendix 10 • Caribou range North Extension Project game trails, bear trails, bear scat, moose trails, a moose and deer bed, squirrels house, wildlife altered trees, bear claws on trees, and a wildlife tree. No specific locations were Section 7.0 and • Grizzly bear range Construction Footprint provided by DRFN. Appendices 1E and 1F (PCF), Local Study Area • Enhanced predation through long sightlines 1 Bear Canyon North Extension has been designed to parallel existing disturbances for 94% of its length and the Hidden Lake North Unit Addition partially overlaps the existing of the Environmental (LSA) and RSA station and the connectivity piping parallels existing rights-of-way and disturbances between the two existing stations. Clearing of vegetation for Project construction will result in Protection Plan (EPP) DRFN requests: an increase in the combined width (i.e., expansion) of existing linear disturbances. Following existing or proposed linear disturbances allows the Project Footprint to be reduced • Exploration and implementation of long-term restoration, by utilizing temporary workspace on the adjacent disposition as much as possible, as well as minimizing the fragmentation of the landscape. Reclamation and cleanup will be habitat and wildlife recovery, and access management completed to maintain equivalent land capability, ensuring the ability of the land to support various land uses similar to the uses that existed before construction. strategies, including strategies that may be relevant beyond NGTL will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential adverse effects of the Project on wildlife and wildlife habitat: the immediate vicinity of the Project • Locate deck sites in previously-disturbed areas, wherever practical. • Joint monitoring of development, wildlife, and habitat • Share existing access with other industrial users, where feasible. • Recommendations from the Fort Nelson First Nation Boreal Caribou Recovery Plan be reviewed and carried forward with • Schedule clearing and construction activities to avoid sensitive wildlife timing windows to the extent feasible. DRFN when the updated report becomes available • In the event there is a timing conflict, consult with the appropriate regulatory agency to discuss practical options and mitigation measures. • Avoid construction and undue disturbance from operation • Leave gaps in windrows (e.g., topsoil/strippings, grade spoil, rollback, snow) and strung pipe at obvious drainages and wildlife trails, and to allow for livestock and during late winter when animals may already be stressed and vehicle/machinery passage across the construction footprint. Locations where wildlife gaps are appropriate will be determined in the field by the Environmental Inspector(s). late spring / early summer ungulate calving season during These gaps should align. construction If previously unidentified listed or sensitive wildlife species or their site-specific habitat (e.g. dens, nests) are identified during construction of the Project, report to the • Where possible, construction activities not result in barriers to Environmental Inspector(s) and implement the Wildlife Species of Concern Discovery Contingency Plan. wildlife movement Bear Canyon Extension is scheduled to be constructed from the fourth quarter of 2021 to the first quarter of 2022, under winter conditions. Construction of the Hidden Lake • Where the top height of potential barriers (e.g., strung pipe, North Unit Addition is scheduled to be constructed from the first quarter of 2021 to the first quarter of 2022. In the event Project activities are scheduled to occur within the soil stockpiles, and wind rows) exceed 1.5 metres (m) in Primary Nesting Period for the Bird Conservation Region for migratory birds, refer to the Breeding Bird and Nest Management Plan. height for more than 72 hours in duration, it is required that physical breaks in pipe/material be employed every 200 m The Bear Canyon North Extension is not located in caribou range. The Hidden Lake North Unit Addition is within the Chinchaga caribou range, but within an area of existing industrial development. NGTL will implement the Caribou Habitat Restoration and Offsetting Mitigation Plan (CHROMP), which was developed for the Project and reflects • Avoid tree removal during bird mating season and removing ongoing consultation with the appropriate provincial agencies and Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) (ESA Appendix 10). The CHROMP is available for review trees with bird nests on the NEB website as part of the Project Application. NGTL is committed to continue to work with DRFN to participate in the planning and implementation of caribou habitat • Environmental studies on seasonal bird and wildlife activities restoration, offsetting and monitoring of NGTL projects. As part of the regulatory process for NEB filings, NGTL has provided all potentially affected stakeholders, landowners be sent to DRFN for review and Aboriginal groups, including DRFN, with notification of the filing and the NEB website to access the documents. • Continue developing and implementing best practices akin to NGTL has reduced their overall Project footprint by paralleling existing disturbances and rights-of-way and has overlapped existing NGTL right-of-way to reduce workspace those being developed for the Boundary Lake Habitat wherever possible. NGTL will implement minimum surface disturbance construction where feasible (e.g., where grading is not necessary) and where conditions allow, to Restoration Pilot Project with DRFN facilitate rapid regeneration of vegetation. NGTL has prepared a project-specific EPP (Appendices 1C and 1D) which outlines environmental protection measures to avoid or reduce potential adverse effects during construction. • Implement access and sightline control measures NGTL will install rollback where practical and effective to prevent access along portions of the construction footprint as directed by the Environmental Inspector(s) or • DRFN monitor the progress of habitat restoration measures designate(s). NGTL will implement habitat restoration measures in the Chinchaga caribou range as specified in the CHROMP (ESA Appendix 10). Access management will be jointly developed by DRFN and NGTL designed to deter predator and human motorized access along the Project rights-of-way. Line-of-sight measures will not be implemented where the proposed pipeline parallels • If a project is modifying or expanding existing linear existing infrastructure as they have been determined to be ineffective. Although purposely installed line-of-sight measures (such as fabricated screens) are no longer used by disturbances such as right-of-way corridors that do not NGTL, other functional restoration techniques, such as access control (e.g., rollback, tree felling/hinging) and other caribou habitat restoration measures (e.g., tree planting) will already adhere to the principles for habitat and access be used in the Chinchaga caribou range to reduce line-of-sight on the right-of-way. management that DRFN and NGTL are jointly developing with The northern portion of the Bear Canyon North Extension is located within a provincially identified Grizzly Bear Support Zone. Construction in forested habitat on the Bear the Boundary Lake Habitat Restoration Pilot Project, these Canyon North Extension will occur in the late fall/winter, when grizzly bears are not expected to be active in the area and no suitable grizzly bear denning habitat was identified principles should be applied to the new project to extend in the LSA given a lack of high elevation habitat, sloping terrain and the presence of high levels of existing anthropogenic disturbance. The Hidden Lake North Unit Addition is across the combined width of the corridor located within a provincially identified Grizzly Bear Secondary Zone, but habitat within the PCF and LSA is disturbed and fragmented by oil and gas activity. There is no suitable bear denning habitat near the Hidden Lake North Unit Addition. No new permanent access is anticipated for the Project. Access to the Project will be from existing public and private access points and roads (respecting traffic safety and concern for other users) and controlled existing access and rights-of-way of others. NGTL will implement mitigation measures relevant to access management, including the following: • Clearly delineate areas that have access restrictions. • Restrict access to construction personnel only. • Remove bar ditch ramps and reclaim all temporary access trails and shoo-flies to stable conditions. Re-contour to preconstruction conditions and seed accordingly. • Remove all temporary vehicle crossing structures The Project will follow NGTL’s Post-Construction Monitoring (PCM) methodology as outlined in the ESA and/or other Project-specific environmental documents, which ensures compliance with specific reclamation performance expectations and applicable regulatory requirements. Mitigation methods will be based on the principle that success of land reclamation is measured against adjacent representative site conditions while taking into consideration the status of reclamation of the time of assessment. NGTL is available to meet with DRFN to provide an overview of NGTL’s pipeline monitoring program, if requested. DRFN also has the opportunity to provide feedback post-construction through ongoing engagement with Regional Liaisons and NGTL’s Public Awareness Program. NGTL will remain available to discuss and, where possible, address any concerns DRFN may have during operation and maintenance (O&M) of the Project. When the site has been determined safe for the public and after the first complete growing season following completion of final clean-up, NGTL will facilitate a post-construction site visit, if requested by DRFN. Results of supplemental environmental studies will be filed with the NEB and notification of the filing with a link to the repository location will be provided to DRFN. NGTL will continue to collaborate with DRFN on developing and implementing best practices.

September2 2019 Page 2 of 6 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-3 Additional Written Evidence Diog River First Nation Mitigation Table

Doig River First Nation (DRFN) Project-related Issues Summary for the North Corridor Expansion Project – North Central Corridor Loop (Hidden Lake North Unit Addition) and Northwest Mainline Loop No. 2 (Bear Canyon North Extension) (the Project) Where Addressed in the Environmental Approximate Location and Socioeconomic Community Interests, Issue/Concern Identified Relative to the Project NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL) Response/Proposed Mitigation Measures Assessment (ESA)

Potential effects on water and water quality. Hidden Lake North Unit The Hidden Lake North Unit Addition PCF and associated connectivity piping is not located within 30 m of any watercourses; therefore, water quality is not anticipated to be Section 5.3 Addition, and Bear Canyon affected by construction and operation of the unit addition. DRFN requests: Sections 8.1 and 8.4 of North Extension PCF, Watercourse crossing methods considered include both trenched (i.e., open cut or isolated) and trenchless (e.g., horizontal directional drill) options. Watercourse crossing the EPP • Restoration of river crossing areas, including developing and LSA, and RSA methods at each location were assessed considering watercourse sensitivity, presence of fish and fish habitat, feasibility, and past experience with reclamation and restoration implementing riparian zone management and strategies for success. Trenchless crossings are conducted in accordance with the applicable sections of the Trenchless Crossing Management Plan. For pipeline crossings conducted using responding to changing rainfall, snow melt, and runoff a trenched crossing method, apply applicable Fisheries and Oceans Canada Measures to Avoid Causing Harm to Fish and Fish Habitat. conditions NGTL determines the appropriate crossing method by considering and balancing a variety of technical, environmental, stakeholder and economic considerations, along with site-specific conditions. In most cases, a conventional trenched crossing is the preferred crossing method because it involves the least footprint, duration of installation and cost. NGTL can construct these crossings effectively and has a proven suite of mitigation measures and industry best practices to address conventional construction across most watercourses. Where minimal disturbance construction can be employed at these crossings, natural revegetation has been more successful and cost effective than the active reclamation measures needed at locations where stripping and grading occurs. Where warranted, a water quality monitoring plan will be developed where trenchless methods are used. NGTL will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential for adverse effects of the Project on water quality during construction: • The Contractor shall develop a detailed site-specific watercourse crossing plan and submit the plan to NGTL for approval prior to initiating watercourse crossing activities. • All equipment shall arrive on the Project free of leaks and in good working condition. Any equipment which does not arrive free of leaks and in good working condition shall not be allowed on the construction footprint until it has been repaired, re-inspected by the EI(s) or designate(s), and deemed suitable for use. • Equipment to be used in or adjacent to a watercourse or waterbody will be clean or otherwise free of external grease, oil or other fluids, mud, soil and vegetation, prior to entering the waterbody. • Ensure no vehicles or equipment containing petroleum, oil, or lubricants are parked or stationed in a watercourse at any time except for equipment that is required for that immediate phase of construction. • Conduct refuelling at least 100 m away from any watercourse or waterbody, when feasible. • Do not wash equipment or machinery within 30 m of watercourses or waterbodies. NGTL will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential for sediment to enter watercourses and/or waterbodies and reduce potential effects on riparian areas: • Install erosion and sediment control at all watercourses and/or waterbodies as directed by the Environmental Inspector(s) or designate(s). • Where water erosion is evident, and there is potential for runoff from the construction footprint to flow into a Watercourse, refer to the Soil Erosion Contingency Plan. • Prohibit clearing of extra temporary workspace within a 10 m (minimum) riparian buffer from top of bank of the watercourse. This area shall be clearly marked prior to clearing operations. The right-of-way will be narrowed through the riparian area, if feasible. • Limit clearing of trees and shrubs at watercourse crossings to the trench line and work side areas required for vehicle crossings. • Fell trees away from watercourses where feasible. Immediately remove trees, debris or soil inadvertently deposited below the high watermark of a watercourse. • If the working surface is unstable, do not permit clearing equipment within the 10 m riparian buffer, unless approved by the Environmental Inspector(s) or designate(s). Following clearing, the 10 m riparian buffer will remain intact (i.e., consisting of low-lying understory vegetation).

1 Effects were identified by DRFN within a 5-kilometer Local Effect Study Area surrounding the Project.

September 2019 Page 3 of 63 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-3 Additional Written Evidence Diog River First Nation Mitigation Table

Doig River First Nation (DRFN) Project-related Issues Summary for the North Corridor Expansion Project – North Central Corridor Loop (Hidden Lake North Unit Addition) and Northwest Mainline Loop No. 2 (Bear Canyon North Extension) (the Project) Where Addressed in the Environmental Approximate Location and Socioeconomic Community Interests, Issue/Concern Identified Relative to the Project NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL) Response/Proposed Mitigation Measures Assessment (ESA)

Potential accidents and malfunctions. Hidden Lake North Unit The product to be transported by this Project is sweet natural gas. The Project will not transport oil, liquids, or condensates. In the event of a pipeline leak or rupture, natural gas Section 2.3 Addition, and Bear Canyon will disperse into the atmosphere. DRFN requests: Section 8.1 and North Extension PCF, The Project has been designed, and will be constructed and operated following applicable standards, industry best management practices and Project-specific mitigation Appendix 1E of the • To discuss how NGTL responds to incidents LSA, and RSA identified in the ESA and the EPP. These measures are expected to avoid or reduce the potential of an accident or malfunction related to the Project. During operation and EPP maintenance, NGTL will implement a combination of incident prevention measures, safety devices and procedures under TransCanada’s corporate Emergency Management System to ensure public safety and including the following: • Availability of emergency response personnel on call 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. NGTL’s first responders consist of employees and contract personnel who specialize in emergency response. The local police and fire departments may be called on for community protection so that our personnel are able to work safely and the public is protected. • The Emergency Response Plan includes notification of Aboriginal groups in proximity to the location. • The appropriate regulators and emergency responders will be notified in the event of an emergency. The Project will be monitored and controlled by the TransCanada Operational Control Centre (OCC). Located in Calgary, the OCC remotely monitors and controls the operation of the NGTL System and other TransCanada-owned and operated pipelines. The OCC is staffed 24 hours per day and uses a computer-based Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) System, which controls gas compression, metering and remote valve facilities to ensure the required gas volumes, line pack and contract pressures are achieved daily. The SCADA system alerts the OCC operator of significant operational changes in the pipeline system. In the unlikely event of a pressure drop, pipeline block valves, which are equipped with actuators with low-pressure detection, will automatically close on sensing low pressure, to isolate the pipe segment. NGTL notes the existing spill prevention programs detailed in the EPP have been successful in preventing spills during construction and ensuring appropriate action and reporting if spills do occur. The EPP applies to all employees, contractors and consultants who conduct work on behalf of NGTL during construction of the Project. All employees, contractors and consultants will abide by all federal, provincial and local requirements for the storage, handling, transport, disposal and spill reporting requirements of all products and waste materials that are potentially hazardous to human health and the environment. In the event of a spill during construction, the Release Contingency Plan will be implemented.

Potential effects on traditional land and resource use. Hidden Lake North Unit Through their desktop review, DRFN documented traditional use knowledge and resource sites in the Bear Canyon North Extension LSA at Ole Lake, Moose/Boundary Lake, Section 5.14 DRFN requests: Addition, and Bear Canyon and an unnamed creek that flows into Clear River. The identified traditional use sites are located outside the PCF and are not anticipated to interact with the Project. Appendix 1E of the North Extension LSA, and DRFN also documented traditional harvesting sites, camping sites, a log cabin, gathering places, specialty wood and firewood harvesting sites, trapping areas, one birth place, EPP • A comprehensive Traditional Use Study that interviews DRFN RSA and a portion of a hunting trail in the Bear Canyon North Extension LSA, however specific locations were not provided. In the Hidden Lake North Unit Addition area, traditional Members will be conducted for a large region around this Sites identified relative to use knowledge and resource sites identified include a traditional (Beaver) language place name, a moose hunting area, and a historical trail marking a DRFN trapping area, Project and the larger pipeline delivery network that it is Bear Canyon North however specific locations were not identified. connected to; this would prepare both DRFN and NGTL for Extension: future development and co-develop adequate mitigation If site-specific information is provided it will be reviewed and considered in the context of the ESA and for incorporation into Project planning, including the EPP and strategies • 630 meters east of Environmental Alignment Sheets (EAS), as appropriate. Consideration of this information will include evaluating whether NGTL’s planned mitigation would effectively avoid the Kilometre Post (KP) 18 identified potential interactions, or whether additional or refined mitigation is warranted. Traditional use sites or features which require site-specific mitigation will be included in • An adequate budget for Traditional Use Studies, which should (Ole Lake) the EPP and EAS filed prior to construction. be part of project start-up conversations between DRFN and NGTL • 4.6 kilometers west of If traditional land use sites not previously identified are found on the construction footprint during construction, implement the Cultural Resource Discovery Contingency Plan. KP 19 • Discussion regarding the concerns and recommendations NGTL funded a traditional knowledge (TK) study with DRFN for the Project, which included fieldwork to identify sites, areas and resources of importance to DRFN. Requests for (Moose/Boundary Lake) provided by DRFN as part of Traditional Use Studies capacity funding or NGTL support for a broad, regional Traditional Use Study is beyond the scope of the Project. NGTL is committed to continue discussions regarding the • Unknown location community’s concern about environmental effects during construction and post-construction, as well as the proposed mitigation measures to minimize those effects. (creek that flows into Clear River)

Potential effects of dust. Hidden Lake North Unit NGTL will implement the following mitigation measures to control dust from construction and vehicle traffic: Section 8.1 of the EPP Addition, and Bear Canyon DRFN requests: • Where traffic as a result of the Project has the potential to create a hazardous or irritating level of dust to nearby residents, dust control on existing access roads will be North Extension PCF, and achieved through the application of water or calcium chloride (or equivalent). Only water will be used for dust control on the construction footprint. • Measures to mitigate dust from construction and truck traffic LSA are necessary such as watering roads during extended dry • Where practical and applicable, use multi-passenger vehicles for the transport of crews to and from job sites. and hot periods

September4 2019 Page 4 of 6 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-3 Additional Written Evidence Diog River First Nation Mitigation Table

Doig River First Nation (DRFN) Project-related Issues Summary for the North Corridor Expansion Project – North Central Corridor Loop (Hidden Lake North Unit Addition) and Northwest Mainline Loop No. 2 (Bear Canyon North Extension) (the Project) Where Addressed in the Environmental Approximate Location and Socioeconomic Community Interests, Issue/Concern Identified Relative to the Project NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL) Response/Proposed Mitigation Measures Assessment (ESA)

DRFN requests: Hidden Lake North Unit Timber and brush disposal options are subject to agreements with the appropriate regulatory agency pursuant to provincial acts and legislation. NGTL will outline the timber N/A Addition, and Bear Canyon salvage requirements for Public Lands where the Crown dispositions are under designated Forest Management Areas and Coniferous Timber Licenses. The Timber Salvage • Access to trees cut during construction and maintenance North Extension PCF Plan includes the identification of potential options for use of the salvageable timber such as rollback, transport to conversion facilities or other viable end users, including Aboriginal groups, pending availability, proximity, and sale agreements. NGTL will implement mitigation measures relevant to merchantable timber, including the following: • Merchantable timber shall be cut and salvaged as outlined within the Timber Salvage Plan, and to the Forest Management Agreement (FMA) holder’s specifications, or in accordance with landowner requests. • Do not bulldoze salvageable timber. • Suspend timber skidding operations or implement alternative measures, if the potential exists for merchantable timber to be damaged through contact with wet or muddy soils. NGTL is willing to discuss potential options for the use of merchantable timber with DRFN upon request. DRFN Elders identified a potential for archaeological sites on the hillsides next to the Peace River and four mounds were identified as having archaeological potential during the Potential effects on heritage resources. Bear Canyon North Section 5.13 Bear Canyon North Extension site visit, however specific locations were not provided. DRFN requests: Extension PCF Appendix 1E of the In all jurisdictions where TransCanada builds and operates, adherence to heritage legislation and guidance is a fundamental environmental requirement. TransCanada engages EPP • Archaeology surveys should be conducted throughout the qualified heritage consultants who undertake the necessary pre-construction desktop and field investigations as required by the provincial Ministry that has jurisdiction for the Project site with the participation of DRFN Members, including Project area. On behalf of NGTL, project information and appropriate documentation was provided to Alberta Culture Multiculturalism & Status of Women (ACMSW, formerly both youth and elders; DRFN views archaeological study as a Alberta Culture and Tourism) to determine the Historical Resources Act requirements for the Project. Historical Resources Act approval was issued by ACMSW without separate initiative from a comprehensive Traditional Use requirements for pre-construction archaeological Historical Resource Impact Assessments. Standard conditions apply to all components, including reporting of any incidental Study finds during construction. In the event of unanticipated discovery during construction, NGTL will implement the Cultural Resource Discovery Contingency Plan, as appropriate, to ensure that any sites not previously identified are properly recorded and mapped, and the potential disturbance of those sites from construction activities is addressed before continuing with construction.

Potential effects of abandonment processes. Hidden Lake North Unit NGTL is committed to managing its pipeline assets throughout their full life cycle. Decommissioning and abandonment activities will require prior approval by the NEB, its Section 5.21 possible successors, and other applicable agencies. It is difficult at this time to predict when or how the pipelines and facilities will be decommissioned or abandoned at the end DRFN requests: Addition, and Bear Canyon North Extension PCF, of the Project's useful life. Prior to abandonment, NGTL will prepare an abandonment plan, and potentially affected communities will have the opportunity to participate in and • Industry should periodically review access and infrastructure LSA, and RSA provide comment on the proposed decommissioning and abandonment plan at that time. Consideration of community feedback, as well as future land use plans, will help to requirements and initiate restoration activities on disturbed determine the appropriate approach for the facilities that minimizes the impact to landowners, communities and the environment. Based on the project-specific evaluation, sites that are no longer in use or necessary NGTL may remove the pipeline and associated infrastructure; leave the pipeline in place or a combination of the two on a site-specific basis, in consultation with affected parties and in accordance with legislative and regulatory requirements in place at the time of decommissioning or abandonment. Potential effects of pesticide use. Hidden Lake North Unit NGTL cannot commit to fully eliminating herbicide applications during post-construction vegetation control, but employs the following measures to responsibly manage the use Section 5.8 Addition, and Bear Canyon DRFN requests: of chemical applications: Section 8.1 of EPP North Extension PCF • • Alternatives to pesticides be discussed, such as DRFN owned Limit the use of chemical applications and operated biological controls (i.e., sheep) • Prohibit the general application of herbicide near rare plants or rare ecological communities. Spot spraying, wicking, mowing, or handpicking are acceptable measures for weed control in these areas. • Prohibit the use of herbicides within 30 m of an open body of water, unless the herbicide application is conducted by ground application equipment, or otherwise approved by the relevant regulatory agency. In areas supporting natural vegetation, NGTL promotes the regeneration and establishment of native vegetation and the widespread application of herbicides on NGTL assets is not common practice. However, due to obligations under the Alberta Weed Control Act, NGTL must comply with legislated requirements in the event thresholds for listed species are exceeded. NGTL is committed to continue discussions regarding DRFN’s concerns about chemical applications, including potentially alternative measures.

September 2019 Page 5 of 65 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-3 Additional Written Evidence Diog River First Nation Mitigation Table

Doig River First Nation (DRFN) Project-related Issues Summary for the North Corridor Expansion Project – North Central Corridor Loop (Hidden Lake North Unit Addition) and Northwest Mainline Loop No. 2 (Bear Canyon North Extension) (the Project) Where Addressed in the Environmental Approximate Location and Socioeconomic Community Interests, Issue/Concern Identified Relative to the Project NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL) Response/Proposed Mitigation Measures Assessment (ESA)

Potential effects on wetlands. Hidden Lake North Unit DRFN identified that the Bear Canyon North Extension right-of-way runs through a substantial wetland complex. Section 5.8 Addition, and Bear Canyon Temporary effects to wetlands as a result of construction of the Bear Canyon North Extension are addressed through industry-standard best practices and policies, including Section 8.1 of EPP North Extension PCF and Alberta’s Codes of Practice (COP), the Federal Policy Wetland Conservation (FPWC) and the Alberta Wetland Policy. To achieve the “no net loss” goal of the FPWC and align LSA with the intent of the Alberta Wetland Policy, NGTL used the wetland mitigation hierarchy (i.e., avoid, minimize, and replace) to reduce potential effects on wetlands. NGTL’s routing criteria primarily relies on paralleling the existing rights-of-ways and considers reducing the impacts to environmentally sensitive areas, including wetlands. Routing is the primary mechanism used for avoiding and minimizing impacts to wetlands but is considered in light of all routing criteria and environmental sensitivities. Where wetlands could not be avoided, mitigation provided in the Project-specific environmental protection plans will be implemented to minimize potential effects to wetlands. NGTL will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential for adverse effects of the Project on wetlands: • NGTL will obtain regulatory approval for construction activities occurring within wetlands, as required. Construct the wetland crossings in accordance with the applicable regulatory requirements. • Minimize the removal of vegetation in wetlands to the extent possible. • Conduct ground level cutting/mowing/mulching of wetland vegetation instead of grubbing. The method of removal of wetland vegetation is subject to approval by NGTL. • Minimize grading within wetland boundary. Do not use temporary workspace within the boundaries of wetlands, unless required for site specific purposes. Temporary workspace within the boundary of a wetland must be approved by the Environmental Inspector(s) or designate(s). • The Contractor will use berms, cross ditches, sediment fencing and/or other appropriate measures to prevent erosion and siltation into adjacent wetland areas, unless otherwise directed by NGTL. Refer to the Soil Erosion Contingency Plan for additional measures. • If ground conditions are encountered that create potential for rutting, admixing or compaction, minimize ground disturbance by using a protective layer such as frost packing, snow, ice, geotextile and fill, rig mats, swamp mats or access mats between wetland root/seed bed and construction equipment. • Replace trench material as soon as feasible, and re-establish pre-construction contours within wetland boundary to facilitate cross right-of-way drainage. • Natural recovery is the preferred method of reclamation. Do not seed wetland areas unless otherwise directed by NGTL. Where permanent loss of wetlands is anticipated (potentially at the Hidden Lake North Unit Addition), a Wetland Assessment and Impact Form (WAIF) will be prepared as per the Alberta Wetland Policy’s process of wetland replacement, and in compliance with the requirements under the Alberta Water Act.

Source: Doig River First Nation. 2018. North Corridor Expansions (Hidden Lake North Unit Addition, and Bear Canyon North Extension). Traditional Use, Knowledge and Ground-truthing Study (Non-Confidential). December 2018. a Detailed mitigation measures are provided in the Project-specific EPP.

September6 2019 Page 6 of 6 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Appendix 8-4 North Corridor Expansion Project Horse Lake First Nation Mitigation Table Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

Appendix 8-4

Horse Lake First Nation Mitigation Table

September 2019

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-4 Additional Written Evidence Horse Lake First Nation Mitigation Table

Horse Lake First Nation (HLFN) Project-related Issues Summary for the North Corridor Expansion Project – North Central Corridor Loop (North Star Section 2, Red Earth Section 3), Northwest Mainline (Bear Canyon North Extension) and Hidden Lake North Unit Addition (the Project) Where Addressed in the Environmental and Community Interests/ Approximate Location Socio-economic Issue/Concern Identified Relative to the Project NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL) Response/Proposed Mitigation Measures Assessment (ESA)

1 Potential cumulative effects, including: North Star Section 2, Red Earth Section 3, HLFN reported that most of the proposed Project parallels existing pipeline rights-of-way and criss-crosses a large hydro-electric line. Section 6 Bear Canyon North Extension, and Hidden • Several projects and developments that are Lake North Unit Addition Regional Study Resource-specific mitigation outlined in this table will be implemented to reduce the potential adverse effects of the Project on wildlife and wildlife habitat, vegetation, and currently impacting the proposed Project Area (RSA) water quality. area and therefore impacting First Nations' ability to use the area for the exercise of The ESA included a cumulative effects assessment which considered the effects of past, present and reasonably foreseeable future projects, including the Project’s Treaty and Aboriginal rights and other contribution to those effects. The cumulative effects assessment methodology follows the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency’s Technical Guidance for Assessing interests Cumulative Effects under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 and the NEB Filing Manual. Cumulative effects are evaluated for significance using the same definition used for significance determination for residual effects. • HLFN members travel further from their community in search of herbs and The ESA assumes that other companies and other NGTL projects and activities considered (i.e., not the Project itself) will employ similar mitigation measures as those medicines described in Section 5.0 of the ESA to control effects on the environment from the specific project. Potential Project-related cumulative effects are minimized with the implementation of the following design and construction measures: • Effects to animals including insects, birds, • fish, mammals, reptiles and amphibians Maximizing the use of adjacent existing right-of-way and reducing the width of additional clearing as much as possible (North Star Section 2 has been designed to parallel existing disturbances for 100% of its length, the Red Earth Section 3 has been designed to parallel existing disturbances for 98% of its length, the Bear Canyon • Combined effects of many different North Extension has been designed to parallel existing disturbances for 94% of its length, and the Hidden Lake North Unit partially overlaps the existing station and the resources sectors operating within HLFN connectivity piping parallels existing rights-of-way and disturbances between the two existing stations). territory • Avoiding construction during critical wildlife timing windows, when feasible. HLFN requests: • Adhering to the approved construction footprint and access. • The proposed Project needs to be considered within the context of other Potential effects on Aboriginal and Treaty rights were considered in the ESA through the assessment of potential Project effects on current use of lands and resources for industrial developments in the area traditional purposes. The ESA assessed potential Project effects on the current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes by Aboriginal peoples in accordance with the NEB Filing Manual. With the implementation of recommended mitigation, adverse effects of the Project on TLRU are predicted to be not significant. NGTL is committed to • NGTL provide information on plans for continue discussions regarding HLFN’s concerns about potential Project-related effects, as well as mitigation measures to minimize any such impacts. NGTL will continue to assessing and managing cumulative effects address questions and concerns from HLFN through its ongoing engagement efforts. of industrial development in the area • Cumulative effects be assessed using a pre- industrial baseline to assess the past, current condition to assess the present and all potential future industrial development to assess the future • HLFN requests NGTL continue to work with HLFN on mitigating potential impacts of the proposed pipeline on the exercise of Treaty and Aboriginal rights and other interests

1 Assumed that HLFN is referring to the electrical transmission line on North Star Section 2 that crosses the Notikewin River.

SeptemberGES0612191119CGY 2019 Page 1 of 51 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-4 Additional Written Evidence Horse Lake First Nation Mitigation Table

Horse Lake First Nation (HLFN) Project-related Issues Summary for the North Corridor Expansion Project – North Central Corridor Loop (North Star Section 2, Red Earth Section 3), Northwest Mainline (Bear Canyon North Extension) and Hidden Lake North Unit Addition (the Project) Where Addressed in the Environmental and Community Interests/ Approximate Location Socio-economic Issue/Concern Identified Relative to the Project NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL) Response/Proposed Mitigation Measures Assessment (ESA)

Potential effects on water quality during North Star Section 2, Red Earth Section 3, HLFN identified waterbodies in relation to the North Star Section 2 including bogs, lakes, marshes, muskeg, rivers, streams, and swamps. HLFN identified marshes and Section 5.3 Bear Canyon North Extension, and Hidden muskeg in relation to Red Earth Section 3. HLFN identified bogs, lakes, marshes, streams, and swamps in relation to Bear Canyon North Extension and waterbodies in the construction, including: Sections 8.1 and 8.4 of Lake North Unit Addition Project Hidden Lake North Unit Addition RSA including marshes, muskeg, small streams, and rivers. • Access to safe and potable water the Environmental Construction Footprint (PCF) and LSA Red Earth Section 3 and the Bear Canyon North Extension are scheduled to be constructed from the fourth quarter of 2021 to the first quarter of 2022, under winter Protection Plans (EPPs) • Impacts on freshwater streams conditions. Construction of the North Star Section 2 is scheduled from third quarter of 2021 to the fourth quarter of 2021. North Star Section 2 is primarily agricultural land • Potential contamination of nearby where full topsoil stripping will be necessary, which is best achieved in unfrozen conditions. NGTL notes the start of construction is planned for after the primary nesting period waterbodies including creeks and swamps for birds and at the end of most breeding periods for wildlife. The Hidden Lake North Unit Addition is scheduled to be constructed from the first quarter of 2021 to the first quarter of 2022. Where stripping and grading is not required during frozen ground conditions or in Crown non-agricultural land use, implement minimal surface disturbance • The amount of available water traversing techniques as indicated on the Environmental Alignment Sheets and/or other Project-specific environment documents. the proposed Project right-of-way The Hidden Lake North Unit Addition PCF and associated connectivity piping is not located within 30 m of any watercourses; therefore, water quality is not anticipated to be HLFN requests: affected by construction and operation of the unit addition. • No damage be done to riparian habitat NGTL will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential for adverse effects of the Project on water quality during construction: • Pipeline be bored under all creeks and • The contractor shall develop a detailed site-specific watercourse crossing plan and submit the plan to NGTL for approval prior to initiating watercourse crossing activities swamps • All equipment shall arrive on the Project free of leaks and in good working condition. Any equipment which does not arrive free of leaks and in good working conditions • The Project be constructed during the shall not be allowed on the construction footprint until it has been repaired, re-inspected by the Environmental Inspector(s) or designate(s), and deemed suitable for use. winter months when the ground is completely frozen • Equipment to be used in or adjacent to a watercourse or waterbody will be clean or otherwise free of external grease, oil or other fluids, mud, soil and vegetation, prior to entering the waterbody. • Ensure no vehicles or equipment containing petroleum, oil, or lubricants are parked or stationed in a watercourse at any time except for equipment that is required for that immediate phase of construction. • Conduct refuelling at least 100 m away from any watercourse or waterbody, when feasible. • Do not wash equipment or machinery within 30m of watercourses or waterbodies. NGTL will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential for sediment to enter watercourses and/or waterbodies: • Install erosion and sediment control at all watercourses and/or waterbodies as directed by the Environmental Inspector(s) or designate(s). • Where water erosion is evident, and there is potential for runoff from the construction footprint to flow into a watercourse, refer to the Soil Erosion Contingency Plan. • Prohibit clearing of extra temporary workspace within a 10 metre (m) (minimum) riparian buffer from top of bank of the watercourse. This area shall be clearly marked prior to clearing operations. The right-of-way will be narrowed through the riparian area, if feasible. • Limit clearing of trees and shrubs at watercourse crossings to the trench line and work side areas required for vehicle crossings. • If the working surface is unstable, do not permit clearing equipment within the 10 m riparian buffer, unless approved by the Environmental Inspector(s) or designate(s). • Following clearing, the 10 m riparian buffer will remain intact (i.e., consisting of low-lying understory vegetation). Watercourse crossing methods considered include both trenched (i.e., open cut or isolated) and trenchless (e.g., horizontal directional drill) options. Watercourse crossing methods at each location were assessed considering watercourse sensitivity, presence of fish and fish habitat, feasibility, and past experience with reclamation and restoration success. Trenchless crossings are conducted in accordance with the applicable sections of the Trenchless Crossing Management Plan. For pipeline crossings conducted using a trenched crossing method, apply applicable Fisheries and Oceans Canada Measures to Avoid Causing Harm to Fish and Fish Habitat. The Notikewin River (crossed by the North Star Section 2) is proposed to be crossed using an open cut method, and the Loon River (crossed by the Red Earth Section 3) is proposed to be crossed using trenchless methods. Conventional trenched crossing methods such as isolated open cut (flowing conditions) or open cut (dry or frozen conditions) are planned for the other watercourses and drainages along the proposed pipeline routes. NGTL determines the appropriate crossing method by considering and balancing a variety of technical, environmental, stakeholder and economic considerations, along with site-specific conditions. In most cases, a conventional trenched crossing is the preferred crossing method because it involves the least footprint, duration of installation, and cost. NGTL can construct these crossings effectively and has a proven suite of mitigation measures and industry best practices to address conventional construction across most watercourses. Where minimal disturbance construction can be employed at these crossings, natural revegetation has been more successful and cost effective than the active reclamation measures needed at locations where stripping and grading occurs. Where warranted, a water quality monitoring plan will be developed that includes monitoring where trenchless methods are used.

September2 2019 GES0612191119CGYPage 2 of 5 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-4 Additional Written Evidence Horse Lake First Nation Mitigation Table

Horse Lake First Nation (HLFN) Project-related Issues Summary for the North Corridor Expansion Project – North Central Corridor Loop (North Star Section 2, Red Earth Section 3), Northwest Mainline (Bear Canyon North Extension) and Hidden Lake North Unit Addition (the Project) Where Addressed in the Environmental and Community Interests/ Approximate Location Socio-economic Issue/Concern Identified Relative to the Project NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL) Response/Proposed Mitigation Measures Assessment (ESA)

Potential effects on vegetation (flora) and plant Sites identified relative to the Red Earth Diamond willow fungus and medicines were identified within the PCF of Red Earth Section 3. Other species identified in association with Red Earth Section 3 included aspen, Sections 5.9, 5.10 and gathering, including: Section 3: balsam fir, black spruce, jack pine, paper birch, poplar, white spruce, red willow, tamarack, bearberry, blueberry, cattail, fireweed, Labrador tea, northern gooseberry, prickly 5.14 rose, yarrow, diamond willow fungus, green and grey reindeer lichen, and old man's beard were identified. • Herbs and medicines • At KP 13.9 (diamond willow fungus) Sections 8.2 and 8.4 of Vegetation identified related to North Star Section 2 included: aspen, black spruce, diamond willow fungus, green alder, jack pine, lodgepole pine, paper birch, poplar, white the EPPs • Trees, shrubs, plants, lichen, moss, and spruce, red willow, river alder, tamarack, blueberry, cattail, fireweed, high and low bush cranberry, Labrador tea, mountain ash, northern gooseberry, prickly rose, wintergreen, fungi yarrow, diamond willow fungus, green and grey reindeer lichen, and old man's beard. • Diamond willow fungus and the loss of Aspen, black spruce, green alder, jack pine, paper birch, poplar, white spruce, red willow, tamarack, blueberry, cattail, fireweed, Labrador tea, prickly rose, yarrow, green diamond willow fungus for future harvest in reindeer lichen, and old man's beard were identified in relation to the Bear Canyon North Extension. the area Vegetation identified related to the Hidden Lake North Unit Addition included: aspen, balsam fir, black spruce, diamond willow, jack pine, paper birch, poplar, white spruce, red • Loss of old growth forests willow, tamarack. bearberry, blueberry, cattail, high and low bush cranberry, Labrador tea, mint, northern gooseberry, prickly rose, grey reindeer lichen, and old man's beard. HLFN requests: HLFN observed old growth forest within the proposed Project areas. Traditional plant uses of the vegetation identified along the Project corridors included food, medicine, • Protection for herbs and medicines shelter, and vegetation used for ceremonial purposes. • Diamond willow fungus along the right-of- North Star Section 2 has been designed to parallel existing disturbances for 100% of its length, Red Earth Section 3 has been designed to parallel existing disturbances for way be harvested by HLFN members prior 98% of its length, the Bear Canyon North Extension has been designed to parallel existing disturbances for 94% of its length, and the Hidden Lake North Unit Addition is to Project construction and that the funding partially overlaps the existing station and the connectivity piping parallels existing rights-of-way and disturbances between the two existing stations. Clearing of vegetation for for this be provided by NGTL Project construction will result in an increase in the combined width (i.e., expansion) of existing linear disturbances. Following existing or proposed linear disturbances allows the Project Footprint to be reduced by utilizing temporary workspace on the adjacent disposition as much as possible, as well as minimizing the fragmentation of the • Old growth forests be avoided landscape. Reclamation and cleanup will be completed to maintain equivalent land capability, ensuring the ability of the land to support various land uses similar to the uses that existed before construction. NGTL will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential adverse effects of the Project on vegetation resources: • During clearing, fell trees towards the construction footprint wherever possible. Recover trees that inadvertently fall into adjacent undisturbed vegetation. • Where practical, leave stumps in place, particularly on streambanks, to provide surface stability. Stumps that are removed will be used as rollback or will be disposed of by burning or chipping, where approved. • On Crown land allow for natural regeneration or seed as directed by the responsible Land Administrator. Natural recovery is the preferred method of reclamation in non- agricultural areas on level terrain where erosion is not expected. The following mitigation measures will reduce the potential adverse effects of the Project on plant gathering: • Provide potentially affected Aboriginal groups with the proposed Project construction schedule and maps. NGTL intends to make use of existing land disturbance to reduce overall linear disturbance to the extent practical, and to site log decks and temporary workspace appropriately to minimize potential effects, but cannot commit to avoidance of all late-successional forest stands. NGTL will implement mitigation measures relevant to late- successional forests, including the following: • Prior to the start of construction activities, clearly mark all sensitive resources as identified on the Environmental Alignment Sheets, Environmental Figures, and/or other Project-specific documents. • Prohibit clearing of extra temporary workspace within a 10 m (minimum) riparian buffer from top of bank of the watercourse. This area shall be clearly marked prior to clearing operations. The right-of-way will be narrowed through the riparian area, if possible. • Conduct grubbing only where stripping and grading is required. Minimal disturbance procedures are the preferred means of right-of-way preparation in forested conditions where suitable, and only apply where grading is not required. Procedures focus on retaining understory vegetation and reducing disturbance to soil and root systems. Following tree felling and removal, stumps are mulched rather than grubbed. Mulch levels are monitored and not allowed to exceed 5 centimetres depth in any area. Frozen ground, snow pack and mulch are used to provide the working surface on the right-of-way. Do not clear timber, stumps, brush or other vegetation beyond the marked construction footprint’s boundary.

SeptemberGES0612191119CGY 2019 Page 3 of 53 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-4 Additional Written Evidence Horse Lake First Nation Mitigation Table

Horse Lake First Nation (HLFN) Project-related Issues Summary for the North Corridor Expansion Project – North Central Corridor Loop (North Star Section 2, Red Earth Section 3), Northwest Mainline (Bear Canyon North Extension) and Hidden Lake North Unit Addition (the Project) Where Addressed in the Environmental and Community Interests/ Approximate Location Socio-economic Issue/Concern Identified Relative to the Project NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL) Response/Proposed Mitigation Measures Assessment (ESA)

Potential effects on wildlife (fauna) and wildlife Sites identified relative to Red Earth Hunting, fishing, and trapping continue to be an important way of life for HLFN members. Several game trails were identified throughout the proposed Project PCF Sections 5.10 and 5.11 habitat, including: Section 3: Wildlife features observed within the North Star Section 2 area included: carcasses, claw marks, disturbed stumps, game trails, lodges, middens, nests, scrapes, sightings, Sections 6.0, 7.0, 8.0, 8.4, • Insects, birds, fish, mammals, reptiles, and • 37 metres southwest of centreline at skulls, tracks, and scat. Animals such as beaver, black and grizzly bear, cougars, coyotes, moose, rabbit, and squirrel were prevalent in the area. Birds observed include and 8.8 and Appendix 1E amphibians) KP 3.9 (bear bait barrel) ducks, eagles, geese, and grouse. The area was considered an important hunting and trapping area. and 1F of the EPPs • Concern about bear baiting with a barrel of • At KP 10.7 (game trail) Wildlife features observed within the Red Earth Section 3 area included: carcasses, claw marks, game lays, game trails, lodges, middens, nests, scrapes, sightings, skulls, oats tracks, and scat. Animals such as beaver, black and grizzly bear, coyotes, deer (mule and white-tailed), moose, rabbit, squirrel, and wolverine were prevalent in the area. Birds observed included ducks, eagles, geese, grouse, and woodpeckers. A bear bait barrel was also identified on the proposed right-of-way. • Game trails Sites identified relative to the Hidden Lake Wildlife features observed within the Bear Canyon North Extension area included: beehives, chews, game trails, nests, sightings, tracks, and scat. Animals such as black North Unit Addition: HLFN requests: bear, coyote, deer (mule and white-tailed), moose, rabbit, and squirrel were prevalent in the area. Birds observed included ducks, eagles, and geese. The area was • NGTL look into the bear bait barrel and • At KP 1.0 (game trail) considered an important hunting, trapping, and harvesting area. whether illegal baiting is taking place on the Wildlife features observed within the Hidden Lake North Unit Addition area included: chew marks, claw marks, game trails, nests, sightings, tracks, and scat. Animals such as proposed right-of-way beaver, black and grizzly bear, cougar, deer (mule and white-tailed), elk, moose, rabbit, and squirrel were prevalent in the area. Birds observed included ducks, eagles, geese, • NGTL ensure all game trails are provided a grouse, hawks, ospreys, sandhill cranes, and woodpeckers. The area is considered an important hunting and trapping area. 100-m buffer and that game trails are not North Star Section 2 has been designed to parallel existing disturbances for 100% of its length, Red Earth Section 3 has been designed to parallel existing disturbances for altered during construction 98% of its length, the Bear Canyon North Extension has been designed to parallel existing disturbances for 94% of its length, and the Hidden Lake North Unit Addition partially • Any moose licks identified be provided a overlaps the existing station and the connectivity piping parallels existing rights-of-way and disturbances between the two existing stations. Clearing of vegetation for Project 300-m buffer and be avoided during construction will result in an increase in the combined width (i.e., expansion) of existing linear disturbances. Following existing or proposed linear disturbances allows the construction Project Footprint to be reduced by utilizing temporary workspace on the adjacent disposition as much as possible, as well as minimizing the fragmentation of the landscape. Reclamation and clean-up will be completed to maintain equivalent land capability, ensuring the ability of the land to support various land uses similar to the uses that existed • Old growth be avoided in order to sustain before construction. adequate cover for ungulates and fur bearers NGTL will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential adverse effects of the Project on wildlife and wildlife habitat: • Pipeline be bored under beaver dams • Locate deck sites in previously-disturbed areas, wherever practical. • Share existing access with other industrial users, where feasible. • Schedule clearing and construction activities to avoid sensitive wildlife timing windows, to the extent feasible. • In the event there is a timing conflict, consult with the appropriate regulatory agency to discuss practical options and mitigation measures. • Leave gaps in windrows (e.g., topsoil/strippings, grade spoil, rollback, snow) and strung pipe at obvious drainages and wildlife trails, and to allow for livestock and vehicle/machinery passage across the construction footprint. Locations where wildlife gaps are appropriate will be determined in the field by the Environmental Inspector(s). These gaps should align. HLFN has not identified the location of specific mineral licks relative to the Project. If site-specific information is provided it will be reviewed and considered in the context of the ESA and for incorporation into Project planning, including the EPP and Environmental Alignment Sheets (EAS), as appropriate. Consideration of this information will include evaluating whether NGTL’s planning mitigation would effectively avoid the identified potential interactions, or whether additional or refined mitigation is warranted. Before the initiation of ground disturbance activities, NGTL will ensure that all environmentally-sensitive resource locations are properly identified and marked in the field to avoid or minimize potential Project effects. Locations will be identified on the EAS, in the site-specific mitigation tables of the EPP and/or other Project-specific documents, and their boundaries will be clearly marked before the start of, and following, clearing activities. Spoil will not be stored on the mineral lick. Following clearing, re-mark all sensitive resources as necessary and supplement markings with signage. The Environmental Inspector(s) will confirm the accuracy of all environmentally sensitive resource locations and will ensure marking is maintained during construction. Refer to potential effects on vegetation above for response regarding late-successional forest stands. NGTL will only arrange to have beaver dams removed where the dams are creating an impediment to construction. NGTL will implement mitigation measures relevant to beaver dams and lodges, including the following: • In the event that beaver dams or lodges will be disturbed or removed, provide notification to or obtain the necessary permits from the responsible regulatory agency prior to commencing activities, if required. Engage the registered trapper(s). • Breach the beaver dam slowly to avoid the rapid release of water that could cause flooding, fish entrapments, and/or erosion of the bed and banks resulting in subsequent siltation of downstream waters.

September4 2019 GES0612191119CGYPage 4 of 5 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-4 Additional Written Evidence Horse Lake First Nation Mitigation Table

Horse Lake First Nation (HLFN) Project-related Issues Summary for the North Corridor Expansion Project – North Central Corridor Loop (North Star Section 2, Red Earth Section 3), Northwest Mainline (Bear Canyon North Extension) and Hidden Lake North Unit Addition (the Project) Where Addressed in the Environmental and Community Interests/ Approximate Location Socio-economic Issue/Concern Identified Relative to the Project NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL) Response/Proposed Mitigation Measures Assessment (ESA)

HLFN requests: North Star Section 2, Red Earth Section 3, NGTL recognizes the interests of Aboriginal groups in all aspects of Project activities and, in particular, environmental protection. NGTL is committed to continue discussions Section 8.1 Bear Canyon North Extension, and Hidden regarding HLFN’s concern about potential environmental impacts during construction, as well as mitigation measures to minimize any such impacts. • NGTL fund HLFN environmental monitors Section 4 of the EPPs Lake North Unit Addition PCF to be on-site during and post construction Natural recovery is the preferred method of reclamation in non-agricultural areas on level terrain where erosion is not expected. Where natural recovery is not preferred, seed to monitor the effects of the project on disturbed areas as per site requirements and as specified by the Environmental Inspector(s) or designate(s). plants, animals and HLFN's traditional The Project will follow NGTL’s Post-Construction Monitoring (PCM) methodology as outlined in the ESA and/or other Project-specific environmental documents, which ensures mode of life compliance with specific reclamation performance expectations and applicable regulatory requirements. Mitigation methods will be based on the principle that success of land • Involve HLFN representative in the reclamation is measured against adjacent representative site conditions while taking into consideration the status of reclamation of the time of assessment. NGTL is available planning and implementation of to meet with HLFN to provide an overview of NGTL’s pipeline monitoring programs, if requested. HLFN also has the opportunity to provide feedback post-construction through reclamation activities in relation to the ongoing engagement with Regional Liaisons and NGTL’s Public Awareness Program. NGTL will remain available to discuss and, where possible, address any concerns HLFN proposed Project. may have during operation and maintenance of the Project. When the site has been determined safe for the public and after the first complete growing season following completion of final clean-up, NGTL can facilitate a post- construction site visit at the request of the HLFN.

Source: Horse Lake First Nation. 2019. Nova Gas Transmission Limited’s Proposed North Corridor Expansion Project. First Nation First Nation IRC Site Assessment Report. May. a Detailed mitigation measures are provided in the Project-specific EPP.

SeptemberGES0612191119CGY 2019 Page 5 of 5 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Appendix 8-5 North Corridor Expansion Project Métis Nation of Alberta Region 6 Mitigation Table Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

Appendix 8-5

Métis Nation of Alberta Region 6 Mitigation Table

September 2019

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-5 Additional Written Evidence Metis Nation of Alberta Region 6 Mitigation Table

Métis Nation of Alberta Region 6 (MNAR6) Project-related Issues Summary for the North Corridor Expansion Project – North Central Corridor Loop (Hidden Lake North Unit Addition, Bear Canyon North Extension, and North Star Section 2) (the Project) Where Addressed in the Environmental and Community Interests, Approximate Location Socio-Economic Assessment Issue/Concern Identified Relative to the Project NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Response/Proposed Mitigation Measures (ESA)a

Potential effects on wildlife Bear Canyon North Extension MNAR6 observed moose, elk and deer signs and habitat while conducting fieldwork of the Bear Canyon North Extension. On the North Star Section 2 MNAR6 identified moose signs and Section 5.10 habitat, including: and North Star Section 2 habitat. No specific locations were provided. Section 8.0 and Appendices 1E and Project Construction Footprint • Established ungulate The Bear Canyon North Extension has been designed to parallel existing disturbances for 94% of its length and the North Star Section 2 has been designed to parallel existing disturbances 1F of the Environmental Protection (PCF) habitat that will be lost to for 100% of its length. Following existing or proposed linear disturbances allows the Project Footprint to be reduced by utilizing temporary workspace on the adjacent disposition as much as Plan (EPP) the right-of-way (ROW) possible, as well as minimizing the fragmentation of the landscape. Reclamation and cleanup will be completed to maintain equivalent land capability, ensuring the ability of the land to expansion support various land uses similar to the uses that existed before construction. • Fur-bearing animal habitat NGTL will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential adverse effects of the Project on wildlife and wildlife habitat: • Waterfowl habitat • Where feasible minimize extra temporary workspace. • Locate deck sites in previously-disturbed areas, wherever practical. • Share existing access with other industrial users, where feasible. • Schedule clearing and construction activities to avoid sensitive wildlife timing windows to the extent feasible. • In the event there is a timing conflict, consult with the appropriate regulatory agency to discuss practical options and mitigation measures. • Leave gaps in windrows (e.g., topsoil/strippings, grade spoil, rollback, snow) and strung pipe at obvious drainages and wildlife trails, and to allow for livestock and vehicle/machinery passage across the construction footprint. Locations where wildlife gaps are appropriate will be determined in the field by the Environmental Inspector(s). These gaps should align. If previously unidentified listed or sensitive wildlife species or their site-specific habitat e.g. dens, nests are identified during construction of the Project, report to the Environmental Inspector(s) and implement the Wildlife Species of Concern Discovery Contingency Plan. Bear Canyon North Extension is scheduled to be constructed from the fourth quarter of 2021 to the first quarter of 2022, under winter conditions. Construction of North Star Section 2 is scheduled from third quarter of 2021 to the fourth quarter of 2021. North Star Section 2 is primarily agricultural land where topsoil stripping will be necessary, which is best achieved in unfrozen conditions. NGTL notes the start of construction is planned for after the primary nesting period for birds and at the end of most breeding periods for wildlife. Hidden Lake North Unit Addition is scheduled to be constructed from the first quarter of 2021 to the first quarter of 2022. In the event Project activities are scheduled to occur within the Primary Nesting Period for the Bird Conservation Region for migratory birds, refer to the Breeding Bird and Nest Management Plan.

Potential effects on water Hidden Lake North Unit The Hidden Lake North Unit Addition PCF and associated connectivity piping is not located within 30 m of any watercourses; therefore, water quality is not anticipated to be affected by Sections 5.3 and 6.5 quality. Addition, Bear Canyon North construction and operation of the unit addition. Sections 8.1 and 8.4 of the EPP Extension, and North Star NGTL will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential for adverse effects of the Project on water quality during construction: Section 2 PCF • The Contractor shall develop a detailed site-specific watercourse crossing plan and submit the plan to NGTL for approval prior to initiating watercourse crossing activities • All equipment shall arrive on the Project free of leaks and in good working condition. Any equipment which does not arrive free of leaks and in good working condition shall not be allowed on the construction footprint until it has been repaired, re-inspected by the EI(s) or designate(s), and deemed suitable for use. • Equipment to be used in or adjacent to a watercourse or waterbody will be clean or otherwise free of external grease, oil or other fluids, mud, soil and vegetation, prior to entering the waterbody. • Ensure no vehicles or equipment containing petroleum, oil, or lubricants are parked or stationed in a watercourse at any time except for equipment that is required for that immediate phase of construction. • Conduct refuelling at least 100 m away from any watercourse or waterbody, when feasible. • Do not wash equipment or machinery within 30 m of watercourses or waterbodies. NGTL will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential for sediment to enter watercourses and/or waterbodies: • Install erosion and sediment control at all watercourses and/or waterbodies as directed by the Environmental Inspector(s) or designates(s). • Where water erosion is evident, and there is potential for runoff from the construction footprint to flow into a watercourse, refer to the Soil Erosion Contingency Plan. • Prohibit clearing of extra temporary workspace within a 10m (minimum) riparian buffer from top of bank of the watercourse. This area shall be clearly marked prior to clearing operations. The right-of-way will be narrowed through the riparian area, if feasible. • Limit clearing of trees and shrubs at watercourse crossings to the trench line and work side areas required for vehicle crossings. • If the working surface is unstable, do not permit clearing equipment within the 10 m riparian buffer, unless approved by the Environmental Inspector(s) or designate(s). • Following clearing, the 10 m riparian buffer will remain intact (i.e., consisting of low-lying understory vegetation).

SeptemberGES0305191523CGY 2019 Page 1 of 31 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-5 Additional Written Evidence Metis Nation of Alberta Region 6 Mitigation Table

Métis Nation of Alberta Region 6 (MNAR6) Project-related Issues Summary for the North Corridor Expansion Project – North Central Corridor Loop (Hidden Lake North Unit Addition, Bear Canyon North Extension, and North Star Section 2) (the Project) Where Addressed in the Environmental and Community Interests, Approximate Location Socio-Economic Assessment Issue/Concern Identified Relative to the Project NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Response/Proposed Mitigation Measures (ESA)a

Potential effects on traditional Hidden Lake North Unit MNAR6 identified natural duck blinds along the proposed North Star Section 2 ROW, however specific locations were not provided. Section 6.15 land and resource use, Addition, Bear Canyon North MNAR6 community members continue to hunt in their traditional territory for moose, bear, duck, and prairie chicken, including in the vicinity of the proposed Project locations. MNAR6 Section 8.0 and Appendix 1E of the including: Extension, and North Star identified a family that has relied on and practised their Aboriginal right to trap for generations, however no specific trapline locations were provided. EPP • Section 2 PCF Hunting If site-specific information is provided it will be reviewed and considered in the context of the ESA and for incorporation into Project planning, including the EPP and Environmental Alignment • Trapping Sheets (EAS), as appropriate. Consideration of this information will include evaluating whether NGTL’s planned mitigation would effectively avoid the identified interactions, or whether additional or refined mitigation is warranted. Traditional use sites or features which require site-specific mitigation will be included in the EP and EAS filed prior to construction. • Plant harvesting Resource-specific mitigation measures outlined in this table above will be implemented to reduce the potential adverse effects of the Project on wildlife and wildlife habitat. • Decreased animal populations NGTL will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential adverse effects of the Project on vegetation resources: • Loss of potential income • During clearing, fell trees towards the construction footprint wherever possible. Recover trees that inadvertently fall into adjacent undisturbed vegetation. • Decreased ability to • Where practical, leave stumps in place, particularly on streambanks, to provide surface stability. Stumps that are removed will be used as rollback or will be disposed of by burning or exercise Aboriginal Rights chipping, where approved. • Established natural duck • On Crown land allow for natural regeneration or seed as directed by the responsible Land Administrator. Natural recovery is the preferred method of reclamation in non-agricultural areas blinds on level terrain where erosion is not expected. Potential effects on Aboriginal and Treaty rights were considered in the ESA through the assessment of potential Project effects on current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes. The ESA assessed potential Project effects on the current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes by Aboriginal peoples in accordance with the NEB Filing Manual. With the implementation of recommended mitigation, adverse effects of the Project on TLRU are predicted to be not significant. The following mitigation measures will reduce the potential adverse effects of the Project on hunting, trapping, and plant gathering: • Provide potentially affected Aboriginal groups with the proposed Project construction schedule and maps. • Project personnel are not permitted to hunt or fish on the construction footprint. • Notify registered trappers at least 10 days prior to construction. TransCanada’s Trapper Compensation Plan reimburses senior trap line holders based on the three elements of Project notification, pre-construction consultation/notification and post- construction fur loss negotiation/compensation. NGTL will implement the Traffic Control Management Plan which includes access control measures (e.g., signage, road closures, restrictions, access control) to manage and control Project- related construction traffic and to reduce unauthorized motorized access. If traditional land use sites not previously identified are found on the construction footprint during construction, implement the Cultural Resource Discovery Contingency Plan.

Potential environmental Sites identified relative to the MNAR6 identified burnt or dead trees surrounding the Hidden Lake North Compressor Station. Section 5.20 Hidden Lake North Unit effects, including: NGTL has no information supporting a link between the dead trees reported by MNAR6 and NGTL’s Hidden Lake North Compressor Station or other facilities. The Hidden Lake North Section 4.0 and Appendices 1E and Addition: • ”Burnt” or dead trees at the Compressor Station and the pipelines that connect with this facility are sweet natural gas facilities. None of the proposed or existing Project facilities transport oil, liquids or condensates. In 1F of the EPP Hidden Lake Compressor • 170 meters from the PCF the event of a facility or pipeline leak or rupture, natural gas disperses into the atmosphere, with limited potential to affect the surrounding environment. Site raise concerns about (burnt or dead trees) Under Section 4.2 of the Project ESA, the vegetation local study area (LSA) for the Project, which is the area where potential Project effects on vegetation could reasonably be expected to existing release of • 260 meters from the PCF occur, is 100 meters from the Project construction footprint. This size of the LSA was based on key considerations of the distance that indirect effects as a result of changes in light, local petrochemical product or (burnt or dead trees) hydrology, microclimate, dust effects, and other edge effects can be expected to extend from a disturbed area. The 100 meter distance is a well-established spatial boundary defined in other environmental numerous ESAs prepared by multiple environmental consultants. disturbance Based on the locational information for the trees provided by MNAR6, NGTL understands they are located approximately 170 and 260 meters from the existing Hidden Lake North MNAR6 requests that: Compressor Station, which suggests any direct correlation with NGTL operations at the compressor station is not likely. Further, the trees noted by MNAR6 are located approximately 103 • NGTL take immediate steps and 174 meters from the existing Northwest Mainline Foulwater Creek pipeline section, beyond the distance where indirect effects are deemed feasible. to investigate the causes of NGTL will conduct vegetation field studies in August of 2019 and will include an examination of the reported dead trees, which may provide information regarding the potential underlying localized plant life mortality cause. and provide a detailed report within 120 days of this report being received

September2 2019 GES0305191523CGYPage 2 of 3 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-5 Additional Written Evidence Metis Nation of Alberta Region 6 Mitigation Table

Métis Nation of Alberta Region 6 (MNAR6) Project-related Issues Summary for the North Corridor Expansion Project – North Central Corridor Loop (Hidden Lake North Unit Addition, Bear Canyon North Extension, and North Star Section 2) (the Project) Where Addressed in the Environmental and Community Interests, Approximate Location Socio-Economic Assessment Issue/Concern Identified Relative to the Project NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Response/Proposed Mitigation Measures (ESA)a

Potential cumulative effects, Bear Canyon North Extension, The Bear Canyon North Extension has been designed to parallel existing disturbances for 94% of its length and the North Star Section 2 has been designed to parallel existing disturbances Section 6 including: and North Star Section 2 PCF for 100% of its length. Following existing or proposed linear disturbances allows the Project Footprint to be reduced by utilizing temporary workspace on the adjacent disposition as much as possible, as well as minimizing the fragmentation of the landscape. Reclamation and cleanup will be completed to maintain equivalent land capability, ensuring the ability of the land to • Ongoing significant support various land uses similar to the uses that existed before construction. disruption and uptake of habitat as a result of the Resource-specific mitigation outlined in this table will be implemented to reduce the potential adverse effects of the Project on wildlife and wildlife habitat, vegetation, and water quality and Bear Canyon North quantity. Extension and North Star The ESA included a cumulative effects assessment which included the potential effects, and Project contributions to those effects, including the effects on the species and concerns Section 2 projects in identified by MNAR6. The cumulative effects assessment methodology follows the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency’s Technical Guidance for Assessing Cumulative Effects combination with other under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 and the NEB Filing Manual. Cumulative effects are evaluated for significance using the same definition used for significance development in the area. determination for residual effects MNAR6 requests that: The ESA assumes that other companies and other NGTL projects and activities considered (i.e., not the Project itself) will employ similar mitigation measures as those described in Section • NGTL maximize the use of 6.0 of the ESA to control effects on the environment from the specific project. Potential Project-related cumulative effects are minimized with the implementation of the following design and common corridor whenever construction measures: possible to limit disturbance • Maximizing the use of adjacent existing ROW and reducing the width of additional clearing as much as possible (North Star Section 2 has been designed to parallel existing disturbances during construction and for 100% of its length and Bear Canyon North Extension has been designed to parallel existing disturbances for 94% of its length). operation of the Project • Avoiding construction during critical wildlife timing windows when feasible. • Adhering to the approved construction footprint and access.

Source: Métis Nation of Alberta Region 6. 2018. Traditional Land Use Study: NGTL North Corridor Expansion Project. Final Report. December. a Detailed mitigation measures are provided in the Project-specific EPP.

SeptemberGES0305191523CGY 2019 Page 3 of 3 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Appendix 8-6 North Corridor Expansion Project Peerless Trout First Nation Mitigation Table Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

Appendix 8-6

Peerless Trout First Nation Mitigation Table

September 2019

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-6 Additional Written Evidence Peerless Trout First Nation Mitigation Table

Peerless Trout First Nation (PTFN) Project-related Issues Summary for the North Corridor Expansion Project – North Central Corridor Loop (Red Earth Section 3) (the Project) Where Addressed in the Environmental Community Interests/ Approximate Location and Socio-economic Issue/Concern Identified Relative to the Project NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL) Response/Proposed Mitigation Measures a Assessment (ESA)

Potential effects to traplines, Sites identified relative to Red Earth Section 3: PTFN identified a new trapper’s cabin at active trapline 2101 on the east side of Highway 88 with Section 5.14 trappers, and trapping activities, • From KP 30.0 to KP 31.9 (Trapline 2101 and trapper cabin) evidence of meat drying racks and a well-maintained yard for guests to stay. An old trapper’s cabin is Appendix 1E of the including: located at the same site. It was noted that trapline 2101 has perfect trapping habitat for squirrels and • From KP 0.0 to KP 9.0 (Trapline 2850) Environmental • Disruption to trapline territory rabbits, and all their predators, such as fisher, marten, wolf, weasel and wolverines. Evidence of Protection Plan (EPP) and traplines 2101, 2850, and • From KP 9.0 to KP 20.0 (eastern half of Trapline 1004) several squirrel houses and their food cuttings were identified. It was noted that beaver are also trapped in this trapline. Both big game and small game trails were noted throughout the trapline area the eastern half of 1004, • From KP 20.0 to KP 30.0 (western half of Trapline 1004) particularly if construction is to and there was evidence of a recent spruce grouse (chicken) kill. Black bears were noted as abundant • 1.32 metres (m) north of the centreline at KP 16.8 (trapping territory) be completed in the winter in the area due to the prolific scat identified along the ROW. • 0.41 m north of the centreline at KP 16.5 (trapping territory) PTFN requests that: The trapper’s cabins are located outside of the Project Construction Footprint (PCF) and are not • 82 m northeast of the centreline at KP 30.14 (new trapper’s cabin) anticipated to be directly affected by Project activities. • NGTL negotiate with the trapline holders regarding • 123.2 m northeast of the centreline at KP 30.1 (old trapper’s cabin) PTFN identified trapline 2850 and it was noted that the trapping habitat is similar to other traplines in compensation for potential the area, varying from high to low ground. On the trapline, during the field study, two large black bears Project-related losses were encountered near baiting barrels. Trapping habitat identified on trapline 2850 includes habitat for black bear, beaver, squirrels and rabbits and related predators including coyote, fisher, fox, marten, mink, wolf, weasel and wolverine. PTFN identified trapline 1004 and reported trapping lynx and marten on the eastern half of trapline 1004 and noted that if there are signs of fisher, wolverine and mink they are also trapped. PTFN noted that the western half of the trapline is largely bog and fen and is not used as a trapping area. PTFN noted that if winter construction is anticipated, the disruption to regular trapping activities would be “high” for traplines 2101 and 2850 and “medium” for trapline 1004. Red Earth Section 3 is scheduled to be constructed from the fourth quarter of 2021 to the first quarter of 2022, under winter conditions. In addition to the resource-specific measures described below for wildlife and wildlife habitat, the following mitigation measures will reduce the potential adverse effects of the Project on trapping. • Provide potentially affected Aboriginal groups with the proposed Project construction schedule and maps. • Notify registered trappers at least 10 days prior to construction. NGTL is engaging with the registered trap line holders and will continue to provide them with Project information. TransCanada’s Trapper Compensation Plan reimburses senior trap line holders based on the three elements of Project notification, pre-construction consultation/notification and post- construction fur loss negotiation/compensation.

Potential effects on existing Sites identified relative to Red Earth Section 3: Vegetation identified relative to the Red Earth Section 3 Local Study Area (LSA) included strawberries, Sections 5.9, 5.10, and plants and medicinal plants used • 0.3 m north of the centreline at KP 16.3 (diamond willow stands) raspberries, high bush cranberries, rosehips, blueberries, low bush or bog cranberries, broadleaf plant 5.14 by PTFN members, including: in bogs (unidentified, but with yellow flower), caribou lichen (primary caribou food), dead spruce (home • 0.3 m north of the centreline at KP 10.0 (several large stands of diamond willow) Sections 8.2 and 8.4 of • Having to travel further to for squirrels), diamond willow, fresh spruce buds, green willow, Labrador tea/muskeg tea, muskeg the EPP other sites to obtain plants for • 0.4 m north of the centreline at KP 16.5 (aspen) moss (green), muskeg moss (red), puffball mushrooms, purple flowering plants (unidentified), red willow and spruce. use • 0.7 m north of the centreline at KP 0.16 (poplar for shelter, woodpecker) The Red Earth Section 3 has been designed to parallel existing disturbances for 98% of its length. • 1 m north of the centreline at KP 15.1 (spruce) Clearing of vegetation for Project construction will result in an increase in the combined width (i.e., • 1.2 m north of the centreline at KP 10.4 (fir trees) expansion) of existing linear disturbances. Following existing or proposed linear disturbances allows • 1.3 m northeast of the centreline at KP 7.2 (Labrador tea) the Project Footprint to be reduced by utilizing temporary workspace on the adjacent disposition as much as possible, as well as minimizing the fragmentation of the landscape. Reclamation and cleanup • 1.3 m north of the centreline at KP 16.8 (aspen) will be completed to maintain equivalent land capability, ensuring the ability of the land to support • 1.6 m south of the centreline at KP 16.3 (diamond willow stands) various land uses similar to the uses that existed before construction. • 1.7 m south of the centreline at KP 16.3 (diamond willow stands) NGTL will implement minimum surface disturbance construction where feasible (e.g., where grading is not necessary) and where conditions allow, to facilitate rapid regeneration of vegetation. • 1.9 m south of the centreline at KP 16.3 (diamond willow stands) • 2 m south of the centreline at KP 14.9 (mixed trees - poplar and aspen) • 2.2 m north of the centreline at KP 10.4 (ferns and green moss)

SeptemberGES0612191119CGY 2019 Page 1 of 81 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-6 Additional Written Evidence Peerless Trout First Nation Mitigation Table

Peerless Trout First Nation (PTFN) Project-related Issues Summary for the North Corridor Expansion Project – North Central Corridor Loop (Red Earth Section 3) (the Project) Where Addressed in the Environmental Community Interests/ Approximate Location and Socio-economic Issue/Concern Identified Relative to the Project NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL) Response/Proposed Mitigation Measures a Assessment (ESA) Potential effects on existing • 2.5 m south of the centreline at KP 10.6 (moose berry bush) NGTL will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential adverse effects of the See above plants and medicinal plants used • 2.6 m north of the centreline at KP 31.8 (caribou food (spruce)) Project on vegetation resources: by PTFN members (cont’d) • • 2.1 m south of the centreline at KP 12.5 (firestarter ("old man's beard")) During clearing, fell trees towards the construction footprint wherever possible. Recover trees that inadvertently fall into adjacent undisturbed vegetation. • 2.9 m north of the centreline at KP 10.5 (diamond willow) • Where practical, leave stumps in place, particularly on streambanks, to provide surface stability. • 3.2 m south of the centreline at KP 11.1 (berry patch and high bush cranberries) Stumps that are removed will be used as rollback or will be disposed of by burning or chipping, • 3.4 m north of the centreline at KP 9.7 (diamond willow) where approved. • 4.5 m north of the centreline at KP 9.8 (8 stands of diamond willow) • On Crown land allow for natural regeneration or seed as directed by the responsible Land Administrator. Natural recovery is the preferred method of reclamation in non-agricultural areas on • 4.2 m north of the centreline at KP 0.17 (spruce and poplar - shelter materials) level terrain where erosion is not expected. • 4.5 m west of the centreline at KP 0.6 (Indian paintbrush and puffball mushroom) The following mitigation measures will reduce the potential adverse effects of the Project on plant • 5.1 m north of the centreline at KP 19.7 (spruce buds (medicine)) gathering: • 5.3 m north of the centreline at KP 9.6 (aspen and willows) • Provide potentially affected Aboriginal groups with the proposed Project construction schedule and • 5.6 m south of the centreline at KP 10.6 (big patch of rosehips) maps. • 6 m northeast of the centreline at KP 7.08 (caribou lichen, spruce gum) • 6 m north of the centerline at KP 11.9 (dogwood) • 6 m north of the centreline at KP 18.7 (large birch (for syrup)) • 6 m north of the centreline at KP 31.0 (tamarack) • 7.1 m north of the centreline at KP 31.2 (tamarack, willows and muskeg moss) • 7.2 m west of the centreline at KP 31.9 (Labrador tea, caribou lichen and spruce) • 7.4 m south of the centreline at KP 12.5 (rosehips) • 7.6 m north of the centreline at KP 31.2 (tamarack, willows and muskeg moss) • 7.8 m north of the centreline KP 31.0 (diamond willow) • 8.1 m north of the centreline at KP 31.2 (tamarack, willows and muskeg moss) • 8.4 m north of the centreline at KP 10.7 (fir trees) • 9.7 m southwest of the centreline at KP 31.9 (caribou lichen, Labrador tea) • 9.2 m north of the centreline at KP 12.2 (poplar) • 10.2 m south of the centreline at KP 12.5 (puffball mushroom medicine) • 10.5 m northeast of the centreline at KP 7.5 (muskeg moss) • 10.7 m north of the centreline at KP 12.5 (birch with no limbs [good for snowshoes]) • 11.1 m southwest of the centreline at KP 0.9 (birch) • 11.3 m north of the centreline at KP 19.9 (birch and willows) • 12 m south of the centreline at KP 10.6 (diamond willows) • 12.1 m south of the centreline at KP 10.7 (high bush cranberries) • 12.2 m northeast of the centreline at KP 1.1 (Labrador tea and muskeg moss [green]) • 13 m north of the centreline at KP 19.9 (diamond willow large patch x 3) • 14 m northeast of the centreline at KP 0.3 (birch stand for syrup) • 14.5 m northeast of the centreline at KP 1.1 (Labrador tea) • 14.5 m southwest of the centreline at KP 2.6 (caribou lichen) • 14.5 m southwest of the centreline at KP 30. 3 (lily medicines) • 15.4 m north of the centreline at KP 0.2 (birch - leaves used to smoke trap wires) • 15.9 m southwest of the centreline at KP 0.7 (birch)

September2 2019 GES0612191119CGYPage 2 of 8 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-6 Additional Written Evidence Peerless Trout First Nation Mitigation Table

Peerless Trout First Nation (PTFN) Project-related Issues Summary for the North Corridor Expansion Project – North Central Corridor Loop (Red Earth Section 3) (the Project) Where Addressed in the Environmental Community Interests/ Approximate Location and Socio-economic Issue/Concern Identified Relative to the Project NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL) Response/Proposed Mitigation Measures a Assessment (ESA) Potential effects on existing • 17.8 m north of the centreline at KP 17.4 (spruce, birch and poplar) See above See above plants and medicinal plants used • 18.1 m southwest of the centreline enterline at KP 0.6 (berry patch) by PTFN members (cont’d) • 18.4 m southwest of the centreline at KP 0.8 (big raspberry patch followed by dense deadfall) • 18.6 m southwest of the centreline at KP 30.3 (medicine plant) • 22.51 m northeast of the centreline at KP 0.39 (red willow) • 22.6 m northeast of the centreline at KP 0.4 (birch "shapoomina" berries) • 23.7 m southwest of the centreline at KP 30.39 (red willow) • 23.9 m north of the centreline at KP 0.22 (high bush cranberries) • 25.3 m northeast of the centreline at KP 0.4 (big patch of purple flower medicine) • 25.5 m northeast of the centreline at KP 0.4 (red willow for smoking meat) • 25.8 m northeast of the centreline at KP 0.4 (purple flower medicine) • 26.2 m northeast of the centreline at KP 0.4 (stand of diamond willow) • 26.4 m northeast of the centreline at KP 0.4 (large patch of red willow) • 26.7 m northeast of the centreline at KP 0.4 (live red willow) • 28.3 m west of the centreline at KP 0.6 (spruce buds (medicine)) • 28.7 m west of the centreline at KP 0.6 (Labrador tea (muskeg tea) and birch) • 30.7 m northeast of the centreline at KP 0.4 (sapoomna) • 31 m northeast of the centreline at KP 0.4 (broadleaf-like lily medicine used for wounds) • 32.8 m northeast of the centreline at KP 0.4 (medicine for wounds) • 32.9 m northeast of the centreline at KP 0.4 (broadleaf-like lily medicine used for wounds) • 36.9 m southwest of the centreline at KP 30.2 (Saskatoon patch, berry batch) • 38.5 m southwest of the centreline at KP 30.2 (berry patch) • 49.6 m southwest of the centreline at KP 30.2 (rosehips) • 57.9 m northeast of the centreline at KP 0.4 (raspberry patch) • 70 m south of the centreline at KP 17.4 spruce (gum and "roofing material for cabins") • 87.6 m north of the centreline at KP 0.2 high bush cranberry • 110.2 m northeast of the centreline at KP 30.1 (spruce needles to burn trap wire) • 1.9 km northeast of the centreline at KP 2.6 (raspberry batch) • 4.3 km north of the centreline at KP 15.1 (diamond willow)

SeptemberGES0612191119CGY 2019 Page 3 of 83 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-6 Additional Written Evidence Peerless Trout First Nation Mitigation Table

Peerless Trout First Nation (PTFN) Project-related Issues Summary for the North Corridor Expansion Project – North Central Corridor Loop (Red Earth Section 3) (the Project) Where Addressed in the Environmental Community Interests/ Approximate Location and Socio-economic Issue/Concern Identified Relative to the Project NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL) Response/Proposed Mitigation Measures a Assessment (ESA)

Potential effects on wildlife and Sites identified relative to Red Earth Section 3: Wildlife signs observed by PTFN in the Red Earth Section 3 PCF included animal trails (rabbit, moose Section 5.10 wildlife habitat. • 0.1 m south of the centreline at KP 11.1 (bear scat and a bear digging anthill for ants) and caribou), beaver dams, a moose skull, kill sites, squirrel dens, beds, rubs, droppings, scat, Sections 1.4, 1.8, 7.0, sightings and tracks. Wildlife observed included bears, moose, and green frogs. • 0.2 m north of the centreline at KP 31.8 (caribou trail north-south and caribou tracks) 8.0, and Appendices PTFN indicated that the existing ROW is a known area for moose harvesting and that an increase in 1E and 1F of the EPP • 0.4 m west of the centreline at KP 0.6 (deer tracks heading south) the pipeline ROW will have the positive benefit of additional moose habitat. • 0.6 m north of the centreline at KP 3 (caribou trail about 1-foot deep north-south) The Red Earth Section 3 has been designed to parallel 98% of existing disturbances. Clearing of • 0.8 m south of the centreline at KP 14.62 (wasps' nest) vegetation for Project construction will result in an increase in the combined width (i.e., expansion) of existing linear disturbances. Following existing or proposed linear disturbances allows the Project • 0.9 m south of the centreline at KP 9.9 (bear scat Footprint to be reduced by utilizing temporary workspace on the adjacent disposition as much as • 1.8 m north of the centreline at KP 31.9 (bird kill [seagull feathers?]) possible, as well as minimizing the fragmentation of the landscape. Reclamation and cleanup will be • 2 m southwest of the centreline at KP 3.0 (bear scat (with grain) completed to maintain equivalent land capability, ensuring the ability of the land to support various land uses similar to the uses that existed before construction. • 2 m northeast of the centreline at KP 7.2 (bear scat) NGTL will implement minimum surface disturbance construction where feasible (e.g., where grading is • 2 m northeast of the centreline at KP 30.8 (squirrel den/food) not necessary) and where conditions allow, to facilitate rapid regeneration of vegetation. • 1.2 m south of the centreline at KP 10.3 (rabbit trails) NGTL will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential adverse effects of the • 2.1 m south of the centreline at KP 15.9 (bear scat) Project on wildlife and wildlife habitat: • 2.2 m north of the centreline at KP 18.2 (moose scat) • Locate deck sites in previously-disturbed areas, wherever practical. • 2.2 m south of the centreline at KP 31.8 (caribou tracks north-south) • Share existing access with other industrial users, where feasible. • 2.8 m southwest of the centreline at KP 1.3 (moose eating willow on ROW) • Schedule clearing and construction activities to avoid sensitive wildlife timing windows to the extent feasible. • 2.4 m south of the centreline at KP 14.6 (moose eating willows along ROW) • In the event there is a timing conflict, consult with the appropriate regulatory agency to discuss • 2.4 m southwest of the centreline at KP 7.0 (moose feeding on willows) practical options and mitigation measures. • 2.7 m south of the centreline at KP 0.1 (bear scat x 3) • Leave gaps in windrows (e.g., topsoil/strippings, grade spoil, rollback, snow) and strung pipe at • 2.7 m south of the centreline at KP 9.4 (squirrel, lynx, and rabbit habitat) obvious drainages and wildlife trails, and to allow for livestock and vehicle/machinery passage • 2.7 m south of the centreline at KP 14.6 (moose eating willows) across the construction footprint. Locations where wildlife gaps are appropriate will be determined in the field by the Environmental Inspector(s). These gaps should align. • 2.8 m southwest of the centreline at KP 1.3 (moose eating willows on ROW) If previously unidentified listed or sensitive wildlife species or their site-specific habitat (e.g. dens, • 2.8 m south of the centreline at KP 12.5 (bear scratchings from climbing tree along the ROW) nests) are identified during construction of the Project, report to the Environmental Inspector(s) and • 3 m east of the centreline at KP 0.6 (wolf scat) implement the Wildlife Species of Concern Discovery Contingency Plan. • 3.1 m north of the centreline at KP 11.1 (bear diggings) Approximately half of Red Earth Section 3 is located within the Red Earth caribou range. NGTL will • 3.2 m north of the centreline at KP 18.2 (small beaver dam and frogs) implement the Caribou Habitat Restoration and Offsetting Mitigation Plan (CHROMP), which was developed for the Project and reflects ongoing consultation with the appropriate provincial agencies • 3.4 m northeast of the centreline at KP 3.9 (bear trail north-south) and Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) (ESA Appendix 10). The CHROMP is available • 3.6 m south of the centreline at KP 9.8 (antler rubbing site) for review on the NEB website as part of the Project Application. • 3.7 m north of the centreline at KP 0.1 (rabbit scat and dense bush) • 3.7 m south of the centreline at KP 17.2 (moose scat) • 4.3 m south of the centreline at KP 31.9 (bird kill) • 4.2 m northeast of the centreline at KP 7.4 (fresh rabbit kill site) • 4 m northeast of the centreline at KP 3.8 (rabbits eating branches) • 4.6 m northeast of the centerline at KP 3.9 (bear centreline with grain x 3) • 4.9 m north of the centreline at KP 9.5 (game trail) • 5.0 m northeast of the centreline at KP 1.0 (small animal den) • 5.1 m north of the centreline at KP 19.2 (rabbit trail) • 5.2 m northeast of the centreline at KP 1.0 (squirrel house x 3) • 5.2 m north of the centreline at KP 17.6 (squirrel houses, moose scat, raven, and an abundance of insects)

September4 2019 GES0612191119CGYPage 4 of 8 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-6 Additional Written Evidence Peerless Trout First Nation Mitigation Table

Peerless Trout First Nation (PTFN) Project-related Issues Summary for the North Corridor Expansion Project – North Central Corridor Loop (Red Earth Section 3) (the Project) Where Addressed in the Environmental Community Interests/ Approximate Location and Socio-economic Issue/Concern Identified Relative to the Project NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL) Response/Proposed Mitigation Measures a Assessment (ESA) Potential effects on wildlife and • 5.3 m north of the centreline at KP 19.2 (caribou trail, caribou scat (old), rabbit trail, and spruce See above See above wildlife habitat (cont’d) gum) • 5.7 m north of the centreline at KP 17.7 (caribou trails [north-south/east-west] intersects ROW) • 5.9 m northeast of the centreline at KP 7.4 (bears digging in logs for ants/insects) • 5.9 m north of the centreline at KP 17.8 (game trail) • 5.9 m north of the centreline at KP 19.5 (caribou trail north-south) • 6 m north of the centreline at KP 31.3 (chicken kill and tamarack) • 6.3 m north of the centreline at KP 19.5 (game trails and rabbit trails) • 6.3 m north of the centreline at KP 31.2 (rabbit trails) • 6.5 m southwest of the centreline at KP 7.0 (bear scat) • 6.6 m south of the centreline at KP 17.2 (moose droppings) • 6.6 m north of the centreline at KP 17.6 (squirrel den) • 6.6 m northeast of the centreline at KP 7.3 (beaver cut) • 7 m north of the centreline at KP 19.3 (wolf scat) • 7.1 m west of the centreline at KP 0.7 (deer trail) • 7.2 m southwest of the centreline at KP 1.2 (grouse ["chicken"] scat) • 7.4 m north of the centreline at KP 19.1 (fresh caribou tracks) • 7.4 m northeast of the centreline at KP 3.2 (bear scat with grain) • 7.5 m north of the centreline at KP 17.4 (moose tracks) • 7.6 m south of the centreline at KP 9.6 (bear scat) • 7.8 m northeast of the centreline at KP 3.7 (squirrel den) • 7.8 m north of the centreline at KP 19.5 (elk trail via cutline) • 7.9 m north of the centreline at KP 19.8 (moose tracks) • 8.1 m north of the centreline at KP 19.1 (scat and tracks of caribou) • 8.2 m south of the centreline at KP 12.5 (wasps' nest) • 8.5 m north of the centreline at KP 17.7 (multiple wildlife trails and intersections) • 9 m northeast of the centreline at KP 3.7 (bear marks from climbing tree) • 9.1 m north of the centreline at KP 12.4 (moose scat) • 9.2 m northeast of the centreline at KP 30.8 (squirrel den) • 9.5 m southwest of the centreline at KP 30.4 (game trail) • 9.6 m northeast of the centreline at KP 0.36 (squirrel food on stump) • 9.8 m north of the centreline at KP 11.7 (bear claw marks on tree) • 9.8 m southwest of the centreline at KP 30.4 (game trail) • 10.4 m north of the centreline at KP 10.7 (moose scat) • 11 m north of the centreline at KP 12.6 (moose tracks) • 11.1 m northeast of the centreline at KP 7.3 (bear scratchings) • 11.2 m southwest of the centreline at KP 30.4 (squirrel house and food) • 12 m south of the centreline at KP 10.57 (deer tracks, diamond willows) • 12 m north of the centreline at KP 17.48 (wolf scat, bear scat, game trail)

SeptemberGES0612191119CGY 2019 Page 5 of 85 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-6 Additional Written Evidence Peerless Trout First Nation Mitigation Table

Peerless Trout First Nation (PTFN) Project-related Issues Summary for the North Corridor Expansion Project – North Central Corridor Loop (Red Earth Section 3) (the Project) Where Addressed in the Environmental Community Interests/ Approximate Location and Socio-economic Issue/Concern Identified Relative to the Project NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL) Response/Proposed Mitigation Measures a Assessment (ESA) Potential effects on wildlife and • 12.2 m southwest of the centreline at KP 0.5 (potential wolverine den [belongs to a medium- See above See above wildlife habitat (cont’d) sized mammal]) • 12.2 m south of the centreline at KP 10.55 (small bird nest) • 12.3 m northeast of the centerline at KP 3.87 (wildlife centreline) • 12.3 m north of the centreline at KP 7.52 (big game trail) • 13 m southwest of the centreline at KP 30.4 (squirrel den and food) • 13.1 m northeast of the centreline at KP 6.95 (moose eating willows and rose hip patch) • 13.2 m north of the centreline at KP 0.23 (bear scat) • 14 m northeast of the centreline at KP 0.3 (rabbit trails) • 14 m northeast of the centreline at KP 30.2 (moose skull and kill site) • 15 m northeast of the centreline at KP 3.7 (bear sharpening nails on tree) • 16.5 m northeast of the centreline at KP 1.1 (game trail and deer track) • 16.6 m southwest of the centreline at KP 3.3 (bear scat x 5) • 17.3 m northeast of the centreline at KP 7.3 (rabbit habitat) • 17.5 m northeast of the centreline at KP 1.0 (mouse and game trail) • 17.5 m southwest of the centreline at KP 3.5 (bear fur) • 17.8 m southwest of the centreline at KP 3.5 wasps' nest) • 17.8 m north of the centerline at KP 17.2 (squirrel trail) • 17.8 m north of the centreline at KP 17.3 (bear bedding site) • 18.1 m southwest of the centreline at KP 0.6 (beehive used for medicine) • 18.4 m north of the centreline at KP 0.0 (bear scat) • 18.5 m south of the centreline at KP 12.5 (rabbit droppings) • 18.8 m northeast of the centreline at KP 0.5 (beehive/ wasp's nest used for medicine) • 18.8 m northwest of the centreline at KP 1.0 (woodpecker on spruce) • 19 m southwest of the centreline at KP 0.7 (bear scat) • 19.7 m north of the centreline at KP 17.3 (bear bedding site) • 19.5 m north of the centreline at KP 7.6 (bear digging in anthill) • 19.83 m southwest of the centreline at KP 0.6 (rabbit trail) • 19.8 m southwest of the centreline at KP 3.5 (rabbit kill) • 19.63 m north of the centreline at KP 17.7 (chicken kill) • 20.1 m west of the centreline at KP 0.6 (bear scat) • 20.2 m northeast of the centreline at KP 0.3 (rabbit scat) • 20.5 m southwest of the centreline at KP 0.8 (squirrel dens) • 20.8 m northeast of the centreline at KP 7.4 (lynx, fisher, rabbit, and squirrel habitat) • 21.1 m northeast of the centreline at KP 3.6 (rabbit trail and rabbit food) • 21.3 m southwest of the centreline at KP 3.1 (2 Canada geese on beaver pond) • 22.8 m northeast of the centreline at KP 1.0 (bear scat) • centreline.2 m southwest of the centerline at KP 30.4 (squirrel den and food) • 23.5 m north of the centreline at KP 12.0 (game trail near bog) • 23.7 m southwest of the centreline at KP 0.6 (potential wolverine den [belongs to a medium-sized mammal])

September6 2019 GES0612191119CGYPage 6 of 8 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-6 Additional Written Evidence Peerless Trout First Nation Mitigation Table

Peerless Trout First Nation (PTFN) Project-related Issues Summary for the North Corridor Expansion Project – North Central Corridor Loop (Red Earth Section 3) (the Project) Where Addressed in the Environmental Community Interests/ Approximate Location and Socio-economic Issue/Concern Identified Relative to the Project NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL) Response/Proposed Mitigation Measures a Assessment (ESA) Potential effects on wildlife and • 23.9 m southwest of the centreline at KP 30.2 (beaver run and beaver cuts) See above See above wildlife habitat (cont’d) • 24.3 m southwest of the centreline at KP 30.5 (moose skull) • 23.9 m southwest of the centreline at KP 0.8 (small unidentified scat [potential weasel]) • 24.7 m northeast of the centreline at KP 0.4 (grouse kill stuck on thorns of rosehips) • 26.7 m northeast of the centreline at KP 3.2 (bear scat with grain) • 27.8 m southwest of the centreline at KP 0.5 (rabbit droppings) • 27.6 m southwest of the centreline at KP 0.7 (squirrel house, fisher, marten, coyote, and bear scat) • 28 m northeast of the centreline at KP 0.4 (wildlife trail) • 28.8 m southwest of the centreline at KP 0.8 (bear digging in tree for insects) • 31.7 m southwest of the centreline at KP 3.5 (deer scat) • 32.5 m southwest of the centreline at KP 3.1 (beaver dam) • 33.9 m southwest of the centreline at KP 0.7 (squirrel house in dead tree) • 34.4 m south of the centreline at KP 0.0 (bear scat x 3 and woodpecker) • 39.1 m northeast of the centreline at KP 30.2 (raven, bear scat with grain) • 43.7 m east of the centreline at KP 0.0 (bear digging for ants) • 63.3 m southwest of the centreline at KP 30.2 (songbirds) • 65.8 m southwest of the centreline at KP 30.2 (2 ducks) • 82 m northeast of the centreline at KP 30.2 (woodpecker) • 88 m northeast of the centreline at KP 7.4 (large animal tracks) • 89.2 m northeast of the centreline at KP 30.2 (bear scat) • 92 m northeast of the centreline at KP 30.2 (bear scat) • 104 m north of the centreline at KP 0.1 (rabbit trail) • 110.7 m east of the centreline at KP 0.0 (bear scat x 5, and bear digging for ants) • 122.1 m northeast of the centreline at KP 30.1 (bear claw marks on tree) • 231.8 m northeast of the centreline at KP 29.9 (bear scat with grain) • 742 m north of the centreline at KP 15.1 (moose tracks, coyote and deer tracks) • 1.5 km northeast of the centreline at KP 6.6 (chicken scat) • 1.5 km northeast of the centreline at KP 6.5 (chicken scat) • 1.6 km north of the centreline at KP 15.0 (live lynx spotted)

SeptemberGES0612191119CGY 2019 Page 7 of 87 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-6 Additional Written Evidence Peerless Trout First Nation Mitigation Table

Peerless Trout First Nation (PTFN) Project-related Issues Summary for the North Corridor Expansion Project – North Central Corridor Loop (Red Earth Section 3) (the Project) Where Addressed in the Environmental Community Interests/ Approximate Location and Socio-economic Issue/Concern Identified Relative to the Project NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL) Response/Proposed Mitigation Measures a Assessment (ESA)

Potential effects on PTFN Treaty Sites identified relative to Red Earth Section 3: PTFN noted that there were no signs of old cabins, grave sites or sacred sites on the proposed ROW. Sections 5.13 and 5.14 and Aboriginal Rights, daily life, • 55.8 m southwest of the centreline at KP 30.2 (jackfish and sucker) PTFN noted the potential for unmarked gravesites to be encountered during construction, however Appendix 1E of the traditional uses, and economy. none are known to PTFN. • See list of wildlife and wildlife habitat identified by PTFN above EPP In all jurisdictions where TransCanada builds and operates, adherence to heritage legislation and • See list of vegetation identified by PTFN above guidance is a fundamental environmental requirement. TransCanada engages qualified heritage consultants who undertake the necessary pre-construction desktop and field investigations as required by the provincial Ministry that has jurisdiction for the Project area. On behalf of NGTL, project information and appropriate documentation was provided to Alberta Culture Multiculturalism & Status of Women (ACMSW, formerly Alberta Culture and Tourism) to determine the Historical Resources Act requirements for the Project. Historical Resources Act approval was issued by ACMSW without requirements for pre-construction archaeological Historical Resource Impact Assessments (HRIA). An HRIA was completed on the existing North Central Corridor Pipeline and no heritage sites were identified relative to Red Earth Section 3. Standard conditions apply to all components, including reporting of any incidental finds during construction. If site-specific information is provided it will be reviewed and considered in the context of the ESA and for incorporation into Project planning, including the EPP and Environmental Alignment Sheets (EAS), as appropriate. Consideration of this information will include evaluating whether NGTL’s planned mitigation would effectively avoid the identified potential interactions, or whether additional or refined mitigation is warranted. Traditional use sites or features which require site-specific mitigation will be included in the EPP and EAS filed prior to construction. In the event of an unanticipated discovery during construction, NGTL will implement the Cultural Resource Discovery Contingency Plan, as appropriate, to ensure that any sites not previously identified are properly recorded and mapped, and the potential disturbance of those sites from construction activities is addressed before continuing with construction. Potential effects on Aboriginal and Treaty rights were considered in the ESA through the assessment of potential Project effects on current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes. The ESA assessed potential Project effects on the current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes by Aboriginal peoples in accordance with the NEB Filing Manual. With the implementation of recommended mitigation, adverse effects of the Project on TLRU are predicted to be not significant. In addition to the resource-specific measures described above for wildlife and wildlife habitat and vegetation, the following mitigation measures will reduce the potential adverse effects of the Project on hunting, trapping, fishing and plant gathering: • Provide potentially affected Aboriginal groups with the proposed Project construction schedule and maps. • Project personnel are not permitted to hunt or fish on the construction footprint. • Notify registered trappers at least 10 days prior to construction. TransCanada’s Trapper Compensation Plan reimburses senior trap line holders based on the three elements of Project notification, pre-construction consultation/notification and post-construction fur loss negotiation/compensation.

PTFN requests discussions on -- NGTL is committed to continue discussions regarding PTFN’s concerns about potential Project-related -- the potential impacts be effects, as well as mitigation measures to minimize any such effects. NGTL is available to meet with completed in person with PTFN to discuss the mitigation measures outlined in this table and will continue to respond to representatives of NGTL and questions and concerns from PTFN through its ongoing engagement efforts. leadership and consultation team from PTFN

Source: Peerless Trout First Nation. 2019. TransCanada’s Proposed Pipeline Right-of-Way North Corridor Expansion Project Red Earth Section 3 Traditional Knowledge Assessment by Peerless Trout First Nation. June. a Detailed mitigation measures are provided in the Project-specific EPP.

September8 2019 GES0612191119CGYPage 8 of 8 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Appendix 8-7 North Corridor Expansion Project Sawridge First Nation Mitigation Table Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

Appendix 8-7

Sawridge First Nation Mitigation Table

September 2019

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-7 Additional Written Evidence Sawridge First Nation Mitigation Table

Sawridge First Nation (SWFN) Project-related Issues Summary for the North Corridor Expansion Project – North Central Corridor Loop (Red Earth Section 3) (the Project) Where Addressed in the Community Interests, Approximate Location Environmental and Socio-economic Issue/Concerns Identified Relative to the Project NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL) Response/Proposed Mitigation Measures a Assessment (ESA)

Potential effects on Inherent Red Earth Section 3 SWFN indicated that the Project area has potential for hunting, specifically, moose, grouse, rabbit, beaver and deer. However, no specific locations were identified. Section 6.15 Regional Study Area Treaty rights, including: Potential effects on Aboriginal and Treaty rights were considered in the ESA through the assessment of potential Project effects on current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes. The Section 8.0 and Appendix 1E of the (RSA) • Hunting ESA assessed potential Project effects on the current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes by Aboriginal peoples in accordance with the NEB Filing Manual. With the implementation of Environmental Protection Plan (EPP) recommended mitigation, adverse effects of the Project on TLRU are predicted to be not significant. • Plant gathering In addition to the resource-specific mitigation outlined in this table, the following mitigation measures will reduce the potential adverse effects of the Project on hunting, trapping, fishing and plant gathering: • Provide potentially affected Aboriginal groups with the proposed Project construction schedule and maps. • Project personnel are not permitted to hunt or fish on the construction footprint. • Notify registered trappers at least 10 days prior to construction. TransCanada’s Trapper Compensation Plan reimburses senior trap line holders based on the three elements of Project notification, pre-construction consultation/notification and post-construction fur loss negotiation/compensation. If site-specific information is provided it will be reviewed and considered in the context of the ESA and for incorporation into Project planning, including the EPP and Environmental Alignment Sheets (EAS), as appropriate. Consideration of this information will include evaluating whether NGTL’s planned mitigation would effectively avoid the identified interactions, or whether additional or refined mitigation is warranted. Traditional use sites or features which require site-specific mitigation will be included in the EPP and EAS filed prior to construction. If traditional land use sites not previously identified are found on the construction footprint during construction, implement the Cultural Resource Discovery Contingency Plan.

Potential effects on wildlife Red Earth Section 3 SWFN observed grouse and bear, a beaver dam and a squirrel den as well tracks and scat of bear, moose, coyote, rabbit and deer near Red Earth Section 3. A moose kill site and a bow hunter’s tree Section 5.10 RSA and Local Study and wildlife habitat, including: blind were also observed and documented. Specific locations were not provided. Sections 1.4, 1.8, 7.0, and 8.0 of the Area (LSA) • Game trails SWFN noted that there are several game trails throughout the Project development area. Specific locations were not provided. EPP • Loss of nesting sites Red Earth Section 3 has been designed to parallel existing disturbances for 98% of its length. Clearing of vegetation for Project construction will result in an increase in the combined width Appendix 1E of the EPP (i.e., expansion) of existing linear disturbances. Following existing or proposed linear disturbances allows the Project Footprint to be reduced by utilizing temporary workspace on the adjacent disposition as much as possible, as well as minimizing the fragmentation of the landscape. Reclamation and cleanup will be completed to maintain equivalent land capability, ensuring the ability of the land to support various land uses similar to the uses that existed before construction. NGTL will implement minimum surface disturbance construction where feasible (e.g., where grading is not necessary) and where conditions allow, to facilitate rapid regeneration of vegetation. NGTL will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential adverse effects of the Project on wildlife and wildlife habitat: • Where feasible minimize extra temporary workspace. • Locate deck sites in previously-disturbed areas, wherever practical. • Share existing access with other industrial users, where feasible. • Schedule clearing and construction activities to avoid sensitive wildlife timing windows to the extent feasible. • In the event there is a timing conflict, consult with the appropriate regulatory agency to discuss practical options and mitigation measures. • Leave gaps in windrows (e.g., topsoil/strippings, grade spoil, rollback, snow) and strung pipe at obvious drainages and wildlife trails, and to allow for livestock and vehicle/machinery passage across the construction footprint. Locations where wildlife gaps are appropriate will be determined in the field by the Environmental Inspector(s). These gaps should align. If previously unidentified listed or sensitive wildlife species or their site-specific habitat (e.g. dens, nests) are identified during construction of the Project, report to the Environmental Inspector(s) and implement the Wildlife Species of Concern Discovery Contingency Plan. Red Earth Section 3 is scheduled to be constructed from the fourth quarter of 2021 to the first quarter of 2022, under winter conditions. In the event Project activities extend into the Primary Nesting Period for the Bird Conservation Region for migratory birds, refer to the Breeding Bird and Nest Management Plan.

September 2019 Page 1 of 31 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-7 Additional Written Evidence Sawridge First Nation Mitigation Table

Sawridge First Nation (SWFN) Project-related Issues Summary for the North Corridor Expansion Project – North Central Corridor Loop (Red Earth Section 3) (the Project) Where Addressed in the Community Interests, Approximate Location Environmental and Socio-economic Issue/Concerns Identified Relative to the Project NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL) Response/Proposed Mitigation Measures a Assessment (ESA)

Potential effects on Red Earth Section 3 SWFN observed the following berries and medicinal plants in the Project area: cranberries, blueberries, gooseberries, cloudberries, bunchberries, willow, birch, rat root, cattails, spruce sap and Section 5.8 vegetation and wetlands, Labrador tea. SWFN noted that the dominant trees in the area are black spruce, birch, poplar, willow and spruce. SWFN identified swamps and muskeg in good condition near Red Earth Section 3. RSA and LSA Section 8.1 of EPP including: Specific locations were not provided. • Berries NGTL will implement minimum surface disturbance construction where feasible (e.g., where grading is not necessary) and where conditions allow, to facilitate rapid regeneration of vegetation. • Medicinal plants NGTL will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential adverse effects of the Project on vegetation resources: • During clearing, fell trees towards the construction footprint wherever possible. Recover trees that inadvertently fall into adjacent undisturbed vegetation. • Where practical, leave stumps in place, particularly on streambanks, to provide surface stability. Stumps that are removed will be used as rollback or will be disposed of by burning or chipping, where approved. • On Crown land allow for natural regeneration or seed as directed by the responsible Land Administrator. Natural recovery is the preferred method of reclamation in non-agricultural areas on level terrain where erosion is not expected. Temporary effects to wetlands as a result of construction of the Red Earth Section 3 are addressed through industry-standard best practices and policies, including Alberta’s Codes of Practice, the Federal Policy on Wetland Conservation and the Alberta Wetland Policy. To achieve the “no net loss” goal of the FPWC and align with the intent of the Alberta Wetland Policy, NGTL used the wetland mitigation hierarchy (i.e., avoid, minimize, and replace) to reduce potential effects on wetlands. NGTL’s routing criteria primarily relies on paralleling the existing rights-of-ways and considers reducing the impacts to environmentally sensitive areas, including wetlands. Routing is the primary mechanism used for avoiding and minimizing impacts to wetlands but is considered in light of all routing criteria and environmental sensitivities. Where wetlands could not be avoided, mitigation provided in the Project-specific environmental protection plans will be implemented to minimize potential effects to wetlands. NGTL will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential for adverse effects of the Project on wetlands: • NGTL will obtain regulatory approval for construction activities occurring within wetlands, as required. Construct the wetland crossings in accordance with the applicable regulatory requirements. • Minimize the removal of vegetation in wetlands to the extent possible. • Conduct ground level cutting/mowing/mulching of wetland vegetation instead of grubbing. The method of removal of wetland vegetation is subject to approval by NGTL. • Minimize grading within wetland boundary. Do not use temporary workspace within the boundaries of wetlands, unless required for site specific purposes. Temporary workspace within the boundary of a wetland must be approved by the Environmental Inspector(s) or designate(s). • The Contractor will use berms, cross ditches, sediment fencing and/or other appropriate measures to prevent erosion and siltation into adjacent wetland areas, unless otherwise directed by NGTL. Refer to the Soil Erosion Contingency Plan for additional measures. • If ground conditions are encountered that create potential for rutting, admixing or compaction, minimize ground disturbance by using a protective layer such as frost packing, snow, ice, geotextile and fill, rig mats, swamp mats or access mats between wetland root/seed bed and construction equipment. • Replace trench material as soon as feasible, and re-establish pre-construction contours within wetland boundary to facilitate cross right-of-way drainage. • Natural recovery is the preferred method of reclamation. Do not seed wetland areas unless otherwise directed by NGTL. In the event that a permanent loss of wetlands is necessary for the construction of the Project (e.g., potentially at valve locations), an application will be prepared as per the Alberta Wetland Policy’s process of wetland replacement, and in compliance with the requirements under the Alberta Water Act

Potential effects on creeks Red Earth Section 3 Watercourse crossing methods considered include both trenched (i.e., open cut or isolated) and trenchless (e.g., horizontal directional drill) options. Watercourse crossing methods at each location Section 5.3 and ponds RSA and LSA were assessed considering watercourse sensitivity, presence of fish and fish habitat, feasibility, and past experience with reclamation and restoration success. Trenchless crossings are conducted in Sections 8.1 and 8.4 of the EPP accordance with the applicable sections of the Trenchless Crossing Management Plan. For pipeline crossings conducted using a trenched crossing method, apply applicable Fisheries and Oceans Canada Measures to Avoid Causing Harm to Fish and Fish Habitat. NGTL determines the appropriate crossing method by considering and balancing a variety of technical, environmental, stakeholder and economic considerations, along with site-specific conditions. In most cases, a conventional trenched crossing is the preferred crossing method because it involves the least footprint, duration of installation, and cost. NGTL can construct these crossings effectively and has a proven suite of mitigation measures and industry best practices to address conventional construction across most watercourses. Where minimal disturbance construction can be employed at these crossings, natural revegetation has been more successful and cost effective than the active reclamation measures needed at locations where stripping and grading occurs. Where warranted, a water quality monitoring plan will be developed that includes monitoring where trenchless methods are used. NGTL will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential for adverse effects of the Project on water quality during construction: • The contractor shall develop a detailed site-specific watercourse crossing plan and submit the plan to NGTL for approval prior to initiating watercourse crossing activities • All equipment shall arrive on the Project free of leaks and in good working condition. Any equipment which does not arrive free of leaks and in good working conditions shall not be allowed on the construction footprint until it has been repaired, re-inspected by the Environmental Inspector(s) or designate(s), and deemed suitable for use. • Equipment to be used in or adjacent to a watercourse or waterbody will be clean or otherwise free of external grease, oil or other fluids, mud, soil and vegetation, prior to entering the waterbody. • Ensure no vehicles or equipment containing petroleum, oil, or lubricants are parked or stationed in a watercourse at any time except for equipment that is required for that immediate phase of construction. • Conduct refuelling at least 100 m away from any watercourse or waterbody, when feasible. • Do not wash equipment or machinery within 30m of watercourses or waterbodies.

September2 2019 Page 2 of 3 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-7 Additional Written Evidence Sawridge First Nation Mitigation Table

Sawridge First Nation (SWFN) Project-related Issues Summary for the North Corridor Expansion Project – North Central Corridor Loop (Red Earth Section 3) (the Project) Where Addressed in the Community Interests, Approximate Location Environmental and Socio-economic Issue/Concerns Identified Relative to the Project NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL) Response/Proposed Mitigation Measures a Assessment (ESA)

Potential effects on creeks See above NGTL will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential for sediment to enter watercourses and/or waterbodies: See above and ponds (cont’d) • Install erosion and sediment control at all watercourses and/or waterbodies as directed by the Environmental Inspector(s) or designate(s). • Where water erosion is evident, and there is potential for runoff from the construction footprint to flow into a watercourse, refer to the Soil Erosion Contingency Plan. • Prohibit clearing of extra temporary workspace within a 10 metre (m) (minimum) riparian buffer from top of bank of the watercourse. This area shall be clearly marked prior to clearing operations. The right-of-way will be narrowed through the riparian area, if feasible. • Limit clearing of trees and shrubs at watercourse crossings to the trench line and work side areas required for vehicle crossings. • If the working surface is unstable, do not permit clearing equipment within the 10 m riparian buffer, unless approved by the Environmental Inspector(s) or designate(s). • Following clearing, the 10 m riparian buffer will remain intact (i.e., consisting of low-lying understory vegetation).

Source: Sawridge First Nation. 2019. Response Letter for NGTL North Corridor Expansion Project – NCC Loop (Red Earth Section 3). Prepared by Sawridge First Nation. July. a Detailed mitigation measures are provided in the Project-specific EPP.

September 2019 Page 3 of 3 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Appendix 8-8 North Corridor Expansion Project Tallcree First Nation Mitigation Table Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

Appendix 8-8

Tallcree First Nation Mitigation Table

September 2019 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-8 Additional Written Evidence Tallcree First Nation Mitigation Table

Tallcree First Nation (TFN) Project-related Issues Summary for the North Corridor Expansion Project – North Central Corridor Loop (North Star Section 2 and Red Earth Section 3) (the Project) Where Addressed in the Environmental and Approximate Location Socioeconomic Community Interests, Issue/Concern Identified Relative to the Project NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL) Response/Proposed Mitigation Measures Assessment (ESA)

Potential effects on traditional land and resource use, North Star Section 2 and Red Earth In their TK report, TFN stated that the Project area is valued because TFN may use the area in the future as the preferred location of traditional land uses shifts over Section 5.14 including: Section 3 Project Construction time. Section 8.1 of the Footprint (PCF), Local Study Area • Increased area of permanently disturbed lands, particularly The North Star Section 2 has been designed to parallel existing disturbances for 100% of its length and Red Earth Section 3 has been designed to parallel existing Environmental Protection (LSA) and Regional Study Area around the Red Earth Section 3, reducing the total area of disturbances for 98% of its length. Clearing of vegetation for Project construction will result in an increase in the combined width (i.e., expansion) of existing linear Plans (EPPs) (RSA) land TFN members have to practice traditional land uses disturbances. Following existing or proposed linear disturbances allows the Project Footprint to be reduced by utilizing temporary workspace on the adjacent disposition and to enjoy the land as much as possible, as well as minimizing the fragmentation of the landscape. Reclamation and cleanup will be completed to maintain equivalent land capability, ensuring the ability of the land to support various land uses similar to the uses that existed before construction. TFN requests: During construction, access will not be restricted but may be temporarily affected to mitigate safety concerns. Where there is no active construction or other identified • They be notified if further work done on the Project or if safety risk (e.g., open trench or excavations), traditional land users will not be impeded. Once Project-related construction is complete, access and use of the right-of- there are any further disturbances in the planning, way can resume for TFN. construction, and operations phases NGTL will provide potentially affected Aboriginal groups with the proposed Project construction schedule and maps prior to construction. NGTL will remain available to discuss and, where possible, address any concerns TFN may have during operation and maintenance of the Project through engagement with Regional Liaisons and NGTL’s Public Awareness Program.

Potential effects on wildlife and wildlife habitat, including: Sites identified relative to North Star NGTL will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential adverse effects of the Project on wildlife and wildlife habitat: Sections 5.10 and 5.11 Section 2: • Disturbance of animals from construction noises, reducing • Locate deck sites in previously-disturbed areas, wherever practical. Sections 6.0, 7.0, 8.0, the availability of game in the Project area • At Kilometre Post (KP) 0.5 8.4, and 8.8 and • Share existing access with other industrial users, where feasible. (game trail) Appendices 1E and 1F of • Schedule clearing and construction activities to avoid sensitive wildlife timing windows, to the extent feasible. the EPPs • At KP 1.2 (game trail) • In the event there is a timing conflict, consult with the appropriate regulatory agency to discuss practical options and mitigation measures. • At KP 1.9 (game trail) • Leave gaps in windrows (e.g., topsoil/strippings, grade spoil, rollback, snow) and strung pipe at obvious drainages and wildlife trails, and to allow for livestock and • At KP 2.6 (game trail and prairie vehicle/machinery passage across the construction footprint. Locations where wildlife gaps are appropriate will be determined in the field by the Environmental chicken) Inspector(s). These gaps should align. Sites identified relative to Red Earth NGTL will implement mitigation measures relevant to reduce sensory disturbance, including the following: Section 3: • Ensure that noise abatement equipment on machinery is in good working order; • At KP 2.4 (game trail and lynx tracks) • Reduce idling of equipment, where possible; and • At KP 2.4 (game trail) • Where practical and applicable, use multi-passenger vehicles for the transport of crews to and from job sites • At KP 5.1 (prairie chickens, If previously unidentified listed or sensitive wildlife species or their site-specific habitat e.g. dens, nests are identified during construction of the Project, report to the game trail) Environmental Inspector(s) and implement the Wildlife Species of Concern Discovery Contingency Plan. • At KP 6.4 (bear scat) • At KP 30.9 (rabbits) • 10 meters south of KP 17.6 (game trail) • 20 meters southwest of KP 4.4 (prairie chicken) • 20 meters south of KP 7.8 (game trail) • 20 meters north of KP 13.6 (bear trapper’s site) • 30 meters north of KP 13.7 (prairie chicken) • 40 meters north of KP 9.9 (game trail, moose tracks) • 40 meters north KP 12.3 (deer tracks) • 40 meters north of KP 13.3 (bear tracks, game trail) • 50 meters north of KP 13.3 (game trail, deer tracks)

SeptemberGES0607191518CGY 2019 Page 1 of 31 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-8 Additional Written Evidence Tallcree First Nation Mitigation Table

Tallcree First Nation (TFN) Project-related Issues Summary for the North Corridor Expansion Project – North Central Corridor Loop (North Star Section 2 and Red Earth Section 3) (the Project) Where Addressed in the Environmental and Approximate Location Socioeconomic Community Interests, Issue/Concern Identified Relative to the Project NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL) Response/Proposed Mitigation Measures Assessment (ESA)

Potential effects of pipeline spills, including: North Star Section 2 and Red Earth TFN members are aware of pipeline spills that have occurred in the past, particularly around the Lubicon Lake area and are particularly concerned that any additional Sections 2.3 and 5.19 Section 3 PCF pipelines, including the Project, may result in spills. • Potential contamination of land and water by spills, Section 8.1 and lowering confidence in the quality of plants and animals The product to be transported by this Project is sweet natural gas. The Project will not transport oil, liquids, or condensates. In the event of a pipeline leak or rupture, Appendix 1E of the EPPs harvested in the Project area and in the region natural gas will disperse into the atmosphere. TFN requests: NGTL notes the existing spill prevention programs detailed in the EPP have been successful in preventing spills during construction and ensuring appropriate action and reporting if spills do occur. The EPP applies to all employees, contractors and consultants who conduct work on behalf of NGTL during construction of the Project. • They be notified in the event of a release All employees, contractors and consultants will abide by all federal, provincial and local requirements for the storage, handling, transport, disposal and spill reporting requirements of all products and waste materials that are potentially hazardous to human health and the environment. • Community members monitor the pipeline for spills and other irregularities The following measures will be adhered to during construction in order to prevent spills: • Implement the Chemical and Waste Management Plan. • The Contractor will ensure equipment is monitored regularly and free of fluid leaks. • Ensure no vehicles or equipment, which contain petroleum, oil, or lubricants are parked or stationed in a watercourse at any time except for equipment that is required for that immediate phase of construction. • Bulk fuel trucks, service vehicles, and pick-up trucks equipped with box mounted fuel tanks shall carry release prevention, containment, and clean up materials that are suitable for the volume of fuels or oils carried. • Release contingency material carried on bulk fuel and service vehicles, stationed near watercourses or waterbodies, or in environmental response units shall be suitable for use on land and water. • Conduct refuelling at least 100 metres (m) away from any watercourse or waterbody, when feasible. In the event of a spill during construction, the Release Contingency Plan will be implemented. The Project has been designed, and will be constructed and operated following applicable standards, industry best management practices and Project-specific mitigation identified in the ESA and the EPP. These measures are expected to avoid or reduce the potential of an accident or malfunction related to the Project. During operation and maintenance, NGTL will implement a combination of incident prevention measures, safety devices and procedures under TransCanada’s corporate Emergency Management System to ensure public safety and including the following: • Availability of emergency response personnel on call 24-hours a day, 7 days a week. NGTL’s first responders consist of employees and contract personnel who specialize in emergency response. The local police and fire departments may be called on for community protection so that our personnel are able to work safely, and the public is protected. • The Emergency Response Plan includes notification of Aboriginal groups in proximity to the location. • The appropriate regulators and emergency responders will be notified in the event of an emergency. The Project will be monitored and controlled by the TransCanada Operational Control Centre (OCC). Located in Calgary, the OCC remotely monitors and controls the operation of the NGTL System and other TransCanada-owned and operated pipelines. The OCC is staffed 24-hours per day and uses a computer-based Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) System, which controls gas compression, metering and remote valve facilities to ensure the required gas volumes, line pack and contract pressures are achieved daily. The SCADA system alerts the OCC operator of significant operational changes in the pipeline system. In the unlikely event of a pressure drop, pipeline block valves, which are equipped with actuators with low-pressure detection, will automatically close on sensing low pressure, to isolate the pipe segment. NGTL recognizes the interests of TFN in all aspects of Project activities and, in particular, environmental protection. NGTL will remain available to discuss and, where possible, address any concerns TFN may have during operation and maintenance of the Project through engagement with Regional Liaisons and NGTL’s Public Awareness Program.

September2 2019 GES0607191518CGYPage 2 of 3 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-8 Additional Written Evidence Tallcree First Nation Mitigation Table

Tallcree First Nation (TFN) Project-related Issues Summary for the North Corridor Expansion Project – North Central Corridor Loop (North Star Section 2 and Red Earth Section 3) (the Project) Where Addressed in the Environmental and Approximate Location Socioeconomic Community Interests, Issue/Concern Identified Relative to the Project NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL) Response/Proposed Mitigation Measures Assessment (ESA)

Potential effects on water and water quality, including: North Star Section 2 and Red Earth NGTL will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential for adverse effects of the Project on water quality during construction: Sections 5.3 and 6.5 Section 3 PCF and LSA • Reduced confidence in the quality and cleanliness of • The Contractor shall develop a detailed site-specific watercourse crossing plan and submit the plan to NGTL for approval prior to initiating watercourse crossing Sections 8.1 and 8.4 of surface and groundwater activities. the EPPs • All equipment shall arrive on the Project free of leaks and in good working condition. Any equipment which does not arrive free of leaks and in good working condition shall not be allowed on the construction footprint until it has been repaired, re-inspected by the EI(s) or designate(s), and deemed suitable for use. • Equipment to be used in or adjacent to a watercourse or waterbody will be clean or otherwise free of external grease, oil or other fluids, mud, soil and vegetation, prior to entering the waterbody. • Ensure no vehicles or equipment containing petroleum, oil, or lubricants are parked or stationed in a watercourse at any time except for equipment that is required for that immediate phase of construction. • Conduct refuelling at least 100 m away from any watercourse or waterbody, when feasible. • Do not wash equipment or machinery within 30 m of watercourses or waterbodies. NGTL will implement the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential for sediment to enter watercourses and/or waterbodies:

• Install erosion and sediment control at all watercourses and/or waterbodies as directed by the Environmental Inspector(s) or designate(s). • Where water erosion is evident, and there is potential for runoff from the construction footprint to flow into a watercourse, refer to the Soil Erosion Contingency Plan. • Prohibit clearing of extra temporary workspace within a 10 m (minimum) riparian buffer from top of bank of the watercourse. This area shall be clearly marked prior to clearing operations. The right-of-way will be narrowed through the riparian area, if feasible. • Limit clearing of trees and shrubs at watercourse crossings to the trench line and work side areas required for vehicle crossings. • If the working surface is unstable, do not permit clearing equipment within the 10 m riparian buffer, unless approved by the Environmental Inspector(s) or designate(s). • Following clearing, the 10 m riparian buffer will remain intact (i.e., consisting of low-lying understory vegetation). Watercourse crossing methods considered include both trenched (i.e., open cut or isolated) and trenchless (e.g., horizontal directional drill) options. Watercourse crossing methods at each location were assessed considering watercourse sensitivity, presence of fish and fish habitat, feasibility, and past experience with reclamation and restoration success. Trenchless crossings are conducted in accordance with the applicable sections of the Trenchless Crossing Management Plan. For pipeline crossings conducted using a trenched crossing method, apply applicable Fisheries and Oceans Canada Measures to Avoid Causing Harm to Fish and Fish Habitat. NGTL determines the appropriate crossing method by considering and balancing a variety of technical, environmental, stakeholder and economic considerations, along with site-specific conditions. In most cases, a conventional trenched crossing is the preferred crossing method because it involves the least footprint, duration of installation and cost. NGTL can construct these crossings effectively and has a proven suite of mitigation measures and industry best practices to address conventional construction across most watercourses. Where minimal disturbance construction can be employed at these crossings, natural revegetation has been more successful and cost effective than the active reclamation measures needed at locations where stripping and grading occurs. Where warranted, a water quality monitoring plan will be developed where trenchless methods are used.

Potential cumulative effects from the Project interacting with: North Star Section 2 and Red Earth TFN reported that although the Project largely twins an existing pipeline it will cause additional impacts to TFN traditional land uses and values and that these impacts Section 6 Section 3 RSA will be cumulative with those that have already occurred on the landscape due to previous projects and developments. • Roads and highways The ESA included a cumulative effects assessment which considered the effects of past, present and reasonably foreseeable future projects, including the Project’s • Seismic lines contribution to those effects. The cumulative effects assessment methodology follows the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency’s Technical Guidance for • Pipelines Assessing Cumulative Effects under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 and the NEB Filing Manual. Cumulative effects are evaluated for significance using the same definition used for significance determination for residual effects. • Other oil and gas infrastructure The ESA assumes that other companies and other NGTL projects and activities considered (i.e., not the Project itself) will employ similar mitigation measures as those • Conversion of forested land to agriculture described in Section 5.0 to control effects on the environment from the specific project. Potential Project-related cumulative effects are minimized with the implementation of the following design and construction measures: • Maximizing the use of adjacent existing right-of-way and reducing the width of additional clearing as much as possible (North Star Section 2 has been designed to parallel existing disturbances for 100% of its length and Red Earth Section 3 has been designed to parallel existing disturbances for 98% of its length). • Avoiding construction during critical wildlife timing windows when feasible. • Adhering to the approved construction footprint and access.

Source: Tallcree First Nation. 2018. TransCanada Pipelines Ltd. North Central Corridor Loop North Star 2 and Red Earth 3 Pipeline Project. Tallcree First Nation Traditional Knowledge Report. December 2018. a Detailed mitigation measures are provided in the Project-specific EPP.

SeptemberGES0607191518CGY 2019 Page 3 of 3 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Appendix 8-9 North Corridor Expansion Project Historical Resources Act Approvals Additional Written Evidence GH-002-2019

Appendix 8-9

Historical Resources Act Approvals

September 2019 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-9 Additional Written Evidence Historical Resources Act Approvals

HRA Number: 4780-19-0045-001 June 04, 2019

Historical Resources Act Approval with Conditions

Proponent: Nova Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL) 450 1st St SW, Calgary, AB T2P 5H1 Contact: Barbara Taylor

Agent: CH2M HILL Energy Canada, Ltd. Contact: CH2M HILL Energy Canada, Ltd.

Project Name: NGTL 2022 North Central Corridor Loop (North Star Section 2)

Project Components: Pipeline Riser Site Log Deck Temporary Workspace Temporary Access Valve Site Geotechnical / Geophysical Testing

Application Purpose: Requesting HRA Approval / Requirements

Historical Resources Act approval is granted for the activities described in this application and its attached plan(s)/sketch(es) subject to the following conditions.

David Link Assistant Deputy Minister Heritage Division Alberta Culture, Multiculturalism and Status of Women

SCHEDULE OF CONDITIONS

ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES

There are no Historical Resources Act requirements associated with archaeological resources; however, the proponent must comply with Standard Requirements under the Historical Resources Act: Reporting the Discovery of Historic Resources, which are applicable to all land surface disturbance activities in the Province.

OPaC HR Application # 014974567 Page 1 of 3 HRM Project # 4780-19-0045

September 2019 Page 1 of 8 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-9 Additional Written Evidence Historical Resources Act Approvals

Historical Resources Act Approval with Conditions HRA Number: 4780-19-0045-001 June 04, 2019

SCHEDULE OF CONDITIONS (continued)

PALAEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES

Conditional Historical Resources Act approval is granted relative to palaeontological resources on the understanding that a targeted Historic Resources Impact Assessment will be conducted, as outlined below.

1. The Historic Resources Impact Assessment must target the following locations:

a) The crossing of the Notikewin River valley and;

b) localities where the project approaches the Miekle River Valley crest and tributaries of the Meikle River.

Development activities outside of the specified target areas may proceed.

2. The Historic Resources Impact Assessment is to be carried out prior to the initiation of any land surface disturbance activities within the target locations under snow free, unfrozen ground conditions. Should the project require survey under winter conditions, assessment procedures must be discussed in advance with the Royal Tyrrell Museum of Palaeontology.

3. The Historic Resources Impact Assessment for palaeontological resources is to be conducted on behalf of the proponent by a palaeontologist qualified to hold a palaeontological research permit within the Province of Alberta. A permit must be issued by Alberta Culture, Multiculturalism and Status of Women prior to the initiation of any palaeontological field investigations. Please allow ten working days for the permit application to be processed. To obtain contact information for consultants qualified to undertake this work, please consult the list of Alberta Historic Resource Consultants.

4. Results of the Historic Resources Impact Assessment must be reported to Alberta Culture, Multiculturalism and Status of Women and subsequent Historical Resources Act approval must be granted before development proceeds within the targeted area.

ABORIGINAL TRADITIONAL USE SITES

There are no Historical Resources Act requirements associated with Aboriginal traditional use sites of a historic resource nature; however, the proponent must comply with Standard Requirements under the Historical Resources Act: Reporting the Discovery of Historic Resources, which are applicable to all land surface disturbance activities in the Province.

HISTORIC STRUCTURES

There are no Historical Resources Act requirements associated with historic structures; however, the proponent must comply with Standard Requirements under the Historical Resources Act: Reporting the Discovery of Historic Resources, which are applicable to all land surface disturbance activities in the Province.

PROVINCIALLY DESIGNATED HISTORIC RESOURCES

There are no Historical Resources Act requirements associated with Provincially Designated Historic Resources; however, the proponent must comply with Standard Requirements under the Historical Resources Act: Reporting the Discovery of Historic Resources, which are applicable to all land surface disturbance activities in the Province.

OPaC HR Application # 014974567 Page 2 of 3 HRM Project # 4780-19-0045

September 2019 Page 2 of 8 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-9 Additional Written Evidence Historical Resources Act Approvals

Historical Resources Act Approval with Conditions HRA Number: 4780-19-0045-001 June 04, 2019

SCHEDULE OF CONDITIONS (continued)

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS 1. In addition to any specific conditions detailed above, the proponent must abide by all Standard Conditions under the Historical Resources Act.

Lands Affected: All New Lands

Proposed Development Area:

MER RGE TWP SEC LSD List 5 22 93 32-34 1-4

5 22 93 25 9,13-16

5 21 93 30 2-3,5-6,12

5 21 93 20 12

5 21 93 19 9,15-16

5 22 93 26 14-16

5 22 93 31 1,5-8,11-12

5 22 93 35 3-4

5 23 93 31-35 13-16

5 23 93 36 9-10,13-15

5 24 93 36 14-16

Documents Attached: Document Name Document Type Reduced Size Maps Illustrative Material

OPaC HR Application # 014974567 Page 3 of 3 HRM Project # 4780-19-0045

September 2019 Page 3 of 8 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-9 Additional Written Evidence Historical Resources Act Approvals

HRA Number: 4780-19-0047-001 May 24, 2019

Historical Resources Act Approval

Proponent: Nova Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL) 450 1st St SW, Calgary, AB T2P 5H1 Contact: Barbara Taylor

Agent: CH2M HILL Energy Canada, Ltd. Contact: CH2M HILL Energy Canada, Ltd.

Project Name: NGTL 2022 North Central Corridor Loop (Red Earth Section 3)

Project Components: Pipeline Riser Site Log Deck Temporary Workspace Temporary Access Valve Site Geotechnical / Geophysical Testing

Application Purpose: Requesting HRA Approval / Requirements

Historical Resources Act approval is granted for the activities described in this application and its attached plan(s)/sketch(es) subject to Section 31, "a person who discovers an historic resource in the course of making an excavation for a purpose other than for the purpose of seeking historic resources shall forthwith notify the Minister of the discovery." The chance discovery of historical resources is to be reported to the contacts identified within Standard Requirements under the Historical Resources Act: Reporting the Discovery of Historic Resources.

Colleen Haukaas Regulatory Approvals Coordinator Alberta Culture, Multiculturalism and Status of Women

ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES

There are no Historical Resources Act requirements associated with archaeological resources; however, the proponent must comply with Standard Requirements under the Historical Resources Act: Reporting the Discovery of Historic Resources, which are applicable to all land surface disturbance activities in the Province.

OPaC HR Application # 014973381 Page 1 of 2 HRM Project # 4780-19-0047

September 2019 Page 4 of 8 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-9 Additional Written Evidence Historical Resources Act Approvals

Historical Resources Act Approval HRA Number: 4780-19-0047-001 May 24, 2019

(continued)

Lands Affected: All New Lands

Proposed Development Area:

MER RGE TWP SEC LSD List 5 5 91 8 7-8,10,14-15

5 6 91 27-29 9-12

5 8 91 27 9-10,14-15

5 8 91 33 1,3-4,6-8,10

5 5 91 17 3-5,12

5 5 91 18 9,14-16

5 5 91 19 3-5

5 6 91 24 8-10,14-15

5 6 91 25 3-5

5 6 91 26 8-12

5 6 91 30 9-12,14-15

5 7 91 25-30 9-12

5 8 91 25-26 9-12

5 8 91 34 3-5

Documents Attached: Document Name Document Type Revised Project Map Illustrative Material

OPaC HR Application # 014973381 Page 2 of 2 HRM Project # 4780-19-0047

September 2019 Page 5 of 8 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-9 Additional Written Evidence Historical Resources Act Approvals

HRA Number: 4780-19-0046-001 May 23, 2019

Historical Resources Act Approval

Proponent: Nova Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL) 450 1st St SW, Calgary, AB T2P 5H1 Contact: Barbara Taylor

Agent: CH2M HILL Energy Canada, Ltd. Contact: CH2M HILL Energy Canada, Ltd.

Project Name: NGTL 2022 Northwest Mainline Loop No. 2 (Bear Canyon North Extension)

Project Components: Pipeline Riser Site Log Deck Temporary Workspace Temporary Access Valve Site Geotechnical / Geophysical Testing

Application Purpose: Requesting HRA Approval / Requirements

Historical Resources Act approval is granted for the activities described in this application and its attached plan(s)/sketch(es) subject to Section 31, "a person who discovers an historic resource in the course of making an excavation for a purpose other than for the purpose of seeking historic resources shall forthwith notify the Minister of the discovery." The chance discovery of historical resources is to be reported to the contacts identified within Standard Requirements under the Historical Resources Act: Reporting the Discovery of Historic Resources.

Colleen Haukaas Regulatory Approvals Coordinator Alberta Culture, Multiculturalism and Status of Women

Lands Affected: All New Lands

Proposed Development Area:

MER RGE TWP SEC LSD List 6 12 83 21 3,5-6,12-13

6 12 84 6-7,18 1,8-9,16

6 12 84 19 1,8-10,14-15

6 12 84 30 3-5

OPaC HR Application # 014973220 Page 1 of 2 HRM Project # 4780-19-0046

September 2019 Page 6 of 8 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-9 Additional Written Evidence Historical Resources Act Approvals

Historical Resources Act Approval HRA Number: 4780-19-0046-001 May 23, 2019

(continued)

6 13 84 25 8-10,15

6 13 84 36 2,7,10,15

6 13 85 1 2,7,10,15

6 13 85 12 2,6-7,10-11,13-14

6 13 85 13 4-5,12

6 12 83 10 7-10,14-15

6 12 83 15 2-5

6 12 83 16 7-8,10-11,14-15

6 12 83 20 16

6 12 83 29 1-2,7-8,10-11,14

6 12 83 31 9,16

6 12 83 32 3-6,12

6 13 85 14 8-9

Documents Attached: Document Name Document Type Revised Project Map Illustrative Material

OPaC HR Application # 014973220 Page 2 of 2 HRM Project # 4780-19-0046

September 2019 Page 7 of 8 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. North Corridor Expansion Project Appendix 8-9 Additional Written Evidence Historical Resources Act Approvals

HRA Number: 4668-14-0046-002 May 07, 2019

Historical Resources Act Approval

Proponent: Nova Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL) 450 1st St SW, Calgary, AB T2P 5H1 Contact: Barbara Taylor

Agent: CH2M HILL Energy Canada, Ltd. Contact: CH2M HILL Energy Canada, Ltd.

Project Name: NGTL 2022 Hidden Lake North Compressor Station Unit Addition

Project Components: Compressor Station Temporary Workspace Other - 800 m of interconnecting piping

Application Purpose: Requesting HRA Approval / Requirements

Historical Resources Act approval is granted for the activities described in this application and its attached plan(s)/sketch(es) subject to Section 31, "a person who discovers an historic resource in the course of making an excavation for a purpose other than for the purpose of seeking historic resources shall forthwith notify the Minister of the discovery." The chance discovery of historical resources is to be reported to the contacts identified within Standard Requirements under the Historical Resources Act: Reporting the Discovery of Historic Resources.

Pauline Bodevin Regulatory Approvals Coordinator

Lands Affected: All New Lands

Proposed Development Area:

MER RGE TWP SEC LSD List 6 11 96 29 10-11,13-14

6 11 96 32 2-4

Documents Attached: Document Name Document Type Project Mapping Illustrative Material

OPaC HR Application # 014974743 Page 1 of 1 HRM Project # 4668-14-0046

September 2019 Page 8 of 8