Volume 3A Section 1 0 Public Cons Rev A

PART 5:

UPDATE ON STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project June 2014

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 PUBLIC CONSULTATION ...... 1 1.1 Introduction ...... 1 1.2 Phase 5 Engagement Overview – January 1 to April 30, 2014 ...... 1 1.3 Phase 5 Engagement - Ongoing ...... 2 1.4 Communication Activities – January 1 to April 30, 2014 ...... 3 1.4.1 Website Content...... 3 1.4.2 eblasts ...... 8 1.4.3 Project Newsletters ...... 10 1.4.4 Phone Line and Email ...... 11 1.4.5 Social Media ...... 11 1.4.6 Media Relations ...... 14 1.4.7 Application to Participate ...... 16 1.4.8 Publicly Accessible Application ...... 18 1.4.9 Letters of Response to Stakeholders ...... 22 1.4.10 Claims-Reality Campaign ...... 25 1.4.11 Trans Mountain in the Community ...... 27 1.4.12 BC 2035 ...... 29 1.4.13 Engagement Opportunities Advertising/Notification ...... 30 1.5 Stakeholder Engagement Activities – January 1 to April 30, 2014 ...... 41 1.5.1 Emergency Management Stakeholder Workshops ...... 41 1.5.2 Engagement on Reactivation Sections ...... 49 1.5.3 BC Parks Engagement ...... 50 1.5.4 Proposed Pipeline Corridor Optimization ...... 54 1.5.5 Workshops ...... 54 1.5.6 Open Houses ...... 61 1.5.7 Online Engagement ...... 65 1.5.8 Meetings with Local Governments and Community Groups ...... 70 1.5.9 Government Relations ...... 73 1.6 Summary of Outcomes – January 1 to April 30, 2014 ...... 73 1.6.1 Key Topics of Interest or Concern - Alberta ...... 73 1.6.2 Key Topics of Interest or Concern – Interior BC ...... 82 1.6.3 Key Topics of Interest or Concern – Lower Mainland/Fraser Valley, BC ...... 92 1.6.4 Key Topics of Interest or Concern – Mainland Coastal, BC ...... 101 1.6.5 Key Topics of Interest or Concern – Island Coastal, BC ...... 107 2.0 REFERENCES ...... 114

LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Letters Editor and Opinion Editorials ...... A-1 Appendix B Trans Mountain Letters to Stakeholders ...... B-1 Appendix C Claims Reality Campaign ...... C-1 Appendix D EMSW Materials ...... D-1 Appendix E Reactivation Workshop Materials ...... E-1 Appendix F BC Parks Workshop Materials ...... F-1 Appendix G Proposed Pipeline Corridor Optimization Materials ...... G-1 Appendix H Other Communication Materials ...... H-1

Page i

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project June 2014

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.4.1-1 Screenshot of the Updated Spill History Page on the TMEP Website ...... 4 Figure 1.4.1-2 Screenshot of Updated Construction Page on the TMEP Website ...... 5 Figure 1.4.1-3 Trans Mountain Website Visits ...... 6 Figure 1.4.1-4 Trans Mountain Website Page Views ...... 6 Figure 1.4.2-1 Screen Shot of a Trans Mountain eblast ...... 9 Figure 1.4.3-1 Cover Page of Trans Mountain Newsletter, March 2014 ...... 10 Figure 1.4.5-1 Geographic Distributions of Trans Mountain Twitter Followers ...... 11 Figure 1.4.5-2 Trans Mountain YouTube Channel Views ...... 12 Figure 1.4-5-3 Screen Shot of Getting to the Route Video ...... 14 Figure 1.4-5-4 Screen Shot of the NEB Review Process Video ...... 14 Figure 1.4-7-1 Application to Participate Advertisement ...... 18 Figure 1.4-8-1 Poster to Libraries Promoting the Availability of the Application ...... 19 Figure 1.4.8-2 Screen Shots of Three Trans Mountain Tweets ...... 20 Figure 1.4.9-1a Letter to NDP Member of Parliament, Kennedy Stewart Posted in the Trans Mountain Website in February 2014 (page 1 of 2) ...... 23 Figure 1.4.10-1 Trans Mountain Sample Claims-Reality Advertisement ...... 26 Figure 1.4.12-1 Trans Mountain BC 2035 Oil and Gas Innovation Advertisement ...... 30 Figure 1.4.13-1 Trans Mountain Sherwood Park and Chilliwack Open House Advertisements ...... 32 Figure 1.4.13-2 Trans Mountain Langley and Burnaby Open House Advertisements ...... 33 Figure 1.4.13-3 Translated Advertisement for March and April 2014 Open Houses ...... 34 Figure 1.4.13-4a Direct Mail Letter for Open House Notification (page 1 of 2) ...... 35 Figure 1.4.13-5 Jasper Open House Notification Advertisement ...... 37 Figure 1.4.13-6 Online Feedback Notification Advertisement ...... 39 Figure 1.4.13-7 eblast Inviting Stakeholders to Provide Feedback on the Proposed Pipeline Corridor and Learn More about the NEB Hearing Order...... 40 Figure 1.6.1-1 Key Topics of Interest or Concern in Alberta ...... 74 Figure 1.6.2-1 Key Topics of Interest or Concern in the BC Interior Region ...... 82 Figure 1.6.3-1 Key Topics of Interest or Concern in the Lower Mainland/Fraser Valley, BC ...... 92 Figure 1.6.4-1 Key Topics of Interest or Concern for the Mainland Coastal, BC Region ...... 101 Figure 1.6.5-1 Key Topics of Interest or Concern for the Island Coastal, BC Region ...... 107

LIST OF TABLES Table 1.4.1-1 Web Page Views ...... 7 Table 1.4.1-2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project Updates ...... 7 Table 1.4.2-1 Trans Mountain Eblasts ...... 8 Table 1.4.5-1 Trans Mountain YouTube Videos ...... 12 Table 1.4.6-1 Trans Mountain Media Inquiries ...... 15 Table 1.4.6-2 Trans Mountain Letters to the Editor...... 15 Table 1.4.6-3 Trans Mountain Opinion Editorials ...... 15 Table 1.4.7-1 Application to Participate Newspaper Campaign ...... 16 Table 1.4.8-1 Usb Mailout to Municipalities and Library ...... 20 Table 1.4.10-1 Trans Mountain Claims-Reality Newspaper Campaign ...... 25 Table 1.4.11-1 Trans Mountain Attendance at Events ...... 27 Table 1.4.11-2 Trans Mountain Speaking Opportunities ...... 28 Table 1.4.11-3 Trans Mountain Community Sponsorship Opportunities ...... 29 Table 1.4.13-1 Newspapers Open House Notification ...... 31 Table 1.4.13-2 Ethnic Newspapers Open House Notification ...... 33 Table 1.4.13-3 Jasper Open House Notification Newspaper Campaign ...... 37 Table 1.4.13-4 Online Engagement Advertising ...... 38 Table 1.5.1-1 Emsw – Thompson Nicola Regional District, BC ...... 42 Table 1.5.1-2 Emsw Participants – Thompson Nicola Regional District, BC ...... 42 Table 1.5.1-3 Emsw – Fraser Valley Regional District, BC ...... 43 Table 1.5.1-4 Emsw Participants – Fraser Valley Regional District, BC ...... 43 Table 1.5.1-5 Emsw – Valemount, BC ...... 44 Table 1.5.1-6 Emsw Participants – Valemount, BC ...... 44

Page ii

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project June 2014

Table 1.5.1-7 Emsw – Jasper, AB ...... 45 Table 1.5.1-8 Emsw Participants – Jasper, AB ...... 45 Table 1.5.1-9 Emsw – Merritt, BC ...... 45 Table 1.5.1-10 Emsw Participants – Merritt, BC ...... 46 Table 1.5.1-11 Emsw – Clearwater, BC ...... 46 Table 1.5.1-12 Emsw Participants – Clearwater, BC ...... 47 Table 1.5.1-13 Emsw Summary of Key Findings ...... 47 Table 1.5.2-1 Thompson Nicola Regional District Reactivation Meeting, Kamloops, BC ...... 49 Table 1.5.2-2 Jasper Reactivation Open House, Jasper, AB ...... 50 Table 1.5.3-1 BC Parks Workshop – Hope (Coquihalla Summit), BC ...... 51 Table 1.5.3-2 Attendees – Hope (Coquihalla Summit), BC ...... 51 Table 1.5.3-3 BC Parks Workshop – Fraser Valley / Chilliwack (Bridal Veil Falls), BC ...... 52 Table 1.5.3-4 Attendees – Fraser Valley / Chilliwack (Bridal Veil Falls), BC ...... 52 Table 1.5.3-5 BC Parks Workshop – Clearwater (Finn Creek), BC ...... 53 Table 1.5.3-6 Attendees – Clearwater (Finn Creek), BC ...... 53 Table 1.5.3-7 BC Parks Workshop – Kamloops (Lac Du Bois), BC ...... 53 Table 1.5.3-8 Attendees – Kamloops (Lac Du Bois), BC ...... 53 Table 1.5.5-1 Proposed Pipeline Corridor Optimization Workshop – West Edmonton, AB ...... 55 Table 1.5.5-2 Attendees – West Edmonton, AB ...... 55 Table 1.5.5-3 Summary of New Key Issues/Concerns – West Edmonton, AB ...... 55 Table 1.5.5-4 Proposed Pipeline Corridor Optimization Workshop – Wabamun, AB ...... 56 Table 1.5.5-5 Attendees – Wabamun, AB ...... 56 Table 1.5.5-6 Summary of New Key Issues/Concerns – Wabamun, AB ...... 56 Table 1.5.5-7 Proposed Pipeline Corridor Optimization Workshop – Fraser Valley/Chilliwack, BC ...... 57 Table 1.5.5-8 Attendees – Fraser Valley/Chilliwack, BC ...... 57 Table 1.5.5-9 Summary of New Key Issues/Concerns – Fraser Valley/Chilliwack, BC ...... 57 Table 1.5.5-10 Proposed Pipeline Corridor Optimization Workshop – Coquitlam, BC ...... 57 Table 1.5.5-11 Attendees – Coquitlam, BC ...... 58 Table 1.5.5-12 Summary of New Key Issues/Concerns – Coquitlam, BC ...... 58 Table 1.5.5-13 Proposed Pipeline Corridor Optimization Workshop – Surrey, BC ...... 59 Table 1.5.5-14 Attendees – Surrey, BC ...... 59 Table 1.5.5-15 Summary of New Key Issues/Concerns – Surrey, BC ...... 59 Table 1.5.5-16 Proposed Pipeline Corridor Optimization Workshop – Langley Township, BC ...... 60 Table 1.5.5-17 Attendees – Langley Township, BC ...... 60 Table 1.5.5-18 Summary of New Key Issues/Concerns – Langley Township, BC ...... 60 Table 1.5.5-19 Proposed Pipeline Corridor Optimization Workshop – Burnaby, BC ...... 61 Table 1.5.5-20 Attendees – Burnaby, BC ...... 61 Table 1.5.5-21 Summary of New Key Issues/Concerns – Burnaby, BC ...... 61 Table 1.5.6-1 Open House – Sherwood Park, AB ...... 62 Table 1.5.6-2 Summary of New Key Issues/Concerns – Open House, Sherwood Park, AB ...... 62 Table 1.5.6-3 Open House – (Othello Road) Hope, BC ...... 62 Table 1.5.6-4 BC Parks Open House – (Othello Road) Hope, BC ...... 63 Table 1.5.6-5 Open House – Fraser Valley / Chilliwack, BC ...... 63 Table 1.5.6-6 Summary of New Key Issues/Concerns Open House – Fraser Valley / Chilliwack, BC ...... 63 Table 1.5.6-7 Open House – Langley Township, BC ...... 64 Table 1.5.6-8 Summary of New Key Issues/Concerns Open House – Langley Township, BC ...... 64 Table 1.5.6-9 Open House – Burnaby, BC ...... 65 Table 1.5.6-10 Open House – Burnaby, BC ...... 65 Table 1.5.7-1 On-Line Engagement Feedback ...... 65 Table 1.5.7-2 Strathcona County / Sherwood Park Online Engagement ...... 66 Table 1.5.7-3 Edmonton West Online Engagement...... 66 Table 1.5.7-4 Hinton Online Engagement (Reactivation Segment) ...... 66 Table 1.5.7-5 Wabamun Online Engagement ...... 66 Table 1.5.7-6 Hope Online Engagement ...... 67 Table 1.5.7-7 Kamloops Online Engagement ...... 67

Page iii

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project June 2014

Table 1.5.7-8 Fraser Valley (Cheam Wetlands) Online Engagement ...... 67 Table 1.5.7-9 Coquitlam Online Engagement ...... 68 Table 1.5.7-10 Langley Online Engagement ...... 68 Table 1.5.7-11 Surrey Online Engagement ...... 69 Table 1.5.7-12 Burnaby Online Engagement ...... 70 Table 1.6.1-1 Key Interests Or Concerns – Alberta ...... 75 Table 1.6.2-1 Key Interests Or Concerns – BC Interior, ...... 83 Table 1.6.3-1 Key Interests Or Concerns – Lower Mainland/Fraser Valley, BC ...... 93 Table 1.6.4-1 Key Interests Or Concerns – Mainland Coastal, BC ...... 102 Table 1.6.5-1 Key Interests Or Concerns – Island Coastal, BC ...... 108

Page iv

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project June 2014

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

This is a list of the abbreviations and acronyms used in this volume of the application.

Term Meaning APEGBC Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of BC AVICC Association of Vancouver Island BBOT Burnaby Board of Trade BCBC Business Business Council of British Columbia ECA Emissions control area FPI Forensic Psychiatric Institute ISIS Centre for Sustainability and Social Innovation MOTI Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure NDP MP New Democrat Party Member of Parliament PACMAR / NANS Pacific Coast Marine Review Panel / Navigation & Navaids Subcommittee RMLBV Remote Mainline Block Valve SILGA Southern Interior Local Government Association TMPL Trans Mountain Pipeline (existing system) USB Universal Serial Bus VBOT Vancouver Board of Trade

Page v

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

1.0 PUBLIC CONSULTATION 1.1 Introduction Consultation Update No. 2 (Update) provides information on stakeholder engagement activities that supplemented Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC (Trans Mountain) work to optimize the route and reduce impacts to people and the environment. This Update describes how stakeholder feedback was gathered and addressed pursuant to Section 52 of the National Energy Board (NEB) Act. Unless otherwise stated, the feedback reported in this Update includes engagement activities conducted during January 1 to April 30, 2014.

The Application reported Trans Mountain’s public consultation activities for the period of May 2012 through to July 31, 2013; Aboriginal Engagement activities for the period of May 2012 through to September 30, 2013; and Landowner Relations for the period of April 2012 through to July 31, 2013. On March 20, 2014 Trans Mountain filed Consultation Update No. 1 and Errata with the NEB, which reported the outcomes of our ongoing engagement activities with Aboriginal groups, landowners and stakeholders conducted following the filing of the Application through to December 31, 2013.

Updates to engagement initiatives that continue to occur throughout the regulatory process will be provided periodically to the NEB.

1.2 Phase 5 Engagement Overview – January 1 to April 30, 2014 Trans Mountain remains committed to ongoing engagement throughout the life of the system. Trans Mountain continues to implement an open, extensive and thorough public consultation process, commonly known as stakeholder engagement. Stakeholder engagement touches all aspects of the proposed pipeline corridor between Strathcona County, Alberta (AB) and Burnaby, British Columbia (BC).

Trans Mountain’s Stakeholder Engagement Program was designed to take into account the unique and varying needs of the communities along the proposed pipeline corridor, and to be responsive and adaptive to the feedback received throughout the various stages of the Trans Mountain Expansion Project (the Project). During Phase 5, Trans Mountain continued to provide accurate and timely Project information, as well as gathering stakeholder feedback through a series of Workshops, Open Houses and meetings with local government and interested parties, attendance at various community events, presentations/speaking opportunities and digital engagement efforts. Feedback received through Trans Mountain’s engagement activities for this reporting period is provided in the Summary of Outcomes, Section 1.6.

Emergency Management Engagement In February 2014, Trans Mountain held Emergency Management Stakeholder Workshops (EMSW) with local and regional subject matter experts from municipal, federal and provincial governments, local environmental non-governmental organizations (ENGOs), and other environmental interest groups. During the reporting period, Workshops were held in Kamloops, BC, Chilliwack/FVRD, BC, Valemount, BC and Jasper, AB. Additional Workshops reported in this Update, although outside the reporting period, were held in Merritt, BC and Clearwater, BC. The purpose of these Workshops was to provide information on the draft Emergency Response Plan (ERP) and collect stakeholder feedback. Details of the EMSW are contained in Section 1.5.1.

Reactivation Engagement Trans Mountain met with representatives from the Thompson Nicola Regional District (TNRD) and the District of Barriere on March 6, 2014, to share information and seek feedback on the proposed reactivation of an existing 43 km of 24-inch pipeline from Darfield to Black Pines, BC. Trans Mountain held an Open House in Jasper, AB on March 27, 2014 to share information and seek feedback on the proposed reactivation of an existing 150 km of 24-inch pipeline from Hinton, AB, to Hargreaves, BC. Details related to these engagement activities are contained in Section 1.5.2.

Provincial Parks Engagement Trans Mountain held BC Parks Workshops during March and April 2014 to gather local knowledge and information specifically related to the BC Parks Stage 2 Boundary Adjustment application. Workshops were

Page 1

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

held in Hope (Coquihalla Summit), BC, Fraser Valley/Chilliwack (Bridal Veil Falls), BC Clearwater (North Thompson), BC, and Kamloops (Lac Du Bois), BC. Details regarding the BC Parks Workshops are contained in Section 1.5.3 and in Technical Update No. 1, Part 5 - BC Parks Boundary Amendment Application (4 Class A Parks) and Park Use Permit (Coquihalla Rec. Area).

Routing Engagement During March and April 2014, Trans Mountain conducted a series of workshops and open houses in communities where Trans Mountain continued its work to optimize the route and reduce impacts to people and the environment. Proposed Pipeline Corridor Optimization Workshops were held in west Edmonton, AB, Wabamun, AB, Fraser Valley/Chilliwack, BC, Coquitlam, BC, Surrey, BC, Langley, BC and Burnaby, BC. Routing Update Open Houses were held in Sherwood Park, AB, Hope (Othello Road), BC, Fraser Valley/Chilliwack, BC, Langley, BC and Burnaby, BC. Details of the Proposed Pipeline Corridor Optimization Workshops and Open Houses are contained in Sections 1.5.10 to 1.5.11.

Technical Update No. 1, Part 1 – Routing, provides further details on Trans Mountain’s engagement activities specific to route optimizations since the Application was filed in December 2013. Part 1 – Routing describes the currently proposed pipeline corridor as well as alternatives being considered by Trans Mountain and reviews Trans Mountain’s consultation efforts regarding the pipeline corridor selection process.

1.3 Phase 5 Engagement - Ongoing Engagement and communications activities will continue in Phase 5, as the Project proceeds through the NEB regulatory process and, if successful, the construction phases of the Project. Trans Mountain will continue to share the results of any new studies or work being completed, communicate any changes or updates to Project plans, share information with stakeholders on the regulatory process, employment and procurement opportunities, community readiness, community benefits and engage on construction effects and mitigation measures.

Engagement and communications activities will be undertaken through a number of initiatives, including but not limited to, Open Houses, Workshops, one-on-one meetings, presentations, website, online feedback forms, printed materials, and digital media including social media. Ongoing Phase 5 Engagement includes the following topics.

• Community Benefits Discussions (Q2 to Q4, 2014) - a series of meetings with municipalities, local governments and other local stakeholder groups to identify and examine a list of potential benefits to local communities that could result from the Project.

• Ongoing Route Optimization (Q2 to Q4, 2014) - follow-up meetings will continue with municipalities and stakeholder groups who have expressed an interest in local routing considerations.

• Engagement on Emergency Management (Q2 2014 continuing into 2015) – EMSWs were held in Clearwater and Merritt, BC in June 2014. Additional EMSWs will be held with First Nations and other local community interest groups, along with follow-up meetings with municipalities and regional districts throughout 2014 and 2015.

• Regional Parks Engagement (Q3 to Q4, 2014) – engagement on proposed pipeline corridor and temporary working space impacts on regional parks crossed by the proposed pipeline.

• Marine Fisheries Offset Plan (Q3 to Q4, 2014) - Trans Mountain committed to develop a Marine Fisheries Offset Plan related to its Westridge Marine Terminal. Engagement on this plan will focus on a targeted group of stakeholders with follow-up meetings as required.

• Terminals Update Communication (Q3 to Q4, 2014) – ongoing communication to provide updates regarding the expansion plans for Westridge Marine Terminal, and the Burnaby Terminal.

• Multi-Cultural Outreach (Q3 to Q4, 2014) - Building awareness of the Project through multicultural media, organizations, and events. A series of roundtables with multicultural and immigrant services

Page 2

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

groups will gather feedback and build relationships. Print and web content will continue to be translated to communicate employment and procurement opportunities as they become available.

• Employment and Procurement Capacity (Q3 to Q4, 2014, continuing into 2015) – as outlined in the Socio-Economic Management Plan (SEMP) contained in Appendix C, Volume 6B of the Application. Activities could include participation in job fairs, procurement Workshops and meetings with municipal governments and Chambers of Commerce.

• Community Readiness (Q4 2014) – a series of discussions held in pipeline route communities. Discussions will include accommodation planning, worker integration and support, jobs and procurement opportunities related to workforce hosting.

• Engagement and Communication on Construction Activities (2015) - Trans Mountain will undertake engagement and communication activities in Project route communities regarding construction plans, anticipated impacts and effects of construction and mitigation measures to reduce the negative impacts of construction on local communities. Topics such as the management of noise, dust and traffic will be included.

1.4 Communication Activities – January 1 to April 30, 2014 In support of the Phase 5 engagement activities reported on in this Update, the following communications initiatives ensured information was communicated to stakeholder groups thoroughly, in plain language, in a manner that maintained stakeholder relationships and built public acceptance for the Project.

1.4.1 Website Content A living communications tool, the Trans Mountain website, continued to evolve and be updated with current Project information. On December 13, 2013, Trans Mountain updated the website spill history page to reflect one additional spill at the Edmonton Terminal (http://www.transmountain.com/spill-history). Figure 1.4.1-1 contains a screenshot of the updated spill history page as presented on the Trans Mountain website.

Page 3

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

Figure 1.4.1-1 Screenshot of the Updated Spill History Page on the TMEP Website

Page 4

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

On April 13, 2014, Trans Mountain updated the website to include information about urban and rural pipeline construction spreads. Figure 1.4.1-2 contains a screenshot of the updated construction page as presented on the TMEP website.

Figure 1.4.1-2 Screenshot of Updated Construction Page on the TMEP Website

Page 5

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

In general, the number of site visits has increased by about 50% from the last reporting period and continues to follow a cyclical pattern where most visits take place Monday to Friday and drop off over the weekend. During the reporting period, the Project website received 29,701 visits. Of those, 61.5% were returning visitors and 38.5% were new visitors. On average, visitors spent 5 minutes and 15 seconds on the website and looked at 3.73 pages. Popular content on the website during this reporting period included the Application, the Proposed Expansion, the Interactive Map and the Project Overview pages.

Figure 1.4.1-3 depicts the number of visits to the Trans Mountain during the reporting period.

Figure 1.4.1-3 Trans Mountain Website Visits

Figure 1.4.1-4 depicts the number of pages viewed by all visitors to the Trans Mountain website during the reporting period.

Figure 1.4.1-4 Trans Mountain Website Page Views

Table 1.4.1-1 provides information on popular web pages, page views, and average time spent on each page.

Page 6

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

TABLE 1.4.1-1

WEB PAGE VIEWS

Page Page Views Average Time on Page Facilities Application 4,888 33:32 (http://application.transmountain.com/facilities-application) Interactive Map 3,589 3:32 (http://application.transmountain.com/interactive-map) Project Overview 3,745 1:35 (http://www.transmountain.com/project-overview) Proposed Expansion 4,657 0:51 (http://www.transmountain.com/proposed-expansion) Current Pipeline Operations 2,686 0:36 (http://www.transmountain.com/current-pipeline-operations) Building a Pipeline 950 2:56 (http://www.transmountain.com/building-a-pipeline) Contact us 1,587 1:40 (http://www.transmountain.com/contact-us) Jobs 1,884 1:01 (http://www.transmountain.com/jobs)

Trans Mountain continues to provide timely updates and share news about the Project through its website. When applicable, this information was distributed via the Project’s Twitter account and to the media. Table 1.4.1-2 provides a list of the Project updates provided during the reporting period.

TABLE 1.4.1-2

TRANS MOUNTAIN EXPANSION PROJECT UPDATES

Title Date Page Views NEB Advisory: Application to Participate in National Energy Board Public January 15, 2014 287 Hearing for Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Pipelines in Our Communities – Safety and Schools February 2, 2014 47 Letter to Kennedy Stewart, Member of Parliament for Burnaby-Douglas February 3, 2014 76 Route Selection – Our Commitment to Transparency & Authentic Dialogue February 10, 2014 385 What you need to know about the Trans Mountain Expansion Project February 25, 2014 418 Behind the Maps – How We’re Working to Optimize the Route March 4, 2014 130 Accessing the Application in Your Community March 7, 2014 151 Consultation Update No. 1 reports more than 300 additional meetings March 20, 2014 124 since filing Application Safety in Shipping: What’s changed since the Exxon Valdez spill March 24, 2014 18 A Milestone for Trans Mountain – March 2014 Newsletter Provides an March 27, 2014 73 Overview of the Project’s Facilities Application Springtime Safety – Call Before You Dig April 1, 2014 17 Local Opportunities AND Safe Operations April 7, 2014 39 Local Events Provide Opportunities for Feedback on Route April 10, 2014 38 The Route and the Regulator – How the NEB Process Addresses Route April 17, 2014 55 Selection A Fair, Efficient Review Process – Our Letter to the NEB about Oral Cross- April 22, 2014 59 Examinations Making in Work – Our Vision for Delivering Lasting Community Benefits April 29, 2014 30

Page 7

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

1.4.2 eblasts Trans Mountain continued to provide eblasts to stakeholders who indicated an interest in receiving Project updates either via the Trans Mountain website, at public events, or at meetings. In accordance with both British Columbia’s and Alberta’s Personal Information Protection Act, participants have the freedom to unsubscribe from Trans Mountain’s email eblasts at any time. Trans Mountain also adheres to the Canadian Anti-Spam Legislation (CASL) that came into effect on July 1, 2014 and requires individuals to provide consent to receive any email publication or commercial electronic message. Table 1.4-2-1 provides a list of the eblasts sent by Trans Mountain during the reporting period.

TABLE 1.4.2-1

TRANS MOUNTAIN EBLASTS

Date eblast Topic January 15, 2014 Intervener Application Notification – as per NEB direction January 15, 2014 Correction to the Intervener Application Notification – as per NEB direction (letter missing from NEB email address) January 22, 2014 Existing Suppliers - Intervener Application Notification and Procurement Database Information March 18, 2014 Invitation to Open Houses March 21, 2014 Consultation Update and Newsletter April 4, 2014 Online Feedback and Hearing Order

Figure 1.4.2-1 provides a screen shot of an eblasts providing a Trans Mountain Update – Learn about Our Recent Consultations and Project Update Newsletter.

Page 8

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

Figure 1.4.2-1 Screen Shot of a Trans Mountain eblast

Page 9

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

1.4.3 Project Newsletters On March 21, 2014, Trans Mountain published a newsletter that provided an update on the Project and a summary of recent activities. The newsletter had a print run of 7,500 and was distributed to stakeholders and was available at meetings and public events. The newsletter was also available electronically on the Project’s website and a link to the website was provided in the relevant eblasts. Figure 1.4.3-1 provides the first page of the 4-page Trans Mountain Newsletter issued in March 12, 2014. A full copy of the newsletter is contained in Appendix H.

Figure 1.4.3-1 Cover Page of Trans Mountain Newsletter, March 2014

Page 10

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

1.4.4 Phone Line and Email Both the toll-free phone line (1-866-514-6700) and the email address ([email protected]) continued to be managed during regular business hours. Trans Mountain continues to provide responses to stakeholder inquiries in a timely manner. During the reporting period, approximately 48 phone inquiries and 272 emails were received.

1.4.5 Social Media Trans Mountain continues to disseminate information through social media to audiences that may prefer to engage through methods other than traditional engagement and communications activities.

Twitter Trans Mountain’s Twitter account (@TransMtn) continues to be used to:

• disseminate accurate and timely information about the Project;

• link traffic to information so as to better inform;

• announce new material as it was posted to the website;

• distribute media coverage about the Project;

• retweet relevant materials (essentially forward other people’s tweets);

• provide quick responses to direct questions;

• correct misinformation; and

• promote engagement opportunities.

During the reporting period, 342 tweets were sent by @TransMtn. As of April 30, 2014, the @TransMtn Twitter account had 1,159 followers. Figure 1.4.5-1 provides information on the current geographic distribution of followers for the Trans Mountain Twitter account.

Figure 1.4.5-1 Geographic Distributions of Trans Mountain Twitter Followers

Page 11

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

YouTube During the reporting period, Trans Mountain added two new videos to its Project-specific YouTube channel located at http://www.youtube.com/user/TransMtn. A total of 28 videos on the YouTube channel generated a total of 473 views and 8,354 estimated minutes watched during the reporting period. The following events resulted in a noticeable increase in YouTube channel views and are reflected in Figure 1.4.5-2.

• March 24, 2014 – posted new video: Getting to the Route – Trans Mountain Expansion Project.

• March 24, 2014 – posted new video: NEB Review Process - Trans Mountain Expansion Project.

Figure 1.4.5-2 Trans Mountain YouTube Channel Views

Table 1.4.5-1 provides information on the length of the videos, the number of views, an estimated number of minutes watched and the average duration of the YouTube views during the reporting period.

TABLE 1.4.5-1

TRANS MOUNTAIN YOUTUBE VIDEOS

Estimated Average Video Total View Length Minutes Duration Video Publish Date (minutes) Views Watched (minutes) Economic Benefits for Trans November 5, 2013 3:03 580 1,174 2:01 Mountain Expansion Project Getting to the Route - Trans March 24, 2014 3:00 271 508 1:52 Mountain Expansion Project Pipeline Safety: Performing October 1, 2013 2:22 182 264 1:26 Preventative Cutouts NEB Review Process - Trans March 24, 2014 3:05 106 209 1:58 Mountain Expansion Project Trans Mountain Pipeline Operating April 8, 2013 2:54 84 135 1:36 Responsibly in your Community Anchor Loop Expansion: Intro February 14, 2013 4:00 73 156 2:07 (Part 1) Trans Mountain Expansion Project - March 7, 2013 2:50 69 138 1:59 Stakeholder Engagement Program - September 2012-January 2013

Page 12

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

TABLE 1.4.5-1 Cont'd

Estimated Average Video Total View Length Minutes Duration Video Publish Date (minutes) Views Watched (minutes) Anchor Loop Expansion: Mount February 15, 2013 3:15 55 110 2:00 Robson Provincial Park Construction (Part 4) Anchor Loop Expansion: Jasper February 15, 2013 3:50 37 74 2:00 National Park Construction (Part 3) Proposed Study Corridor: Kamloops, November 7, 2013 2:37 33 69 2:05 BC Proposed Study Corridor Options: November 7, 2013 3:57 31 61 1:57 Langley to Burnaby, BC Anchor Loop Expansion: February 15, 2013 7:17 26 91 3:30 Environmental Protection & Restoration Planning (Part 2) Proposed Study Corridor: Hope, BC November 7, 2013 2:57 26 42 1:36 Proposed Study Corridor: Chilliwack, November 7, 2013 1:08 23 15 0:38 BC Proposed Study Corridor: Hinton, AB November 7, 2013 1:46 20 22 1:05 Proposed Study Corridor: Pembina November 7, 2013 1:02 19 11 0:35 River Crossing, AB Proposed Study Corridor: Burnaby to November 7, 2013 1:06 19 13 0:42 Westridge Proposed Study Corridor: Wabamun, November 7, 2013 1:17 19 10 0:32 AB Proposed Study Corridor: November 7, 2013 1:15 16 15 0:56 Abbotsford, BC Trans Mountain Seeks Feedback: June 13, 2013 1:39 13 14 1:02 Have Your Say Proposed Study Corridor: Edmonton November 7, 2013 3:51 11 20 1:46 Anchor Loop Expansion: Restoration February 15, 2013 4:02 10 20 1:59 & Reclamation (Part 6) Proposed Study Corridor: Cheam November 7, 2013 0:53 10 5 0:30 Wetlands and Bridal Veil Falls area Anchor Loop Expansion: Thank February 15, 2013 2:20 7 16 2:20 You! (Part 7) Anchor Loop Expansion: Local February 15, 2013 2:51 7 13 1:53 Benefits (Part 5) Vancouver Board of Trade (VBOT) February 27, 2013 11:19 6 31 5:08 Energy Forum - Ian Anderson Keynote Presentation - Jan 31, 2013 VBOT Energy Forum - Panel March 6, 2013 7:09 1 1 0:36 Discussion - January 31, 2013 (Part 2) VBOT Energy Forum - Panel March 6, 2013 13:20 1 0 0:11 Discussion - January 31, 2013 (Part 1)

Figures 1.4.5-3 and 1.4.5-4 provide screen shots of the videos posted on YouTube.

Page 13

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

Figure 1.4-5-3 Screen Shot of Getting to the Route Video

Figure 1.4-5-4 Screen Shot of the NEB Review Process Video

1.4.6 Media Relations Trans Mountain continues to reach out proactively to local news organizations in communities along the proposed pipeline and marine corridor. Trans Mountain offered media interviews with Project spokespeople, to raise awareness about the various opportunities to engage with the Project and to provide accurate Project information. Media contacts included newspapers, magazines, radio stations, and TV stations. One media tour took place at the Westridge Marine Terminal in Burnaby, BC on March 12, 2014.

Trans Mountain also continues to respond to incoming media inquiries through its media-specific phone numbers (604) 908-9734 and (855) 908-9734, and a media-specific email address ([email protected]). Trans Mountain responded to 126 media inquiries and provided 33 interviews during the reporting period. Table 1.4.6-1 provides information on the TMEP media inquiries.

Page 14

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

TABLE 1.4.6-1

TRANS MOUNTAIN MEDIA INQUIRIES

Number of Media Number of Media Month Inquiries Interviews Key Topics January 2014 38 9 Application filing: marine risk assessment, routing, regulatory process February 32 5 Routing, pipelines in parks, consultation update, economic 2014 benefits March 2014 24 11 Routing, public consultation, open houses, NEB ATP process April 2014 32 8 Hearing Order, NEB process, Oral Hearings

Trans Mountain also submitted Letters to the Editor and Opinion Editorials to various publications, provided updated image and b-roll packages on regular basis, and used Twitter to engage in discussion with journalists.

Letters to the Editor Trans Mountain submitted the following Letters to the Editor to provide accurate Project information in response to previously printed materials. Copies of the Letters to the Editor that were submitted during the reporting period are included in Appendix A. Table 1.4.6-2 provides information on Trans Mountain Letters to the Editor during the reporting period.

TABLE 1.4.6-2

TRANS MOUNTAIN LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Date Publication URL or Appendix Topic Author April 25, 2014 Times http://www.timescolonist.com/opinion/letters/ki NEB Hearing Scott Stoness Colonist nder-morgan-committed-to-answering- process questions-1.1005462 April 29, 2014 Business in See Appendix A NEB Cross Scott Stoness Vancouver examination

Opinion Editorials Trans Mountain also submitted the following Opinion Editorials to provide accurate information through the media. Copies of the Opinion Editorials that were submitted during the reporting period are included in Appendix A. Table 1.4.6-3 provides a list of publications and the URL link to Opinion editorials submitted during the reporting period.

TABLE 1.4.6-3

TRANS MOUNTAIN OPINION EDITORIALS

Date Publication URL Title Author February 2, Burnaby http://www.burnabynow.com/opinion/your- Kinder Morgan Ian Anderson 2014 Now letters/kinder-morgan-president-responds- Canada Inc. 1.846090 (KMC) President Responds April 28, 2014, Vancouver http://www.vancouversun.com/touch/opinio NEB is a Fair Scott Stoness printed on Sun n/letters/National+Energy+Board+hearing+ Process May 1, 2014 fair+process/9797559/story.html?rel=7617 429

Page 15

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

The Letters to the Editor and Opinion Editorials that were noted in Section 1.4.1.6.3 of Volume 3A, and Section 1.4.6 of Consultation Update No. 1 & Errata, are also included in Appendix A.

1.4.7 Application to Participate Trans Mountain provided public notification in British Columbia and Alberta about the deadline for Applications to Participate, which forms part of the NEB Application review process. The advertisement content prepared by the NEB, was placed in the 26 NEB identified newspapers, as well as an additional 18 newspapers that Trans Mountain opted to include along the pipeline and marine corridor. Advertisements ran in both English and French. The advertisement was run at least twice in all newspapers, except those that did not have two publish dates during the advertising time period specified by the NEB. Table 1.4.7-1 provides the insertion dates and circulation numbers for newspapers where Application to Participate advertising was placed.

TABLE 1.4.7-1

APPLICATION TO PARTICIPATE NEWSPAPER CAMPAIGN

Publication Insertion Date Circulation January 16, 2014 Edmonton Journal January 22, 2014 125,057 January 24, 2014 January 17, 2014 Vancouver Sun 186,095 January 24, 2014 January 16, 2014 Victoria Times Colonist January 22, 2014 58,839 January 25, 2014 January 17, 2014 Burnaby Now 47,812 January 24, 2014 January 16, 2014 Chilliwack Times 30,500 January 23, 2014 January 17, 2014 Coquitlam Now 53,323 January 22, 2014 Gulf Island Tides January 23, 2014 17,500 January 21, 2014 Langley Advance News 40,026 January 28, 2014 January 16, 2014 Nanaimo Daily News January 22, 2014 5,866 January 23, 2014 January 17, 2014 North Shore News 62,691 January 24, 2014 January 21, 2014 Surrey Now 113,092 January 28, 2014 Valley Sentinel (Valemount, Tête Jaune January 16, 2014 1,396 Cache, Dunster) January 23, 2014 January 17, 2014 Vancouver Courier 133,474 January 24, 2014 January 16, 2014 West Ender 55,241 January 23, 2014 January 17, 2014 Abbotsford News 46,254 January 22, 2014 January 17, 2014 Bowen Island Undercurrent 1,500 January 24, 2014

Page 16

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

TABLE 1.4.7-1 Cont'd

Publication Insertion Date Circulation January 17, 2014 Burnaby New West Leader 45,626 January 22, 2014 January 17, 2014 Chilliwack Progress 29,505 January 24, 2014 Clearwater North Thompson Times January 23, 2014 1,243 (Clearwater, Blue River) January 17, 2014 Duncan/Cowichan News Leaders 21,523 January 24, 2014 January 22, 2014 Gulf Island Driftwood 4,533 January 29, 2014 January 16, 2014 Hope Standard 1,950 January 23, 2014 January 17, 2014 Kamloops This Week 19,664 January 24, 2014 January 16, 2014 Langley Times 38,869 January 23, 2014 January 16, 2014 Merritt Herald Weekender 6,630 January 23, 2014 January 21, 2014 Nanaimo News Bulletin 35,000 January 28, 2014 January 16, 2014 Surrey/N. Delta Leader 85,850 January 23, 2014 Tri City News (Coquitlam, Port Moody, Port January 17, 2014 53,469 Coquitlam) January 24, 2014 January 17, 2014 Victoria News Regional 26,146 January 22, 2014 Jasper Fitzhugh January 23, 2014 3,000 January 20, 2014 Edson Leader 1,615 January 27, 2014 January 20, 2014 Hinton Parklander 4,333 January 27, 2014 January 21, 2014 Sherwood Park/Strathcona County News 26,411 January 28, 2014 January 17, 2014 Spruce Grove Examiner 11,010 January 24, 2014 January 17, 2014 Stony Plain Reporter 11,307 January 24, 2014 January 22, 2014 Edmonton Examiner 168,776 January 29, 2014 January 22, 2014 Rocky Mountain Goat - Valemount 600 January 29, 2014 January 21, 2014 Wabamun Community Voice Zone 2 6,000 January 28, 2014 January 16, 2014 Le Franco 4,082 January 23, 2014 La Source January 20, 2014 6,000 Windspeaker - Sweetgrass January 20, 2014 9,450 Windspeaker - Raven's Eye February 03, 2014 9,450

Page 17

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

Figure 1.4.7-1 provides a copy of the Application to Participate Advertisement.

Figure 1.4-7-1 Application to Participate Advertisement

1.4.8 Publicly Accessible Application In an effort to make the Application as broadly accessible as possible, Trans Mountain contacted libraries in communities along the proposed pipeline and marine corridor in an effort to identify locations where the public could access the Application in person. On January 23, 2014, Trans Mountain mailed USB drives containing the Application to libraries and municipalities along the proposed pipeline corridor. Trans Mountain then conducted follow-up calls to confirm the USB drives were received and if the organizations were willing to make the USB drives available to the public.

Locations where the Application would be made available publicly were listed on the website as a Trans Mountain update story titled “Accessing the Application in Your Community”, http://www.transmountain.com/updates/accessing-the-application-in-your-community and this page was linked to on various pages throughout the website and promoted on Twitter.

Page 18

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

On March 7, 2014, Trans Mountain sent letters identifying the public locations of the Application, to 41 individuals that have indicated a preference for hard copy letters regarding Project update information.

On April 10, 2014, Trans Mountain mailed an updated USB drive containing the Application and Consultation Update No. 1 & Errata, to all of the libraries and municipalities that had previously been mailed a USB drive. Trans Mountain again conducted follow-up calls to confirm the USB drives had been received and if the organizations were willing to make the USB drives available to the public. The list of confirmed locations was updated on as “Accessing the Application in Your Community”, http://www.transmountain.com/updates/accessing-the-application-in-your-community, and again promoted on Twitter.

For those libraries that requested it, a poster promoting the availability of the Trans Mountain Application at their location, was also provided. Figure 1.4.8-1 is a copy of the poster provided to libraries.

Figure 1.4-8-1 Poster to Libraries Promoting the Availability of the Application

Trans Mountain promoted the availability of the Application through its Twitter account. Figure 1.4.8-2 contains three screenshots of Trans Mountain tweets that provide a link to the website listing of libraries and municipalities with USB copies of Application.

Page 19

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

Figure 1.4.8-2 Screen Shots of Three Trans Mountain Tweets

Table 1.4.8-1 contains the list of library locations that were sent USBs containing the updated Application on April 10, 2014.

TABLE 1.4.8-1

USB MAILOUT TO MUNICIPALITIES AND LIBRARY

Region Organization Edmonton Public Library - Stanley A. Milner (Main) Edmonton Public Library - Lois Hole Edmonton Public Library – Whitemud Edmonton Public Library – Riverbend Edmonton Public Library - Mill Woods Entwistle Public Library Evansburg Public Library Green Grove Public Library Seba Beach Library Spruce Grove Public Library Stony Plain Public Library Wabamun Public Library Alberta Wildwood Public Library Strathcona County Library Jasper Municipal Library Town of Hinton City of Edmonton Town of Stony Plain Municipality of Jasper Town of Edson City of Spruce Grove Strathcona County Parkland County Yellowhead County Village of Wabamun

Page 20

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

TABLE 1.4.8-1 Cont'd

Region Organization Parks Canada - Jasper National Park Alberta (cont’d) Edmonton Public Library Valemount Public Library McBride & District Public Library Kamloops Library North Kamloops Library Barriere Library Blue River Library Clearwater Library Merritt Library BC Interior Fraser Valley Regional Library - Hope Library District of Hope TNRD District of Clearwater District of Barriere Regional District of Fraser-Fort George City of Kamloops City of Merritt Village of Valemount Burnaby Public Library – Cameron Burnaby Public Library – McGill Burnaby Public Library - Bob Prittie Metrotown Coquitlam Public Library - City Centre Surrey Public Library - City Centre Port Moody Public Library Abbotsford Community Library Lower Chilliwack Library Mainland/Fraser Fraser Valley Regional Library - George Mackie Valley Library City of Abbotsford City of Surrey FVRD Township of Langley City of Coquitlam City of Burnaby Clearbrook Library North Vancouver City Library North Vancouver District Public Library - Lynn Valley Main West Vancouver Memorial Library Vancouver Public Library - Central (Main) Greater Victoria Public Library - Central (Main) Coastal Vancouver Island Regional Library - Sidney / North Saanich Fraser Valley Regional Library - White Rock Library Squamish Public Library Richmond Public Library - Brighouse (Main) Bowen Island Public Library

Page 21

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

TABLE 1.4.8-1 Cont'd

Region Organization City of Chilliwack City of Vancouver City of North Vancouver District of North Vancouver Coastal (cont’d) District of West Vancouver City of Victoria Town of Sidney Village of Lions Bay Sooke Library

1.4.9 Letters of Response to Stakeholders As part of its ongoing stakeholder engagement and communication activities, Trans Mountain continues to respond to inquiries from stakeholders. The following section provides an overview of responses to stakeholders issued during the reporting period.

Burnaby-Douglas NDP MP Kennedy Stewart As part of its ongoing stakeholder engagement and communications activities, Trans Mountain monitors media activity. On January 30, 2014, Trans Mountain provided Burnaby-Douglas NDP MP Kennedy Stewart with a letter containing updated Project information in response to statements he had made to the press. Figure 1.4.9-1 provides a copy of the two-page letter to Mr. Kennedy that was posted on the Trans Mountain website in February 2014. A copy of the letter sent to Mr. Kennedy Stewart is also located in Appendix B.

Page 22

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

Figure 1.4.9-1a Letter to NDP Member of Parliament, Kennedy Stewart Posted in the Trans Mountain Website in February 2014 (page 1 of 2)

Page 23

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

Figure 1.4.9-1b Letter to NDP Member of Parliament, Kennedy Stewart Posted in the Trans Mountain Website in February 2014 (page 2 of 2)

Page 24

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

Burnaby Stakeholder On March 14, 2014, Trans Mountain responded to an email inquiry regarding the stakeholder’s concerns as they related to the existing Burnaby Terminal and the proposed expansion to the facility. A copy of this letter is contained in Appendix B.

Fraser Valley Regional District On March 18, 2014, Trans Mountain responded to questions posed in writing by the Fraser Valley Regional District (FVRD). The letter included a USB drive containing a copy of Trans Mountain’s Application to the NEB. A copy of this letter is contained in Appendix B.

City of Abbotsford On March 25, 2014, Trans Mountain responded to a list of questions provided by the City of Abbotsford. A copy of this letter is contained in Appendix B.

City of Burnaby On June 4, 2014, Trans Mountain provided a letter to the City of Burnaby extending an invitation to meet and discuss potential legacy benefits to the community should the proposed expansion Project proceed. A copy of this letter is contained in Appendix B.

1.4.10 Claims-Reality Campaign To correct information circulating in Lower Mainland communities about the Project and the process, Trans Mountain ran a Claim-Reality advertising campaign. English, Chinese, Punjabi and Korean advertisements were placed in community newspapers during February and March 2014. Table 1.4.10-1 details the community newspapers where Trans Mountain placed advertisements in February and March 2014.

TABLE 1.4.10-1

TRANS MOUNTAIN CLAIMS-REALITY NEWSPAPER CAMPAIGN

Publication Insertion Dates Circulation February 05, 2014 Burnaby Now 47,812 February 07, 2014 February 05, 2014 Burnaby New West Leader 45,626 February 07, 2014 March 06, 2014 Chilliwack Times 30,500 March 13, 2014 March 05, 2014 Coquitlam Now 53,323 March 12, 2014 March 04, 2014 Langley Advance News 40,026 March 11, 2014 March 04, 2014 Surrey Now 113,092 March 11, 2014 March 05, 2014 Abbotsford News 46,254 March 12, 2014 March 05, 2014 Chilliwack Progress 29,505 March 12, 2014 March 07, 2014 Tri City News 53,469 March 14, 2014 March 06, 2014 Langley Times 38,869 March 13, 2014

Page 25

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

TABLE 1.4.10-1 Cont'd

Publication Insertion Dates Circulation March 06, 2014 Surrey / North Delta Leader 85,850 March 13, 2014 March 06, 2014 Hope Standard 1,950 March 13, 2014 Indo Canadian Voice March 15, 2014 15,000 Indo Canadian Awaaz March 14, 2014 15,000 March 07, 2014 Sing Tao Daily 30,000 March 13, 2014 March 06, 2014 Ming Pao 30,000 March 14, 2014 Dawa Business March 15, 2014 20,000 VanChoSun (Korean Press) March 14, 2014 7,000

Figure 1.4.10-1 is a copy of the Claim-Reality advertisement placed in community newspapers.

Figure 1.4.10-1 Trans Mountain Sample Claims-Reality Advertisement

Page 26

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

Trans Mountain also distributed a letter to targeted neighbourhoods in Langley and Surrey on February 18, 2014 and to targeted neighbourhoods in the Fraser Valley Regional District on March 18, 2014. Copies of these letters are included in Appendix C.

1.4.11 Trans Mountain in the Community Participation in and/or attendance at events provided Trans Mountain with a forum for direct contact with stakeholders, as well as accessibility for stakeholders to ask questions about the Project. Trans Mountain representatives took the opportunity to attend various events during the reporting period. Table 1.4.11-1 provides information on Trans Mountain attendance at events.

TABLE 1.4.11-1

TRANS MOUNTAIN ATTENDANCE AT EVENTS

Date Location Event January 16, 2014 Burnaby Burnaby Board of Trade (BBOT): Local Government Reception January 16, 2014 Vancouver Vancouver Board of Trade (VBOT): Economic Outlook Event January 23, 2014 North Vancouver North Vancouver Chamber: Conversation with the Mayors Luncheon January 25, 2014 Coquitlam Port Moody Art Centre Gala January 27, 2014 Vancouver BC Hotel Association Board of Directors Meeting January 28, 2014 Vancouver Premier's Lunar New Year Reception January 30, 2014 Vancouver Metro Vancouver - Services and Solutions for a Livable Region January 30, 2014 Vancouver Centre for Sustainability and Social Innovation (ISIS) University of British Columbia (UBC) Clean Capital Conference January 31, 2014 Vancouver Business Council of British Columbia (BCBC) Business Breakfast February 04, 2014 Surrey Pipeline Industry Series Part 3 - Northern Gateway Pipeline February 04, 2014 Toronto Economic Club of Canada: "Canada, Resources and our Economic Future" February 13, 2014 Burnaby Burnaby Optimists' Celebration of Hearts February 13, 2014 Surrey Surrey Board of Trade Business to Business Networking Reception February 19, 2014 Vancouver BC Chamber of Commerce: Budget 2014 Lunch with Premier Clark February 20, 2014 Burnaby Burnaby Board of Trade (BBOT): Lunar New Year Banquet February 21, 2014 Vancouver Business Council of British Columbia (BCBC): Member Forum: Post Budget Briefing with Minister Michael de Jong February 21, 2014 Kamloops Kamloops Chamber of Commerce: Provincial Budget Address presented by Members of the Legislative Assembly (MLAs) Terry Lake and Todd Stone February 21, 2014 Vancouver Vancouver Board of Trade (VBOT): Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Meeting February 25, 2014 Vancouver British Columbians for Prosperity - Follow the Money February 27, 2014 Surrey 2014 Surrey Regional Economic Summit February 28, 2014 Vancouver Port Metro Vancouver (PMV): Simon Fraser University (SFU) Long House Campaign Launch February 28, 2014 Vancouver Chamber of Shipping British Columbia (BC) Annual General Meeting (AGM) March 04, 2014 Calgary Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA): BC strategy session March 05, 2014 Vancouver PMV Environmental Managers Breakfast Session March 5-6, 2014 Victoria CGA/CMA/FMI 2 day Workshop : "Sustainable Finance and Resource Development"

Page 27

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

TABLE 1.4.11-1 Cont'd

Date Location Event March 07, 2014 Surrey Surrey Board of Trade: "Pipeline Industry Series Part 4 - FortisBC Pipeline Upgrades" March 08, 2014 Vancouver SUCCESS Gala March 08, 2014 Langley BC Seniors Games Community Awareness and Supporters Event March 14, 2014 Vancouver Business Council of BC - policy briefing March 19, 2014 Abbotsford Western Response Resource Ltd. March 21, 2014 Vancouver Business Council of BC - event with the Minister of International Trade March 26, 2014 Vancouver Pacific Coast Marine Advisory Review Panel (PACMAR) / Navigation & Navaids (NANS ) Subcommittee Meeting March 26-28, 2014 Vancouver Globe 2014 April 02, 2014 Burnaby Burnaby Board of Trade: State of the City address by Mayor Derrick Corrigan April 02, 2014 Victoria Seaspan: Business Leaders Lunch: "Ships, and Barges, and Drydocks, Oh My!” April 10, 2014 Vancouver Resource Works: Media Launch and Event April 11-13, 2014 Parksville 2014 AVICC AGM & Convention April 16, 2014 Abbotsford Fraser Valley Chambers of Commerce Business Showcase April 24, 2014 Victoria Association of Professional Biology AGM: "Look Back to Build the Future" April 24, 2014 Burnaby Burnaby/Lougheed 'Wine and Roses' event April 24, 2014 Vancouver Business Council of BC Forum: "Putting BC to Work " April 30, 2014 Vancouver Pacific Salmon Foundation Gala and Auction April 30-May 2, 2014 Penticton 2014 Southern Interior Local Government Association (SILGA) Annual General Meeting AGM and Convention

Trans Mountain representatives also participated in various speaking opportunities including, panel discussions and presentations to a wide variety of stakeholders. These events offered Trans Mountain an opportunity to outline Project details and answer questions. Table 1.4.11-2 provides information on Trans Mountain speaking opportunities.

TABLE 1.4.11-2

TRANS MOUNTAIN SPEAKING OPPORTUNITIES

TMEP Date Location Speaking Opportunity Representative January 10, 2014 Surrey, BC Presentation to Operating Engineers Union of BC Norm Rinne January 13, 2014 Langley, BC Presentation to Township of Langley Council Greg Toth February 6, 2014 Kelowna, BC Presentation at Southern Interior Construction Greg Toth Association – Consultant, Contractor, Owner Workshop February 11, 2014 North Panel Presentation, Port Metro Vancouver – Ian Anderson Vancouver, BC North Shore Waterfront Advisory Committee Event February 11, 2014 Burnaby, BC Keynote Address, Vancouver Regional Ian Anderson Construction Association Annual General Meeting February 13, 2014 North Introduction of Greg D’Avignon at the North Shore Lizette Parsons Vancouver, BC Chamber of Commerce – Keynote breakfast with Bell Greg D’Avignon, BCBC President & CEO

Page 28

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

TABLE 1.4.11-2 Cont'd

TMEP Date Location Speaking Opportunity Representative February 18, 2014 Surrey, BC Presentation to the Association of Professional Greg Toth Engineers and Geoscientists of BC (APEGBC) Fraser Valley Chapter February 19, 2014 Strathcona Presentation to Sherwood Park Chamber of Greg Toth County, AB Commerce March 6, 2014 Victoria, BC Presentation at the 2014 Joint CMA, CGA, FMI Ian Anderson Professional Development Workshop March 13, 2014 West Vancouver, Ian Anderson Presentation to Hollyburn Country Club BC Presentation to International Union of Operation March 15, 2014 Burnaby, BC Christie Libby Engineers – Local 115 March 21, 2014 Edmonton, AB Presentation at the International Right of Way Carey Association – 2014 Right Of Way Canadian Johannesson Education Forum April 17, 2014 Coquitlam, BC Presentation to the Association of Professional John Macleod Engineers and Geoscientists of BC (APEGBC) Tri Cities Chapter April 24, 2014 Vancouver, BC Presentation at the Association of Professional Ian Anderson Biology – 9th Annual Conference

Trans Mountain has taken the opportunity to contribute to various organizations including community events and fundraising programs. Table 1.4.11-3 provides a few examples of Trans Mountain sponsorships during the reporting period.

TABLE 1.4.11-3

TRANS MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY SPONSORSHIP OPPORTUNITIES

Event Date Organization Purpose January 16, 2014 Burnaby Board of Trade – Local Platinum Sponsorship Government Reception February 24, 2014 Pacific Energy Innovation Association Dialogue sponsor (PEIA) forum 2014 “Charting our Energy Future” March 8, 2014 C3 Korean Canadian Society Annual Support sessions and workshops Leadership Conference designed to develop leadership skills, explore potential career paths and provide networking opportunities for post- secondary students and young professionals. April 25, 2014 Forest Grove Elementary School Support the purchase of emergency preparedness supplies for students and staff. April 30 - May 2, 2014 Southern Interior Construction Provide sponsorship to their organization’s Association activities to support member services to the construction industry. May 8, 2014 Surrey Board of Trade International Trade Event sponsor and presenter Awards

1.4.12 BC 2035 The Vancouver Sun has an ongoing series about the future of BC. On March 29, 2014, the BC 2035 issue focused on the topic of oil and gas innovation. Trans Mountain placed a three-quarter page advertisement

Page 29

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

in that issue highlighting the economic benefits and marine safety regime related to the Project. The advertisement which ran in the Vancouver Sun included copy indicating a figure for Tax Payments to BC as an annual figure, when it should have been a total figure for construction and 20 years of operations. The corrected version of the advertisement shown in Figure 1.4-12-1 was posted on www.transmountain.com on March 31, 2014 and promoted via the Trans Mountain Twitter channel.

Figure 1.4.12-1 Trans Mountain BC 2035 Oil and Gas Innovation Advertisement

1.4.13 Engagement Opportunities Advertising/Notification Trans Mountain conducted advertising campaigns in support of ongoing engagement activities that notified stakeholders about online feedback opportunities and encouraged attendance at upcoming public events. The campaign included print advertising and direct mail postcard drop.

In March and April 2014, newspaper advertising notified stakeholders about Open Houses in specific communities in Alberta and British Columbia to discuss pipeline corridor optimization. The advertisements outlined the date, time, and location of each session, and invited stakeholders to find out more about the Project.

Page 30

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

Table 1.4.13-1 provide information on the open house notification plan by each location.

TABLE 1.4.13-1

NEWSPAPERS OPEN HOUSE NOTIFICATION

Location Publication Insertion Dates Circulation March 13, 2014 Chilliwack Times 30,500 March 20, 2014 Agassiz-Harrison March 13, 2014 4,618 Observer March 20, 2014 Chilliwack, BC March 13, 2014 March 18, 2014 Chilliwack Progress 29,505 March 19, 2014 March 26, 2014 March 14, 2014 Sherwood Park, Sherwood Park / March 18, 2014 26,411 AB Strathcona County News March 21, 2014 March 20, 2014 March 25, 2014 Langley Advance News 40,026 March 27, 2014 April 1, 2014 March 20, 2014 March 25, 2014 Surrey Now 113,092 March 27, 2014 April 1, 2014 Langley, BC March 20, 2014 March 25, 2014 Langley Times 38,869 March 27, 2014 April 1, 2014 March 20, 2014 March 25, 2014 Surrey North Delta Leader 85,850 March 27, 2014 April 1, 2014 March 21, 2014 March 26, 2014 Burnaby Now 47,812 March 28, 2014 April 2, 2014 March 21, 2014 March 26, 2014 Coquitlam Now 53,323 March 28, 2014 April 2, 2014 Burnaby, BC March 21, 2014 March 26, 2014 Burnaby New West Leader 45,626 March 28, 2014 April 2, 2014 March 21, 2014 March 26, 2014 Tri City News 53,469 March 28, 2014 April 2, 2014

Figure 1.4.13-1 provides screenshots of the Sherwood Park and Chilliwack Open House Advertisements and Figure 1.4.13-2 contains a screen shot of the Langley and Burnaby Open House Advertisements.

Page 31

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

Figure 1.4.13-1 Trans Mountain Sherwood Park and Chilliwack Open House Advertisements

Page 32

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

Figure 1.4.13-2 Trans Mountain Langley and Burnaby Open House Advertisements

Translated newspaper advertising invited stakeholders to find out more about the Project and ongoing pipeline corridor optimization at upcoming open houses. The translated advertising provided the date, time, and location of the three BC sessions. Table 1.4.13-2 contains a list of ethnic newspaper, circulations numbers and publication dates for translated Open House advertising.

TABLE 1.4.13-2

ETHNIC NEWSPAPERS OPEN HOUSE NOTIFICATION

Publication Insertion Dates Circulation Language English (targets Punjabi Indo Canadian Voice March 21, 2014 15,000 audience) Indo Canadian Awaaz March 22, 2014 15,000 Punjabi March 21, 2014 Sing Tao Daily 30,000 Chinese March 25, 2014 March 22, 2014 Ming Pao 30,000 Chinese March 26, 2014

Page 33

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

TABLE 1.4.13-2 Cont'd

Publication Insertion Dates Circulation Language March 22, 2014 Dawa Business 20,000 Chinese March 25, 2014 March 21, 2014 VanChoSun 7,000 Korean March 26, 2014 English (targets Filipino Filipino Post March 20, 2014 25,000 audience)

Figure 1.4.13-3 provides a sample of a translated Open House advertisement.

Figure 1.4.13-3 Translated Advertisement for March and April 2014 Open Houses

Direct Mail In select Lower Mainland neighbourhoods, Trans Mountain also conducted a direct mailing of more than 12,500 letters that invited residents and businesses to attend an Open House in their area. Locations were selected based on the corridor optimization area that was being consulted on, at the respective Open House. Letters were hand delivered in select adjacent neighbourhoods of Rosedale, Coquitlam and Burnaby to ensure stakeholders in those neighbourhoods were specifically informed of the upcoming

Page 34

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

events. Figure 1.4.13-4 contains a sample of the two-page Trans Mountain Open House Direct Mail Letter Notification.

Trans Mountain also conducted a mail out to 48 stakeholders in the Othello Road area of Hope, BC inviting them in to an upcoming Open House. A Land Agent also hand delivered a copy of the letter to 18 homes within the corridor.

Figure 1.4.13-4a Direct Mail Letter for Open House Notification (page 1 of 2)

Page 35

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

Figure 1.4.13-4b Direct Mail Letter for Open House Notification (page 2 of 2)

Reactivation Open House Notification In March 2014, newspaper advertising was placed in the Jasper Fitzhugh to notify stakeholders about an Open House being held in the community to discuss the reactivation of an existing section of Trans Mountain’s pipeline. Table 1.4.13-3 provides the insertion dates and circulation of the Jasper Open House notification.

Page 36

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

TABLE 1.4.13-3

JASPER OPEN HOUSE NOTIFICATION NEWSPAPER CAMPAIGN

Publication Insertion Dates Circulation March 13,2014 Jasper Fitzhugh 3,000 March 20,2014

Figure 1.4.13-5 is the Trans Mountain Jasper Open House Notification Advertisement.

Figure 1.4.13-5 Jasper Open House Notification Advertisement

Online Feedback Notification Following the Routing Open Houses, additional advertising encouraged stakeholders to provide their feedback online. Table 1.4.13-4 provides a list of community newspapers that ran the Online Feedback advertising in April 2014.

Page 37

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

TABLE 1.4.13-4

ONLINE ENGAGEMENT ADVERTISING

Publication Insertion Dates Circulation Burnaby Now April 09, 2014 47,812 Burnaby New West Leader April 09, 2014 45,626 Coquitlam Now April 09, 2014 53,323 Tri-City News April 09, 2014 53,469 April 03, 2014 Chilliwack Times 30,500 April 10, 2014 April 03, 2014 Agassiz-Harrison Observer 4,618 April 10, 2014 April 02, 2014 Chilliwack Progress 29,505 April 09, 2014 Langley Times April 08, 2014 38,869 Langley Advance News April 08, 2014 40,026 Surrey Now April 08, 2014 113,092 Surrey North Delta Leader April 08, 2014 85,850 Jasper Fitzhugh April 03, 2014 3,000 April 04, 2014 Sherwood Park / Strathcona County 26,411 April 11, 2014 March 28, 2014 Spruce Grove Examiner April 04, 2014 11,010 April 11, 2014 March 28, 2014 Stony Plain Reporter April 04, 2014 1,307 April 11, 2014 April 02, 2014 Edmonton Examiner 168,776 April 09, 2014 April 01, 2014 Wabamun Community Voice 6,000 April 08, 2014

Figure 1.4.13-6 provides a copy of the Online Feedback Opportunity Notification Advertisement.

Page 38

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

Figure 1.4.13-6 Online Feedback Notification Advertisement

In addition to the newspaper advertising, an eblast was sent on April 4, 2014 to over 4,400 stakeholders notifying them of the online feedback opportunity, per Table 1.4.2-1. The link was also promoted via the @TransMtn Twitter channel.

Figure 1.4.13-7 provides a screen shot of an eblast inviting stakeholders to provide feedback on the proposed pipeline corridor and to learn more about the NEB Hearing Order.

Page 39

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

Figure 1.4.13-7 eblast Inviting Stakeholders to Provide Feedback on the Proposed Pipeline Corridor and Learn More about the NEB Hearing Order

Page 40

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

1.5 Stakeholder Engagement Activities – January 1 to April 30, 2014 Phase 5 engagement activities and discussions enabled the Project to continue to identify and ensure stakeholder concerns were captured. Engagement activities that occurred during the reporting period included, but were not limited to:

• EMSWs;

• Engagement on Reactivation Sections;

• BC Parks Workshops;

• Proposed Pipeline Corridor Optimization Workshops;

• Routing Update Open Houses;

• ongoing meetings with local governments and other stakeholders regarding proposed pipeline corridor optimization;

• ongoing meetings with environmental groups and ENGOs; and

• face-to-face stakeholder meetings.

Trans Mountain’s online interactive map (http://application.transmountain.com/interactive-map) was used extensively throughout this Phase at workshops, open houses and face-to-face meetings, to discuss route refinements to the proposed pipeline corridor and proposed alternative pipeline corridors with stakeholders.

During the reporting period, Trans Mountain participated in a total of 213 in-person meetings with stakeholders and interest groups regarding the Project; of which 39 were held with local governments, 28 with representatives of the federal government, six with provincial government representatives and regulatory agencies, and 140 with others including individuals, local interest groups, and environmental organizations.

1.5.1 Emergency Management Stakeholder Workshops Emergency planning and response have been key areas of concern in both pipeline and marine communities. To address this concern, Trans Mountain initiated a series of EMSWs which began in Phase 4 and continued into Phase 5. During this reporting period, the following EMSWs were held:

• February 12, 2014 in Kamloops, BC (TNRD);

• February 14, 2014 in Chilliwack, BC (FVRD);

• February 19, 2014 in Valemount, BC; and

• February 20, 2014 in Jasper, AB.

Additional EMSWs, outside the reporting period for this Update, were held as follows and are also reported in this Update:

• June 3, 2014 in Merritt, BC; and

• June 17, 2014 in Clearwater, BC (includes Barriere region).

Workshop invitees included local emergency managers and first responders, health and safety officials, and local government representatives. Trans Mountain provided attendees with an overview of existing operations and the proposed Project, and an overview of both the current ERP and proposed enhancements related to the Project.

Attendees reviewed Trans Mountain’s ERPs and provided feedback on concerns relevant to their area. Materials available for review during the EMSWs included a map book containing the complete details of

Page 41

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

the proposed Trans Mountain Expansion Project, the current ERPs, the existing Trans Mountain pipeline system (TMPL) Field Guide, a Control Points Manual, routing maps and the Kinder Morgan Canada Inc. (KMC) Incident Command System Guide.

Attendees were provided with copies of the Project map, the ERP Summary Booklet and Section 4, Volume 7 of the Application as take-aways, these are located in Appendix D.

1.5.1.1 Thompson Nicola Regional District, BC Details of the EMSW in the TNRD, BC are summarized in Tables 1.5.1-1 to 1.5.1-2.

TABLE 1.5.1-1

EMSW – THOMPSON NICOLA REGIONAL DISTRICT, BC

Number of Region Location Date Attendees February 12, 2014 BC Interior TNRD Offices, Kamloops, BC 13 8:30 AM – 13:00 PM

While workshop invitees generally included local emergency managers and first responders, health and safety officials, and local government representatives, the following is a listing of only those organizations in attendance at the Thompson Nicola Regional District Emergency Management Stakeholder Workshop.

TABLE 1.5.1-2

EMSW PARTICIPANTS – THOMPSON NICOLA REGIONAL DISTRICT, BC

Organization Emergency Response Officer, Ministry Of Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure (MOTI) Environment (MOE) Manager, Public Health, Environmental Health Community Services Manager, TNRD Services/Emergency Program Coordinator (EPC), Interior Health Assistant Fire Chief, Emergency Program Fire Chief, Little Fort Coordinator (EPC) City of Kamloops Ministry of Justice, Regional Manager Emergency Services Supervisor, TNRD Staff Sergeant, RCMP District Operations Manager, TNRD Staff Sergeant, Ops Support, Non- Division Superintendent, St John Ambulance Commissioned Officer (NCO) Note: Some organizations had more than one representative in attendance.

The following is a summary of concerns raised at the TNRD Workshop:

• rural evacuation and notification;

• ongoing public and responder education, given changes in manpower in rural areas;

• highway access remaining open;

• tactical response capacity in rural areas (protection of people and property);

• increased intra-agency communication needed (i.e., wildfire group has frequent calls); and,

• lack of cell coverage/communication capacity in the area.

Page 42

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

Issues identified by participants are further detailed in the Summary of Outcomes, Section 1.6, Table 1.6.2-1, Key Topics of Interest or Concern – Interior, BC.

1.5.1.2 Fraser Valley Regional District, BC Details of the EMSW in the FVRD, BC are summarized in Tables 1.5.1-3 to 1.5.1-4.

TABLE 1.5.1-3

EMSW – FRASER VALLEY REGIONAL DISTRICT, BC

Region Location Date Number of Attendees Lower Mainland/ FVRD Office, Chilliwack BC February 14, 2014 22 Fraser Valley 8:30 am – 1:00 pm

While workshop invitees generally included local emergency managers and first responders, health and safety officials, and local government representatives, the following is a listing of only those organizations in attendance at the Fraser Valley Regional District Emergency Management Stakeholder Workshop.

TABLE 1.5.1-4

EMSW PARTICIPANTS – FRASER VALLEY REGIONAL DISTRICT, BC

Organization City of Chilliwack Police, Abbotsford District of Hope Police, Hope/Boston Bar Community Emergency Management, BC-South West Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), Upper Fraser Valley Detachment Fire Department, Abbotsford RCMP, Fraser Valley Traffic Services Fire Department, Chilliwack St John’s Ambulance Fraser Health Authority Vancouver Aquarium Lions Gate Risk Management Note: Some organizations had more than one representative in attendance.

The following is a summary of concerns raised at the FVRD Workshop:

• coordination and capacity of emergency response;

• leak detection;

• location of valves;

• socio-economic impacts in Hope from influx of workers;

• security risk; and

• habitat destruction during construction.

Issues identified by participants are further detailed in the Summary of Outcomes, Section 1.6, Table 1.6.3-1, Key Topics of Interest or Concern – Lower Mainland/Fraser Valley, BC.

1.5.1.3 Valemount, BC Details of the EMSW in Valemount, BC are summarized in Tables 1.5.1-5 to 1.5.1-6.

Page 43

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

TABLE 1.5.1-5

EMSW – VALEMOUNT, BC

Region Location Date Number of Attendees Valemount, Best Western, Valemount February 20, 2014 14 BC 10:00 am – 13:00 pm

While workshop invitees generally included local emergency managers and first responders, health and safety officials, and local government representatives, the following is a listing of only those organizations in attendance at the Valemount Emergency Management Stakeholder Workshop.

TABLE 1.5.1-6

EMSW PARTICIPANTS – VALEMOUNT, BC

Organization BC Ambulance Service Regional District of Fraser-Fort George BC Ministry of Transportation and RCMP Valemount Detachment Infrastructure (McBride Government of British Columbia) Valemount and District Volunteer Fire Department; BC Ambulance Service Canadian National (CN) Railway Village of Valemount Lakes District Maintenance Ltd. Note: Some organizations had more than one representative in attendance.

The following is a summary of concerns raised at the Valemount Workshop:

• fire response (wildfires);

• improved contact list (intra-agency and with KMC);

• natural hazards impact on pipeline;

• communications (extremely limited cell and satellite phone coverage);

• reliance on outside assistance for support (hours away);

• communication between Trans Mountain and other utilities (rail) in the event of an incident are not clear;

• coordinated response (needs an exercise);

• no OSCAR nearby; and

• fire prevention during construction (proper disposal of debris).

Issues identified by participants are further detailed in the Summary of Outcomes, Section 1.6, Table 1.6.2-1, Key Topics of Interest or Concern – Interior, BC.

1.5.1.4 Jasper, AB Details of the EMSW in Jasper, AB are summarized in Tables 1.5.1-7 to 1.5.1-8.

Page 44

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

TABLE 1.5.1-7

EMSW – JASPER, AB

Number of Region Location Date Attendees Alberta Jasper Sawbridge Inn February 20, 2014 8 8:30 am – 1:00 pm

TABLE 1.5.1-8

EMSW PARTICIPANTS – JASPER, AB

Organization Parks Canada (Jasper National Park), Emergency City Parks Canada (Jasper National Park), Spill Response Environmental Assessment Royal Canadian Mounted Police RCMP – Jasper Parks Canada (Jasper National Park), Aquatics Detachment Associated Ambulance Jasper Fire Department Municipality of Jasper, Director, Emergency Municipality of Jasper, Manager, Communications Services Note: Some organizations had more than one representative in attendance.

The following is a summary of concerns raised at the Jasper Workshop:

• influx of workers during construction;

• potential highway closure during construction or during an incident

• protection of sensitive sites (wetlands);

• public safety;

• pipeline integrity and operations;

• training and CAER; and

• ERP and public awareness.

1.5.1.5 Merritt, BC Details of the EMSW in Merritt, BC are summarized in Tables 1.5.1-9 to 1.5.1-10.

TABLE 1.5.1-9

EMSW – MERRITT, BC

Number of Region Location Date Attendees June 3, 2014 BC Interior Merritt, BC 16 8:30 AM – 1:00 PM

Page 45

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

TABLE 1.5.1-10

EMSW PARTICIPANTS – MERRITT, BC

Organization City of Merritt Nooaitch First Nation Coldwater Indian Band Shackan Indian Band Lower Nicola Indian Band Upper Nicola Band Merritt Fire Rescue Department Note: Some organizations had more than one representative in attendance.

The following is a summary of concerns raised at the Merritt Workshop:

• no KMC staff in the Merritt area, or equipment or training;

• impact of incident on infrastructure;

• impact of incident on human health;

• property values go down due to spill;

• more valves and automated new line and old line;

• spill impacts on economy, tourism, First Nations and Culture;

• negative long term impacts, fishing, land use, tourism;

• coordination of large-scale evacuation; and

• vandalism/terrorism.

Issues identified by participants are further detailed in the Summary of Outcomes, Section 1.6, Table 1.6.2-1, Key Topics of Interest or Concern – Interior, BC.

1.5.1.6 Clearwater, BC Details of the EMSW in Clearwater, BC are summarized in Tables 1.5.1-11 to 1.5.1-12.

TABLE 1.5.1-11

EMSW – CLEARWATER, BC

Number of Region Location Date Attendees June 17, 2014 BC Interior Clearwater, BC 27 8:30 AM – 1:00 PM

While workshop invitees generally included local emergency managers and first responders, health and safety officials, and local government representatives, the following is a listing of only those organizations in attendance at the Clearwater Emergency Management Stakeholder Workshop.

Page 46

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

TABLE 1.5.1-12

EMSW PARTICIPANTS – CLEARWATER, BC

Organization Clearwater Chamber ESS Clearwater Clearwater Fire Zone Interior Health Clearwater Voluntary Fire Department School District 73 District of Barriere Simpcw First Nation District of Clearwater TNRD – Area O DOF TNRD – Area A and B Note: Some organizations had more than one representative in attendance.

The following is a summary of concerns raised at the Clearwater Workshop:

• water contamination;

• landslide resulting in highway closure;

• line rupture near the hospital or the old folks home;

• low flow leak not picked up by SCADA;

• no CAER training;

• timing of the smart-tool use (not used often enough);

• explosion that causes fire;

• line rupture causing lengthy highway closure;

• reaction time to line strikes in rural areas; and

• better education on BC-One Call System.

Issues identified by participants are further detailed in the Summary of Outcomes, Section 1.6, Table 1.6.2-1, Key Topics of Interest or Concern – Interior, BC.

Table 1.5.1-13 provides a summary of key findings from all sessions in order of most common themes.

TABLE 1.5.1-13

EMSW SUMMARY OF KEY FINDINGS

Topic Key Finding • Community Awareness for Emergency Response (CAER) program presentations are important to rural communities with high turnover of volunteer responders - in Jasper the last CAER presentation was three years ago and there has been almost 100 per cent turnover in police, fire and ambulance since that time. Most workshop attendees had never attended a CAER presentation. Training • Local emergency managers and first responders are looking for more opportunities to learn and practice their skills. They requested Trans Mountain invite local stakeholders to observe and/or participate in tabletops, live exercises. These opportunities would provide the local emergency managers and responders with improved communications between agencies.

Page 47

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

TABLE 1.5.1-13 Cont'd

Topic Key Finding • Trans Mountain was requested to assist in enhance general emergency response capacity through training. Training topics of common interest include ICS training or Training (cont’d) certification, Wildlife response, Communications and radio, Tank or product fire training, In-Situ burning workshop, Table tops (scenario discussions) twice a year on a pipeline rupture, and OSCAR trailer demonstrations. • In the event of worst case spills, what is the likelihood local service would be drawn in to help respond? Local Emergency Response personnel do not feel prepared, particularly in remote communities. Rural communities do not have staff trained to respond to hazardous materials exposure and appropriate response support could take up to two hours. • Provide gas detectors and training to help first responders safely approach potentially hazardous area post-spill. • Stakeholder identify a need for OSCAR trailers in remote communities between Enhancement of Clearwater and Jasper (i.e., Valemount). Once in place, communities would be Local Emergency interested in mutual aid options, such as having Trans Mountain response Response Capacity equipment available for local use. • Mutual Aid agreement with CN Rail, particularly in remote communities. Stakeholders suggested Trans Mountain share emergency training and equipment with CN to enable CN regional staff and conductors to help identify TMPL integrity issues. • Wildlife Rescue is not present in all locations along the pipeline (i.e., Jasper) and stakeholders wondered if Trans Mountain could help enhance capacity through provision of training. • In rural communities, residents and media call first responders and local government directly to learn about incidents. Request to be included in initial Trans Mountain notification Emergency Response Location (ERL) about event and to Incident receive regular updates. Notification from Emergency Management British Columbia Management – (EMBC) is not quick enough (or consistent). Community • Requested more frequent updates and information sharing of KMC notification lists. Communications • Request to notify Public Health and any potentially impacted water users if there is any threat to potable water systems. Concern about how to track well users and community water systems not under Public Health jurisdiction • Rural areas such as Jasper and Valemount have limited options for road access to some remote sites of the pipeline, and air ambulance not reliable in bad weather. Local • North Thompson area has one highway access, with no diversion options. Incidents Transportation impacting the highway corridor would have significant impact on communities and Access would require Trans Mountain to respond from one direction only. Suggested protocols to help determine priority access points and traffic management in the event of an emergency. • Key concern in rural communities such as Jasper, Valemount and rural areas between North Thompson communities. Risk is that Trans Mountain may be able to Lack of Reliable communicate with themselves but not with responders in some areas. Telecommunication • Satellite phone coverage is also intermittent due to steep valleys. s • No common cell phone carrier and not enough bandwidth for a large incident. Telus is the only coverage north of Heffley Creek. There are many dead zones (i.e., areas up to 100 km) for cellular and wireless in northern British Columbia/rural Alberta. Lack of reliable • Looking for information from Trans Mountain on backup generators available in rural power supply areas in the case of emergency power failure. • First Nations are looking for early notification of incidents in order to identify high priority locations such as heritage, gathering and fishing sites. • Consult with municipalities to validate control points and access requirements. Work Information Sharing with organizations like Parks Canada to overlay more detail on ecologically sensitive (Maps) areas, which can change throughout the course of a year. • Municipalities and law enforcement want more access to current pipeline right-of-way to help with timely outreach to landowners (i.e., evacuation) if there is an emergency.

Page 48

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

TABLE 1.5.1-13 Cont'd

Topic Key Finding • Identify Valve Placement for things like distance from populated areas, security of Information Sharing valve sites, proximity to water crossings and availability of information for local (Maps) (cont’d) municipalities. Suggest maps of valve locations, indication of drain down volumes and shut-off time in the event of an emergency. • Sharing of information with local authorities, RCMP in particular, including social Security – Threat media monitoring. Assessment • Be open about construction program and security needs during that period. • Be clear on what the line of communication would be with law.

Issues identified are further detailed in the Summary of Outcomes, Section 1.6.

1.5.2 Engagement on Reactivation Sections Engagement on the reactivation of two 24-inch segments of existing pipeline that form part of the Trans Mountain Expansion Project, continued in Phase 5.

1.5.2.1 Reactivation Meeting – Darfield and Black Pines Segment On March 6, 2014, Trans Mountain met with representatives from TNRD and the District of Barriere in Kamloops to share information and gather stakeholder feedback on the proposed reactivation of an existing 43 km of 24-inch pipeline between Darfield and Black Pines. Table 1.5.2-1 provides information on the reactivation meeting.

TABLE 1.5.2-1

THOMPSON NICOLA REGIONAL DISTRICT REACTIVATION MEETING, KAMLOOPS, BC

Region Location Date Number of Attendees Interior BC TNRD Offices, Kamloops March 6, 2014 4 9:00 – 11:00 AM

Attendees were provided the following documentation, which is included in Appendix E:

• Reactivation PowerPoint Presentation;

• Description of Activities Associated with the TMEP Reactivation Plan Trans Mountain handout;

• Oil and Gas 101: Monitoring Pipeline Integrity, The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) handout;

• “Pigging”, The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) handout; and

• Section 3.6, Reactivation of NPS 24 Segments (Hinton to Hargreaves and Darfield to Black Pines) extracted from the Facilities Application, Volume 4A - Project Design and Execution –Engineering.

The following issues were identified by participants at the meeting:

• product in the pipeline;

• age of the pipeline; and

• impacts to pressure from power loss.

Page 49

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

Issues identified by participants are further detailed in the Summary of Outcomes, Section 1.6, Table 1.6.2-1, Key Topics of Interest or Concern – Interior, BC.

1.5.2.2 Reactivation Open House – Hinton to Hargreaves Segment On March 27, 2014, Trans Mountain held an Open House in Jasper, AB to share information and gather stakeholder feedback on the proposed reactivation of an existing 150 km of 24-inch pipeline from Hinton, AB to Hargreaves, BC. Table 1.5.2-2 provides information on the Jasper Open House.

TABLE 1.5.2-2

JASPER REACTIVATION OPEN HOUSE, JASPER, AB

Region Location Date Number of Attendees Alberta Jasper, AB March 27, 2014 13 9:00 – 11:00 AM

Attendees were provided the following documentation, which is included in Appendix E:

• Description of Activities Associated with the TMEP Reactivation Plan Trans Mountain handout;

• Oil and Gas 101: Monitoring Pipeline Integrity, The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) handout;

• “Pigging”, The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) handout; and

• Section 3.6, Reactivation of NPS 24 Segments (Hinton to Hargreaves and Darfield to Black Pines) extracted from the Facilities Application, Volume 4A - Project Design and Execution –Engineering.

The following issues were identified by participants at the Open House:

• condition of the existing line, and the process for testing and bringing it back into service;

• greenhouse gas;

• stakeholder engagement; and

• Aboriginal outreach.

Issues identified by participants are further detailed in the Summary of Outcomes, Section 1.6, Table 1.6.1-1, Key Topics of Interest or Concern – Alberta.

1.5.3 BC Parks Engagement In March 2014, Trans Mountain conducted a series of workshops to reach out to:

• share information on the proposed approach for undertaking the Stage 2 Detailed Proposal;

• share information on the proposed route along the Trans Mountain study corridor;

• identify local environmental and socio-economic topics of concern; and

• identify potential parks benefits.

At the workshops, the Project team provided attendees with a proposed overview of the selected study corridor in each park, sought feedback of attendees on particular concerns relating to human activity and

Page 50

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

environment in the parks as well as discussed parks benefits, in break-out groups. Materials presented at the workshops are contained in Appendix F.

Feedback received at these sessions and afterwards, was shared with the relevant Trans Mountain disciplines and was considered in setting the scope for the Stage 2 Detailed Proposal. Event reports and proposed benefits were submitted to BC Parks for consideration against Park benefit priorities.

Invitations to participate in the workshops were sent to groups identified by BC Parks and:

• Aboriginal communities and groups;

• stakeholders and environmental subject matter experts;

• senior local government staff and elected officials;

• local ENGOs with knowledge of environmentally sensitive sites;

• regional and federal ENGOs;

• park recreation users;

• park tenure holders; and

• regional representatives from provincial and federal regulatory agencies including BC Parks.

The summary of key issues/concerns gathered through the BC Parks Workshops are reported in Section 1.6 and in Technical Update No. 1, Part 5 - BC Parks Boundary Amendment Application (4 Class A Parks) and Park Use Permit (Coquihalla Rec. Area).

Hope (Coquihalla Summit), BC The details of the Hope (Coquihalla Summit) Workshop are summarized in Tables 1.5.3-1 to 1.5.3-2.

TABLE 1.5.3-1

BC PARKS WORKSHOP – HOPE (COQUIHALLA SUMMIT), BC

Number of Region Location Date Attendees Interior, BC Hope Recreation Centre March 26, 2014 21 3:00 – 5:30 pm

The following is a listing of only those organizations in attendance at the Hope (Coquihalla Summit) Workshop.

TABLE 1.5.3-2

ATTENDEES – HOPE (COQUIHALLA SUMMIT), BC

Organization Backcountry Horsemen of BC Hope Pathways BC Parks, South Coast Region / Ministry of Lower Nicola Indian Band Environment Cheam First Nation Shxw’owhamel First Nation Chawathil First Nation Spectra Energy Climbers Access Society of BC Trails BC – South Coquihalla Division

Page 51

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

TABLE 1.5.3-2 Cont’d

Organization Coquihalla Lakes Lodge Trails BC Coquihalla Summit Snowmobile Club Union Bar First Nation FVRD Note: Some organizations had more than one representative in attendance.

Fraser Valley/Chilliwack (Bridal Veil Falls), BC The results of the Fraser Valley/Chilliwack (Bridal Veil Falls) Workshop are summarized in Table 1.5.3-3 to Table 1.5.3-4.

TABLE 1.5.3-3

BC PARKS WORKSHOP – FRASER VALLEY / CHILLIWACK (BRIDAL VEIL FALLS), BC

Number of Region Location Date Attendees Lower Mainland/Fraser Coast Chilliwack March 27, 2014 39 Valley 1:30-4:00 pm

The following is a listing of only those organizations in attendance at the Fraser Valley / Chilliwack (Bridal Veil Falls) Workshop.

TABLE 1.5.3-4

ATTENDEES – FRASER VALLEY / CHILLIWACK (BRIDAL VEIL FALLS), BC

Organization Back Country Horsemen of BC FVRD BC Wildlife Federation Fraser Valley Mountain Bike Association BC Parks Fraser Valley Watershed Coalition BC Enviro Network Freshwater Fisheries Society BC Canadian Parks & Wilderness Society Fraser Valley Invasive Plant Council Chawathil Horse Council BC Cheam First Nations Jakes Construction Chilliwack Field Naturalists Ministry of Environment City of Chilliwack Ministry of Transportation & Infrastructure Community of Agassiz Nature Conservancy of Canada Community of Harrison Outdoor Recreation Council of BC Ducks Unlimited Pacific Salmon Foundation Environment Canada Wilderness Committee Federation of BC Naturalists Note: Some organizations had more than one representative in attendance.

Clearwater (Finn Creek), BC The results of the Clearwater (Finn Creek) Workshop are summarized in Tables 1.5.3-5 to 1.5.3-6.

Page 52

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

TABLE 1.5.3-5

BC PARKS WORKSHOP – CLEARWATER (FINN CREEK), BC

Number of Region Location Date Attendees Interior, BC Clearwater Resource Centre April 1, 2014 12 2:30 PM – 5:30 PM

The following is a listing of only those organizations in attendance at the Clearwater (Finn Creek) Workshop.

TABLE 1.5.3-6

ATTENDEES – CLEARWATER (FINN CREEK), BC

Organization Blue River Community Association Ministry of Transportation & Infrastructure (MOTI) Blue River Powder Packers Naklin Ltd District of Clearwater Thompson Headwaters Services Committee Little Fort Recreation TNRD Ministry of Parks, Thompson Region Wells Grey Outdoor Club Note: Some organizations had more than one representative in attendance.

Kamloops (Lac Du Bois), BC The results of the Kamloops (Lac Du Bois) Workshop are summarized in Table 1.5.3-7 and Table 1.5.3-8.

TABLE 1.5.3-7

BC PARKS WORKSHOP – KAMLOOPS (LAC DU BOIS), BC

Number of Region Location Date Attendees Interior, BC Holiday Inn on Tranquille Road, April 2, 2014 26 Kamloops, BC 9:00 AM – 12:00 PM

The following is a listing of only those organizations in attendance at the Kamloops (Lac Du Bois) Workshop.

TABLE 1.5.3-8

ATTENDEES – KAMLOOPS (LAC DU BOIS), BC

Organization BC Parks Ministry of Environment, Thompson Region City of Kamloops Nature Conservancy of Canada Grasslands Conservation Council Skeetchestn First Nation Kamloops Naturalist Club Thompson Rivers University Kamloops Thompson Trails Alliance T'kemlups te Secw'epewc Lower Nicola Indian Band Tranquille Livestock Association Ministry of Forest Lands and Natural Resource Office Verne Sundstrom Forestry Consulting (MFLNRO) Note: Some organizations had more than one representative in attendance.

Page 53

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

1.5.4 Proposed Pipeline Corridor Optimization As described in NEB_IR_No._1.12a, this section provides additional details related to engagement for ongoing route optimization undertaken during the reporting period. In addition, engagement related to ongoing route optimization is reported in Technical Update No. 1, Part 1 – Routing.

Trans Mountain’s Application, filed on December 16, 2013, identified a proposed pipeline corridor and in some cases proposed alternative pipeline corridors. Following the December 2013 filing, Trans Mountain continued its work to optimize the route and reduce impacts to people and the environment through a combination of technical and environmental studies, engagement activities and on-the-ground field work.

Trans Mountain held a series of Public Open Houses and Proposed Pipeline Corridor Optimization Workshops, which have also been referred to as Route Refinement Workshops and Study Corridor Optimization Workshops. Workshops and Open Houses were held to review area-specific routing changes, gather feedback and to share updated Project information with members of the local communities. These routing changes were in areas where the proposed pipeline corridor included proposed or alternate route options, or where modified route alternatives were presented.

At these events affected communities and stakeholders provided feedback on corridor deviations currently being examined by Trans Mountain. Feedback collected has been relayed to the appropriate Project team to be considered and incorporated in to Project planning as appropriate.

On February 18, 2014 prior to the Workshops and Open House, Trans Mountain distributed approximately 200 letters in Surrey, BC and provided 70 copies to an area resident, at their request, who then hand delivered the letter to his neighbours along 217th Street. The letter assured stakeholders that Trans Mountain would make no decisions about proposed routing without first consulting with those who may be impacted. Also included was a link to the Claims-Reality Campaign described in Section 1.4.10. A copy of the Langley and Surrey letters and the Claims Reality Fact sheet are included in Appendix C.

1.5.5 Workshops Trans Mountain conducted a series of workshops in communities where Trans Mountain continued its work to optimize the route and reduce impacts to people and the environment. Proposed Pipeline Corridor Optimization Workshops held in west Edmonton, Wabamun, Fraser Valley/Chilliwack, Coquitlam, Surrey, Langley and Burnaby are described below.

The workshops provided stakeholders with an opportunity to receive updated Project information, to review area-specific revisions to the proposed pipeline corridor, since filing the NEB Application in December 2013, and to provide feedback to Trans Mountain.

Copies of the materials available at the Workshops identified below, are included in Appendix G:

• Agenda;

• Workshop Etiquette;

• Presentation;

• ESA Module Posters;

• Maps;

• Feedback Form – We Want To Hear From You;

• Getting to the Route video; and

• Project Description video.

West Edmonton, AB The results of the West Edmonton Workshop are summarized in Table 1.5.5-1 through Table 1.5.5-3.

Page 54

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

TABLE 1.5.5-1

PROPOSED PIPELINE CORRIDOR OPTIMIZATION WORKSHOP – WEST EDMONTON, AB

Region Location Date Number of Attendees Alberta Edmonton, AB. March 25, 2014 8 5:00 – 8:00 pm

The following is a listing of only those organizations in attendance at the Proposed Pipeline Corridor Optimization Workshop (West Edmonton).

TABLE 1.5.5-2

ATTENDEES – WEST EDMONTON, AB

Organization City of Edmonton Lewis Estates Community League Edmonton and Area Land Trust Wedgewood Ravine Homeowners Association Greater Windermere Community League Note: Some organizations had more than one representative in attendance.

TABLE 1.5.5-3

SUMMARY OF NEW KEY ISSUES/CONCERNS – WEST EDMONTON, AB

Topic Summary of New Key Issues/Concerns • Heron nesting site identified along Transportation Utility Corridor (TUC), waterfowl habitat • Larch Sanctuary and MacTaggart Sanctuary • Coal and clay soils below Whitemud Creek bed pose risks if construction and Land reclamation are not done properly; sedimentation and instability • Slope stability is an issue along the banks of the Whitemud and Blackmud Creeks • Road crossings and access to communities during construction, Whitemud Road, Winterburn Road • Route option along Whitemud Drive Air • No new issues raised • Fish spawning in Whitemud and Blackmud Creeks • Reclamation is critical for water crossings and wetlands; Whitemud Creek, Blackmud Creek, North Saskatchewan River, Fulton Creek Wetlands, and Wedgewood Creek • Whitemud Creek prone to significant short-term stream flow fluctuations after Water heavy rainfall events; risk for slope stability and construction • For wetlands along TUC, Fulton Creek in Strathcona County, and waterfowl habitat – reclamation is key, construction timing should not be in early spring • Stream crossing techniques; strong preference for trenchless crossings of Whitemud, Blackmud and Wedgewood • Stability of Whitemud Creek banks • Interest in stakeholder engagement opportunities for residents of the communities on the west side of Edmonton (i.e., where TMEP exits from TUC); Lewis Estates Human Activity Golf Course & Land Use • Indication that some residents in west Edmonton do not know there is an existing pipeline through their communities • Construction timing; nuisance

Page 55

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

Wabamun, AB The results of the Wabamun Workshop are summarized in Tables 1.5.5-4 through 1.5.5-6

TABLE 1.5.5-4

PROPOSED PIPELINE CORRIDOR OPTIMIZATION WORKSHOP – WABAMUN, AB

Number of Region Location Date Attendees Alberta Wabamun, AB. March 26, 2014 7 5:00 – 8:00 pm

The following is a listing of only those organizations in attendance at the Proposed Pipeline Corridor Optimization Workshop (Wabamun).

TABLE 1.5.5-5

ATTENDEES – WABAMUN, AB

Organization Pembina River Tubing Wabamun Watershed Management Council Village of Wabamun Note: Some organizations had more than one representative in attendance.

TABLE 1.5.5-6

SUMMARY OF NEW KEY ISSUES/CONCERNS – WABAMUN, AB

Topic Summary of New Key Issues/Concerns • Eagles and ospreys nest along a powerline that runs parallel to the existing TMPL right-of way • Wabamun Lake Provincial Park – existing TMPL right-of way is not near trails. Consensus from participants that construction could not be during summer • Catchment area funnels runoff (or potential spill) across entrance into the Village of Wabamun, through the Village and into Lake Wabamun • Soils in area are high in phosphorous, so sedimentation into Lake Wabamun needs Land to be prevented • Quality and testing of old pipe • Preference for the existing TMPL right-of way • North route would restrict potential future activity and development on north side of highway • LaFarge has received a permit for aggregate extraction south of the pipeline • Erosion into Lake Wabamun Air • No new issues raised • Interest in feasibility of horizontal directional drilling (HDD) under Pembina River • Quick and quality reclamation important in order to avoid phosphorous rich sedimentation into Lake Wabamun Water • Wet areas west of Village of Wabamun, waterfowl habitat • Impact to Lake Wabamun, Pembina River and Wabamun Lake Provincial Park • HDD for Pembina River, in the event it has to be a trenched crossing, it should be outside tourism (tubing) busy season July 1 – August 31 • Safety of residents and tourists • Timing of construction – not during summer Human Activity & • Land Use Access to Village of Wabamun, traffic issues during construction • Desire to have emergency response training opportunities for local first responders – as well as equipment housed in Wabamun

Page 56

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

Fraser Valley/Chilliwack, BC The results of the Fraser Valley/Chilliwack Workshop are summarized in Tables 1.5.5-7 to 1.5.5-9.

TABLE 1.5.5-7

PROPOSED PIPELINE CORRIDOR OPTIMIZATION WORKSHOP – FRASER VALLEY/CHILLIWACK, BC

Number of Region Location Date Attendees Lower Mainland/Fraser Coast Chilliwack Hotel March 27, 2014 6 Valley 4:15 – 6:30 pm

The following is a listing of only those organizations in attendance at the Proposed Pipeline Corridor Optimization Workshop (Fraser Valley/Chilliwack).

TABLE 1.5.5-8

ATTENDEES – FRASER VALLEY/CHILLIWACK, BC

Organization BC Chicken Marketing Board City of Chilliwack Chilliwack Chamber of Commerce Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure City of Abbotsford Pipe Up Network Note: Some organizations had more than one representative in attendance.

TABLE 1.5.5-9

SUMMARY OF NEW KEY ISSUES/CONCERNS – FRASER VALLEY/CHILLIWACK, BC

Topic Summary of New Key Issues/Concerns • Agricultural considerations for construction and operations of the pipeline. Land Disruption to current agricultural land uses – stressing animals, ground or storage pits and recommendation to place the pipeline in a deeper trench. Air • No new issues • Sensitive aquifers in this area that may be impacted by the Project. Water Aquifers have a variety of uses and are irreplaceable. • The Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure (MOTI is concerned that Human Activity & Land a pipeline corridor will sterilize their right-of-way. They see a high level of Use risk with the pipeline being the second priority to the pipeline in case of emergency repairs (i.e., in case of flood).

Coquitlam, BC The results of the Coquitlam Workshop are summarized in Tables 1.5.5-10 through 1.5.5-12.

TABLE 1.5.5-10

PROPOSED PIPELINE CORRIDOR OPTIMIZATION WORKSHOP – COQUITLAM, BC

Number of Region Location Date Attendees Lower Mainland/Fraser Executive Plaza, North Road, March 26, 2014 9 Valley, BC Coquitlam 4:00 – 6:30 pm

Page 57

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

The following is a listing of only those organizations in attendance at the Proposed Pipeline Corridor Optimization Workshop (Coquitlam).

TABLE 1.5.5-11

ATTENDEES – COQUITLAM, BC

Organization City of Coquitlam Burke Mountain Naturalists Ministry of Transportation and Highways Recreational Outfitters Inc. Coquitlam Sunrise Rotary Tri Cities Chamber of Commerce Note: Some organizations had more than one representative in attendance.

TABLE 1.5.5-12

SUMMARY OF NEW KEY ISSUES/CONCERNS – COQUITLAM, BC

Topic Summary of New Key Issues/Concerns • Migratory birds at Colony Farm Regional Park; post breeding season, outside protected bird nesting window, is a very important time. They eat and stay longer to gain strength for migration • What’s the benefit to Coquitlam having this pipeline? • Huge impact on Colony Farm Regional Park; nesting birds, recreational users, visitors all year round • Notification process required for right-of-way usage • Long term impacts of spill should one occur • Increased maintenance hassle due to pipeline (i.e., need to call before you dig) Land • Seismic; poor ground next to Fraser River as it is low lands • Impacts to nesting birds using Forensic Psychiatric Institute (FPI) fields in addition to Colony Farm • Saturated ground in winter; lots of rain • Avoid tree loss • Construction period during winter to minimize disruption to park users; birds and people • What’s the plan for Emergency Response Routes in the event of a spill? • Loss or degradation of green space • Land fill in United Boulevard area • Noise impacts to Colony Farm Regional Park and along the corridor Air • Flash light from welding; a distraction to traffic and a safety concern • Construction traffic impacts to air quality • Concern about impacts to creeks through Coquitlam (i.e., multiple crossings run north to south) • Storm water impacts and transfer of product/spill material through storm drainage system; need an appropriate response plan • Construction sediment control issues • High pressure large diameter water mains in area; if ruptured, could cause damage to Water TMPL • Water quality impacts on drainage canals at Colony Farm • As-builts for methane collection systems • Stoney Creek crossing – ensure proper construction method to protect creek • Potential water quality impacts on Coquitlam River and Mundy Slough • Involve stewardship groups in response plans (i.e., notify of issue)

Page 58

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

TABLE 1.5.5-12 Cont'd

Topic Summary of New Key Issues/Concerns • United Boulevard/Pacific Reach residential development in future. Potential development encumbrance (i.e., pre-load NEB Safety Zone) • Access to boat launches at Maquabeak Park • Impact to Mackin Park • Recreational users at Colony Farm Regional Park year round; impact to cyclists, hikers, gardeners, visitors during construction • Recreational and Commercial use of river during construction • Pipe installation; impact to zoning Human Activity • Impacts to wildlife and overall diversity & Land Use • Less construction in corridor (i.e., United Blvd) than Bernatchey alternate • Ensure access is maintained to Colony Farm Park and FPI • Noise impact to FPI • Impact/loss of green space • Length of construction activity in a given area • Kwikwetlem First Nation • Schools may not be relevant unless there’s one at Fraser Mills • Impact to services (water, gas etc.) during construction

Surrey, BC The results of the Surrey Workshop are summarized in Tables 1.5.5-13 through 1.5.5-15.

TABLE 1.5.5-13

PROPOSED PIPELINE CORRIDOR OPTIMIZATION WORKSHOP – SURREY, BC

Number of Region Location Date Attendees Lower Mainland/Fraser Sheraton Guildford April 1, 2014 7 Valley 4:00 - 7:10 pm

The following is a listing of only those organizations in attendance at the Proposed Pipeline Corridor Optimization Workshop (Surrey).

TABLE 1.5.5-14

ATTENDEES – SURREY, BC

Organization City of Surrey Fraser Heights Community Association Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure Note: Some organizations had more than one representative in attendance.

TABLE 1.5.5-15

SUMMARY OF NEW KEY ISSUES/CONCERNS – SURREY, BC

Topic Summary of New Key Issues/Concerns • Approximately 25 residential homes in Fraser Heights impacted by Land construction; impacts on properties for sale (i.e., Alternate Corridor) • Impact to land/environment in event of oil spill

Page 59

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

TABLE 1.5.5-15 Cont'd

Topic Summary of New Key Issues/Concerns Air • No new issues raised Water • No new issues raised • Important to work with local governments (i.e., Regional and Municipal) on construction planning Human Activity • Property devaluation of residential properties (i.e., 173rd Street), including & Land Use properties for sale in area of proposed alternate pipeline corridor • Impacts to / limiting future utility use in road right-of-way (i.e., sterilization)

Langley, BC The results of the Langley Workshop are summarized in Tables 1.5.5-16 through 1.5.5-18.

TABLE 1.5.5-16

PROPOSED PIPELINE CORRIDOR OPTIMIZATION WORKSHOP – LANGLEY TOWNSHIP, BC

Number of Region Location Date Attendees Lower Mainland/Fraser Holiday Inn, Walnut Grove April 2, 2014 9 Valley 4:00 - 7:00 pm

The following is a listing of only those organizations in attendance at the Proposed Pipeline Corridor Optimization Workshop (Langley).

TABLE 1.5.5-17

ATTENDEES – LANGLEY TOWNSHIP, BC

Organization Langley Environmental Protection Society Region 2, BC Wildlife Federation and Trails BC Langley Field Naturalists Society Salmon River Landowner Group Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure Township of Langley Neighbourhood Group (west of Redwoods Golf Yorkson Watershed Stewardship Committee Course) Redwoods Golf Course Note: Some organizations had more than one representative in attendance.

TABLE 1.5.5-18

SUMMARY OF NEW KEY ISSUES/CONCERNS – LANGLEY TOWNSHIP, BC

Topic Summary of New Key Issues/Concerns • Revisit Salmon River option; reduced environmental issues Land • Compare Redwoods Nature Park to Salmon River flood plain Air • Air quality Water • Water contamination / flooding

Page 60

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

TABLE 1.5.5-18 Cont'd

Topic Summary of New Key Issues/Concerns • Need to balance impacts to environment and human impact; routing along the east side of golf course will impact environment, and along the west will impact many Human Activity residents & Land Use • Disruption to natural areas north of golf course • Human impacts during construction (i.e., nuisance)

Burnaby, BC The results of the Burnaby Workshop are summarized in Tables 1.5.5-19 through 1.5.5-21.

TABLE 1.5.5-19

PROPOSED PIPELINE CORRIDOR OPTIMIZATION WORKSHOP – BURNABY, BC

Number of Region Location Date Attendees Lower Mainland/Fraser Executive Plaza, North Road, April 3, 2014 9 Valley Coquitlam 4:00 – 6:10 pm

The following is a listing of only those organizations in attendance at the Proposed Pipeline Corridor Optimization Workshop (Burnaby).

TABLE 1.5.5-20

ATTENDEES – BURNABY, BC

Organization BC Fly Fishers Federation Member of Legislative Assembly (MLA) Burnaby Board of Trade Simon Fraser University (SFU) Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure Stoney Creek Streamkeepers Note: Some organizations had more than one representative in attendance.

TABLE 1.5.5-21

SUMMARY OF NEW KEY ISSUES/CONCERNS – BURNABY, BC

Topic Summary of New Key Issues/Concerns • Geotechnical concerns; seismic withstand and creation of potential geotechnical Land concerns with trenchless methods through Burnaby Mountain Air • Odour control at Burnaby Terminal • Protect water resources in the event of a spill Water • Trenchless option through Burnaby Mountain; positively response Human Activity & • No new issues raised Land Use

1.5.6 Open Houses Trans Mountain also hosted Public Open Houses that provided stakeholders with an opportunity to receive updated Project information, to review area-specific revisions to the proposed pipeline corridor since filing the NEB Application in December 2013, and to provide feedback to Trans Mountain.

Page 61

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

Copies of the materials presented at the Open Houses identified below are included in Appendix G:

• ESA Module Posters;

• Display Boards;

• Maps;

• Feedback Form – We Want To Hear From You;

• Getting to the Route video; and

• Project Description video.

Sherwood Park, Alberta The results of the Sherwood Park Open House are summarized in Tables 1.5.6-1 and 1.5.6-2

TABLE 1.5.6-1

OPEN HOUSE – SHERWOOD PARK, AB

Number of Region Location Date Attendees Alberta Sherwood Park, Strathcona County March 24, 2014 11

TABLE 1.5.6-2

SUMMARY OF NEW KEY ISSUES/CONCERNS – OPEN HOUSE, SHERWOOD PARK, AB

Topic Summary of New Key Issues/Concerns Land • No new issues raised Air • No new issues raised Water • No new issues raised • Rugby Club members were interested in construction timing and the exact location of the pipeline (i.e., centerline, setback).The proposed pipeline corridor goes through land on the TUC that is leased by the Strathcona Druids Rugby Club. Club members are concerned about the impact of the Project to their fields and Human Activity clubhouse, and are interested in what benefits the company could provide as & Land Use compensation (i.e., bleachers, facility upgrades, security building). • Rugby Club members asked if the trees to the west of their fields would be affected as they currently provide a windbreak for the fields • Rugby club members were interested in opportunities for input into fine-tuning the centreline.

Hope (Othello Road) Open House The results of the Hope (Othello Road) Open House are summarized in Table 1.5.6-3 and 1.5.6-4.

TABLE 1.5.6-3

OPEN HOUSE – (OTHELLO ROAD) HOPE, BC

Number of Region Location Date Attendees Interior BC Hope Recreation Centre March 26, 2014 20 12:30 – 2:00 pm

Page 62

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

TABLE 1.5.6-4

BC PARKS OPEN HOUSE – (OTHELLO ROAD) HOPE, BC

Topic Summary of New Key Issues/Concerns • Take into consideration gravel pit near KP 1010/11 and Hope Cemetery near KP 1010.3. • Othello Road resident concerns about construction in approximate area of RK 1036 to RK 1038 Land • Nestle Waters right-of-way alignment (TMPL and TMEP) • Othello Road reduced load capacity; can it accommodate Trans Mountain’s heavy equipment needs • Owner of Tuck Lake Resort noted bear, lynx, bobcat and owls are frequently seen in area. Air • No new issues raised Water • No new issues raised Human Activity • No new issues raised & Land Use

Fraser Valley / Chilliwack, BC Cenovus, one of Trans Mountain’s shippers, attended the Fraser Valley / Chilliwack, BC Open House with a booth and materials, and participated in the discussions. This provided an opportunity for Cenovus to respond to questions as they relate to their industry. The results of the Fraser Valley / Chilliwack Open House are summarized in Tables 1.5.6-5 and 1.5.6-6.

TABLE 1.5.6-5

OPEN HOUSE – FRASER VALLEY / CHILLIWACK, BC

Number of Region Location Date Attendees Lower Mainland/Fraser Coast Chilliwack Hotel March 27, 2014 41 Valley

TABLE 1.5.6-6

SUMMARY OF NEW KEY ISSUES/CONCERNS OPEN HOUSE – FRASER VALLEY / CHILLIWACK, BC

Topic Summary of New Key Issues/Concerns • Questions around spill impacts (i.e., local spill response and historical spills) Land • Concern from landowners (i.e., property devaluation) Air • No new issues raised Water • Concern for aquifer and well water impact during construction/in event of spill • Stakeholders interested in knowing more about construction spreads (i.e., length of construction time and how they move) Human Activity • Questions around NEB process (i.e., funding, structure, inspectors and board members) & Land Use • Macro questions and philosophical discussion regarding where the product goes, upstream and downstream concerns

Langley, BC Cenovus, one of Trans Mountain’s shippers, attended the Langley, BC Open Houses with a booth and materials, and participated in the discussions. This provided an opportunity for Cenovus to respond to

Page 63

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014 questions as they relate to their industry. The results of the Langley Open House are summarized in Tables 1.5.6-7 and 1.5.6-8.

TABLE 1.5.6-7

OPEN HOUSE – LANGLEY TOWNSHIP, BC

Number of Region Location Date Attendees Lower Mainland/Fraser Holiday Inn, Langley, BC April 2, 2014 140 Valley

TABLE 1.5.6-8

SUMMARY OF NEW KEY ISSUES/CONCERNS OPEN HOUSE – LANGLEY TOWNSHIP, BC

Topic Summary of New Key Issues/Concerns • Concern about impacts to residential neighbourhoods as a result of construction and in event of a spill • Impact to Parks and protected areas as a result of construction or a spill • Pipeline stability during earthquake Land • Construction impact and safety near residences • Protection of archeological finds • Concern for tree removal • Impact on nocturnal animals of construction or in event of a spill • Nuisance (i.e., odour, dust, fumes) Air • Airborne contaminants in the event of a spill • Impact to Salmon River flood plain and agriculture as a result of construction or in event of a spill Water • Disturbance to wetlands and environmentally sensitive areas • Additional watercourse crossings connecting to Mundy Creek • Concern golf course drainage may be impacted by construction • Routing process, timing and location of construction • Insurance and liability in event of a spill • Opportunities for additional jobs • Interest in pipeline safety and emergency response procedures Human Activity • Definition of directly impacted, notification requirements & Land Use • Impact to golf course as result of construction or spill • Noise near chicken barns • Yorkson Creek has salmon; Mundy drains into it; introducing salmon to east of Mundy; oil spill would be detrimental to fish and recreational users • Request valve location closer to where deviation occurs

Burnaby, BC In addition to the materials noted above, Trans Mountain also posted the Claims-Reality Campaign material at the Burnaby Open House. Cenovus, one of Trans Mountain’s shippers, attended the Chilliwack, BC Open House with a booth and materials, and participated in the discussions. This provided an opportunity for Cenovus to respond to questions as they relate to their industry The results of the Burnaby Open House are summarized in Tables 1.5.6-9 and 1.5.6-10.

Page 64

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

TABLE 1.5.6-9

OPEN HOUSE – BURNABY, BC

Number of Region Location Date Attendees Lower Mainland/Fraser Executive Plaza, North Road, April 3, 2014 146 Valley Coquitlam, BC

TABLE 1.5.6-10

OPEN HOUSE – BURNABY, BC

Topic Summary of New Key Issues/Concerns • Concern about Colony Farms; impact on wildlife, estuary, amphibians , reptiles, birds, mammals • City of Coquitlam Councillor has received a lot of negative feedback about routing through this area; City of Councillor has been asked whether the City of Coquitlam would need to rezone the area for a pipeline to run through a park • Routing through Colony Farms Regional Park; mitigation has been done in Land Colony Farms Park related to previous projects; proposed pipeline expansion could destroy previous mitigation; Park use is second highest in greater Vancouver area for Metro Vancouver parks, only behind Pacific Spirit Park • Some unusual species including King bird, Barn owl, Hawks, Lazalui bunting use the hedgerows • Grassland species in Colony Farms Park Air • No new issues raised Water • No new issues raised Human Activity & • Although mitigation may be able to repair the temporary impact, the construction Land Use impact (i.e., noise, vehicles) may drive some animals away permanently

1.5.7 Online Engagement Table 1.4.13-4 documents the advertising Trans Mountain conducted to notify stakeholders about online feedback opportunities and encouraged attendance at upcoming public events. The campaign included print advertising and direct mail postcard drop. Online engagement opportunities were also promoted via the @TransMtn Twitter account and through an eblast to all stakeholders in the Trans Mountain contact database.

Additional advertising was placed specifically to notify stakeholders of the online engagement opportunity following the open houses.

From March 17 to April 17, 2014, an online survey and feedback from requesting comments from stakeholders on routing optimization and the proposal to returning a section of existing Trans Mountain pipeline to service, was available on the Trans Mountain website. Supporting materials were provided for visitors to review and provide comment on. Materials made available online are located in Appendix G. As a result of this online engagement opportunity, Trans Mountain received 85 feedback forms. Table 1.5.7-1 summarizes the number of visitors, feedback forms submitted and document views related to online engagement.

TABLE 1.5.7-1

ON-LINE ENGAGEMENT FEEDBACK

Number of Related Document Number of Visitors Number of Feedback Forms Submitted Views 6,975 85 543

Page 65

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

Table’s 1.5.7-2 to 1.5.7-12 summarizes the online engagement results by area.

TABLE 1.5.7-2

STRATHCONA COUNTY / SHERWOOD PARK ONLINE ENGAGEMENT

Topic Summary of New Key Issues/Concerns • Concerns about disruption to recreation and sports activities in the TUC. Reclamation Land of fields for recreation and sport Air • No comments received Water • No comments received Human Activity • No comments received & Land Use Note: Comments resulting from the one Feedback Form received.

TABLE 1.5.7-3

EDMONTON WEST ONLINE ENGAGEMENT

Topic Summary of New Key Issues/Concerns Land • Soil disturbance and erosion; take proper soil remediation measures • Concern for spills / leaks becoming airborne Air • Leaks under high pressure could cause respiratory issues • Burning of spilled oil could result in smoke-laden air • Concerns for water crossings at Whitemud Creek, North Saskatchewan River, etc. Water Avoid water crossings wherever possible and use highest safety methods at crossings that are necessary Human Activity & • Road traffic on Anthony Henday Drive Land Use • Possible impact to those living around Anthony Henday Drive in event of a spill Note: Comments resulting from the three Feedback Forms received.

TABLE 1.5.7-4

HINTON ONLINE ENGAGEMENT (REACTIVATION SEGMENT)

Topic Summary of New Key Issues/Concerns Land • No comments received Air • No comments received Water • No comments received Human Activity • Hope that the cleared area will provide more trail and wildlife corridors & Land Use • Overall support for the reactivation and Project that supports economic benefits Note: Comments resulting from the one Feedback Form received.

TABLE 1.5.7-5

WABAMUN ONLINE ENGAGEMENT

Topic Summary of New Key Issues/Concerns • Avoid bird nesting season Land • Movement of amphibians; where do the local garter snakes have their hibernaculum Air • No comments received • Merryweather Creek is already suffering declining water levels, how will reduced forest Water cover from construction be mediated to avoid further water level decline

Page 66

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

TABLE 1.5.7-5 Cont'd

Topic Summary of New Key Issues/Concerns • Concern about trespassing during and after construction, as well as illegal use of private Human Activity land for hunting and recreation & Land Use • Concern about worker hygiene facilities while on site • Concern about introduction of weeds following construction Note: Comments resulting from the one Feedback Form received.

TABLE 1.5.7-6

HOPE ONLINE ENGAGEMENT

Topic Summary of New Key Issues/Concerns Land • General support for the Project; no concerns received Air • General support for the Project; no concerns received Water • General support for the Project; no concerns received Human Activity • General support for the Project; no concerns received & Land Use • Increased trail options for more outdoor recreation Note: Comments resulting from the two Feedback Forms received.

TABLE 1.5.7-7

KAMLOOPS ONLINE ENGAGEMENT

Topic Summary of New Key Issues/Concerns • Support for Lac du Bois / range land route option; moving it further away from residential Land • Acceptable with assurance that environmental care be observed • Existing pipeline through Westsyde should be abandoned Air • Acceptable with assurance that environmental care be observed Water • Acceptable with assurance that environmental care be observed Human Activity • Possible new recreation trails in Lac Du Bois Park & Land Use Note: Comments resulting from the two Feedback Forms received.

TABLE 1.5.7-8

FRASER VALLEY (CHEAM WETLANDS) ONLINE ENGAGEMENT

Topic Summary of New Key Issues/Concerns Land • Concerned that pipeline would run through prime agricultural land Air • Downstream concerns about air pollution following usage after refinement Water • Concerns about watershed that is used to water crops year round Human Activity • Concerns about depleting our oil supplies and high cost of oil. Local demand should be & Land Use met before exporting Note: Comments resulting from the four Feedback Forms received.

Page 67

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

TABLE 1.5.7-9

COQUITLAM ONLINE ENGAGEMENT

Topic Summary of New Key Issues/Concerns • Vancouver Avian Research Centre (VARC) opposes use of Colony Farm Regional Park, stating that any disturbance within the park will negatively impact breeding and migratory birds • Public Park should not be used for private company use Land • Pipeline assembly in Colony Farm Park will disrupt main access road and trail system near Lougheed Highway • Wildlife and agriculture will be impacted in Colony Farm Park and nesting area for Lazuli Buntings Air • Increased carbon emissions threatens future generations Water • General concern for clean water • Traffic congestion Human Activity • Contribute to climate change and extreme weather events & Land Use • Threat to tourism • Prevents advancement in renewable energy development Note: Comments resulting from the four Feedback Forms received.

TABLE 1.5.7-10

LANGLEY ONLINE ENGAGEMENT

Topic Summary of New Key Issues/Concerns • Several comments the route should go through the east side of the Redwoods Golf Course, General not the west side as many more residences will be affected, as well as two elementary schools, old growth trees and environmentally sensitive areas • Concern about Hennig Farms regarding agriculture land loss in the floodplain option and soil instability in the hillside option • Wildlife concerns along 217th Avenue (i.e., eagles, hawks, etc. live in the trees that would need to be removed) Land • Redwoods Golf Course was bought by the Township with the strict requirement that it become a park following the golf course administration; disagree with pipeline going under a public park • Concern that there cannot be trees in the 30m right-of-way making the park a barren field • Impact to agricultural areas just beyond the proposed Walnut Grove option • Concern about temporary impact of construction (i.e., trucking, machinery) on air (i.e., diesel fumes, dust and dirt). Air • Noise pollution • Risk of fire from pipeline leak and impact of resulting smoke • Pollution during construction • Concern about pipeline leak above Hennig Farms’ ponds; they are fed by drainage runoff and groundwater; concern about contamination from underground leak • Concerns about hydrology along Messiter Station Road • Concern that the salmon run is close and there could be risk of contamination Water • Potential water table contamination impacting plant and wildlife (i.e., Redwoods Golf Course) • Risk to East Munday Creek that drains to the north, parallel to the west boundary of Redwoods Golf Course

Page 68

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

TABLE 1.5.7-10 Cont'd

Topic Summary of New Key Issues/Concerns • Property values will decrease along 217th Avenue with removal of trees • Privacy of homes along 217th Avenue will be affected by removal of trees • Concern for safety of residents who live along 217th Avenue in event of a spill • Concern for safety of those who want to enjoy the Redwoods Park Human Activity • Risk to families and schools and recreation areas in Walnut Grove & Land Use • Traffic impacts during construction • Disruption to golf course and business during construction • Increased noise during construction • Homes on west side of Redwoods Golf Course are at risk due to being downslope from proposed pipeline corridor, in an earthquake-prone zone Note: Comments resulting from the 42 Feedback Forms received.

TABLE 1.5.7-11

SURREY ONLINE ENGAGEMENT

Topic Summary of New Key Issues/Concerns • Wildlife displacement • Ranching would become dangerous Land • Loss of parkland, trees, natural environment and habitat for wildlife (i.e., 181st Street route) • Risk to Surrey Bend Park environment from spills • Destruction of greenbelt (i.e., 181st Street route) • Oil production pollutes the air Air • Dust contamination from construction • Noise pollution (i.e., loss of noise-reducing trees / foliage – 181st Street) • Risk to underground drinking water • Concern that marine safety regime is compromised without the Kitsilano Coast Guard Water • Risk to Fraser River from spills • Risk to wells and septic tanks along 173rd Street Alternate Corridor • Expropriation • Concern that hunting, skidoo crashers and corrosion from extreme weather will impact safety of the pipeline • Construction noise • Increased noise along 181st Street due to removal of trees and noise-mitigating foliage • Impact of trains over pipeline along Golden Ears Connector area (i.e., increasing weight of Human Activity trains cause cyclical and intense shaking in area) & Land Use • Compounded impact to a community already impacted by construction of Golden Ears Connector (i.e., four years of ongoing construction because projects would run back-to- back) • Fear of safety hazards (i.e., explosions, evacuations) • Land devaluation (i.e., 173rd Street Alternate Corridor) • Traffic disruptions (i.e., access to houses along 173rd Street will be very difficult due to narrow road) Note: Comments resulting from the 11 Feedback Forms received.

Page 69

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

TABLE 1.5.7-12

BURNABY ONLINE ENGAGEMENT

Topic Summary of New Key Issues/Concerns • Avoid farmland; follow existing infrastructure • No concerns; the pipeline is far safer for wildlife than highways / railways where thousands of animals die each year Land • Decrease in property value • Impact to Eagle Creek and green forestation in Burnaby Mountain, Underhill and Westridge area Air • General concern about the air • Concern for impact on any and all species that live in the waters in any of the inlets that tankers will be sailing through Water • Extra safeguards around the Brunette River requested • Concerns about spill in the Fraser River and impact to the salmon run • Concern about impact to Georgia Strait from 300+ tankers a year • Concerned for long-term safety of people in area • Trans Mountain should work to avoid or impact as little as possible, in populated or environmentally sensitive areas Human Activity • Makes more sense to build a new facility and move the pipeline to non-civic areas & Land Use • Pipelines are more secure in populated areas than other forms of transport • Economic impact to property owners • Suggestion to contribute to or build a new connection to the Central Valley Greenway; also suggested a bridge over the CN mainline near Stoney Creek Note: Comments resulting from the 14 Feedback Forms received.

1.5.8 Meetings with Local Governments and Community Groups Trans Mountain had conversations with local governments and community interest groups during the reporting period to share Project updates, review area specific routing changes and gather feedback. Stakeholders provided feedback on many aspects of the Project, and in particular pipeline corridor deviations being considered by Trans Mountain since the filing of the Application in December 2013. Trans Mountain will continue to share Project updates with interested stakeholders, seek input on specific aspects of the proposed Project and resolve issues where practical as it proceeds.

Fraser Valley Regional District / Chilliwack, BC Trans Mountain met with MLAs Martin and Throness on January 10, 2014. This meeting was to provide information about how Trans Mountain ensures the ongoing safety of the existing Trans Mountain pipeline. In this meeting, Trans Mountain responded to questions about the risk of an oil spill and the potential impact to the aquifer, construction timelines and valve location; an interest was also expressed in providing information about pipelines near schools.

In the Fraser Valley, between the western boundary of Hope and Chilliwack, conversations with stakeholders during this time frame focused on deviations in the Cheam Lake Wetlands Park and Bridal Veil Provincial Park area. Trans Mountain presented to the FVRD Board on March 19, 2014. Key points of feedback included input about engagement methods; emergency response methods, effectiveness, training and cost to taxpayers; environmental considerations including breadth of habitat studies and control of invasive species; geological instability; and preference for routing along existing pipeline corridor through Bridal Veil Falls Provincial Park.

Trans Mountain met with the City of Chilliwack on April 30, 2014 to discuss community legacy benefits, and although outside of the reporting time frame is planning to schedule a second meeting to continue this discussion.

Page 70

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

Abbotsford, BC Although outside reporting period for this Update, on May 7, 2014 and May 13, 2014 Trans Mountain met with the Mayor, CAO and senior staff to discuss the proposed Project. Of significant interest to the City was engagement with local residents, routing particularly in the Sandy Hill residential neighbourhood, geotechnical and engineering concerns, and emergency response. The Project team provided information, responded to questions and the city and Trans Mountain agreed to arrange for subject matter meetings to address mutual topics of interest.

In addition, at the request of staff, Trans Mountain hosted an event on June 26, 2014 inviting Sandy Hill residential neighbours to learn more about the proposed Project and potential construction impacts in their neighbourhood. Topics of interest included a request for additional information from Trans Mountain about construction impacts and timelines; geotechnical questions from the city about Sandy Hill; land value impacts; and other routes considered.

Trans Mountain aims to meet with the City of Abbotsford to initiate community benefits discussions in the near future.

Township of Langley, BC Trans Mountain presented to Mayor and Council on January 14, 2014. Key topics and areas of interest raised were safe operations of the existing pipeline through Langley, emergency response, liability and impacts of a spill on the environment and proposed routing. Trans Mountain met with municipal staff on March 21, 2014 to provide a Project update and seek input on routing. The Township provided feedback indicating their preference to align the pipeline through the east side of the Redwoods Golf Course and willingness to work with Trans Mountain to place the pipe in 88th Avenue if the eastern route was selected. Since this meeting, the 88th Avenue option is no longer being considered however Trans Mountain continues to seriously investigate the feasibility of the east side of the golf course.

Attempts were made to reschedule a meeting originally set for April 16, 2014 to discuss potential community benefits with the Township. This meeting has not been successfully rescheduled yet.

Surrey, BC Trans Mountain met with municipal staff on January 29, 2014 and April 2, 2014 to provide updates and seek input into deviations to the pipeline corridor through Surrey. Topics of interest and concern raised were the routing selection process and location of the pipeline near residential neighbourhoods, in municipal streets and along the southern edge of Surrey Bend Park. Justification for the selected corridor was discussed in detail including an explanation of alternatives considered and why they did not meet routing objectives. City staff expressed their concern about disruption to Surrey Bend Park, an environmentally sensitive area important to the region. They also expressed an interest in stakeholder engagement planned to seek input from other stakeholders and the public.

On April 23, 2014 Trans Mountain presented to City of Surrey’s Environmental Sustainability Advisory Committee. Key interest and concern raised by committee members focused on safe operations of the existing pipeline, emergency response, routing, seismic stability and impact to the environment in the event of a spill.

Trans Mountain met with members of the Fraser Heights Community Association and residents of 173 Street on March 31, 2014 to provide information about the Project, the proposed Alternate Corridor through their neighbourhood, and respond to questions. Key topics of interest were route selection process and location of the proposed pipeline corridor, impact to residents during construction and concern about devaluation of properties located next to an oil pipeline.

Trans Mountain met again with the President of the Fraser Heights Community Association and a neighbour representing interests along 181st Street on May 5, 2014. Interests raised during this meeting were pipeline routing and selection process, impacts on the environment and area residents during construction (noise), as well as construction timing and methodology. There is project fatigue in the neighbourhood from several large infrastructure projects preceding Trans Mountain.

Page 71

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

Although outside of the reporting period for this Update, on May 1, 2014 and June 4, 2014 Trans Mountain met to seek potential community legacy benefits with the City.

Coquitlam, BC Trans Mountain met with municipal staff on January 30, 2014 and June 13, 2014 to provide an update and seek input into routing deviations. At these meetings, the City expressed concern about environmental impacts to Colony Farm Regional Park and disruption to local business along United Boulevard. On June 13, 2014 Trans Mountain advised that based on input from the community, it was investigating using a CP Rail corridor adjacent to Colony Farms Regional Park as a temporary workspace to avoid Colony Farms Regional Park. An alternate temporary workspace in Colony Farms Regional Park remains a consideration at this time. Staff indicated that this information would likely be well received by Council.

On March 14, 2014 and April 15, 2014 Trans Mountain met with the Great Canadian Casino to discuss Project routing and concerns about potential business interruptions to the newly branded Hard Rock Vancouver Casino on United Boulevard in Coquitlam. This area has experienced construction fatigue with several major infrastructure projects recently completed and currently planned in this area.

On April 4, 2014 Trans Mountain met with members of the Burke Mountain Naturalists to discuss the revised pipeline corridor across the Fraser River east of the Port Mann Bridge near Colony Farms Regional Park, including a proposed temporary construction area in Colony Farms Regional Park. The group expressed concern about disrupting the park, even on a temporary basis and outside of bird nesting season. Of particular concern is sensitive bird habitat in and near the park that could be negatively impacted by even short term work.

On April 17, 2014 and June 13, 2014, Trans Mountain met with the City of Coquitlam to discuss community legacy benefits. The City has indicated their process for reviewing benefits and provided input to Trans Mountain. On May 26, 2014, Trans Mountain received a letter from Acting Mayor Brent Asmundson expressing concern about potential impacts to Colony Farms Regional Park.

Burnaby, BC Trans Mountain met with the City of Burnaby on March 11, 2014 to provide a Project update, including an update on the proposed Environment, Socioeconomic Assessment and an update on routing.

The routing update included the revised proposed Westridge pipeline corridor - a Terminal to Terminal tunnel or two-part horizontal directional drill. The City asked about surface impact, emergency response and geotechnical considerations for Burnaby Mountain. The City expressed interest in the potential for community benefit of moving the existing Westridge pipeline into the new alignment. Trans Mountain committed to investigating this option.

The update also included swapping of the Alternate Corridor for the proposed pipeline corridor in the Lougheed/Highway One area. The city expressed concern about possible residential impact in this area; and also expressed concern if removal of a greenbelt on Shell property was required to accommodate the corridor.

Related to the proposed expansion of the Westridge Marine Terminal, the City expressed an interest in acoustic analysis/measurement, odour control, the marine infill area, construction impact and emergency response at the terminal.

Finally, the City was interested in the routing decision making process; and Trans Mountain requested working together regarding the City’s permit approvals process.

On February 12, 2014, Trans Mountain provided a Project update to the Stoney Creek Environment Committee and walked the Stoney Creek with local stream keepers representing the Stoney Creek Environment Committee and Sapperton Fish and Game Club. The group discussed the proposed pipeline corridor related to the watershed.

On March 31, 2014, Trans Mountain met with neighbours from the Westridge, and particularly the Northcliffe neighbourhood to share updated Project information. Significant concerns were expressed in this neighbourhood that the impact of a proposed expanded Marine Terminal will impact residents views

Page 72

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

including lighting, acoustic environment, and odours. Follow-up meetings were held with the Northcliffe neighbours on May 2 and May 9. On May 9, Trans Mountain provided information about the preliminary dock layout and location.

Despite several requests to meet to discuss community legacy benefits, the City of Burnaby confirmed on June 10, 2014 that it will not discuss community benefits until Trans Mountain receives Project approval.

Metro Vancouver, BC On March 12, 2014, Trans Mountain met with Metro Vancouver to have the first multi-discipline Project meeting. Metro Vancouver is interested in the proposed corridor, interaction with existing and proposed infrastructure, air quality assessment methodology and impacts, and impact of pipeline corridors to Regional Parks.

1.5.9 Government Relations In addition to the Proposed Pipeline Corridor Optimization Workshops and Routing Update Open Houses, meetings were held with the respective MLAs and MPs of constituencies where the workshops and open houses were held. Elected officials were provided information describing the Project, with a particular emphasis on routing deviations as described in NEB_IR_No._1.12a. Additionally, meetings were held with BC government representatives to provide information on the Application, to specifically discuss matters of interest to the Province and or items that involve a discussion on provincial programs or permits.

1.6 Summary of Outcomes – January 1 to April 30, 2014 During the reporting period, Trans Mountain continued to provide accurate and timely Project information, as well as gathering stakeholder feedback through a series of workshops, open houses and meetings with local government and interested parties, attendance at various community events, presentations/speaking opportunities and digital engagement efforts. Feedback on the Project has been received through the following:

• comments and questions posted on the Project website’s online engagement portal;

• inquiries to the Project phone line and email address;

• workshops and open houses;

• social media; and

• stakeholder meetings.

Feedback received through Trans Mountain’s ongoing engagement activities, that have not previously been identified and addressed in either Volume 3A of the Application or Consultation Update No. 1 & Errata, is summarized by Region in Tables 1.6.1-1 through 1.6.5-1.

1.6.1 Key Topics of Interest or Concern - Alberta Figure 1.6.1-1 displays the new topics of interest or concern in Alberta raised since the filing of the Application (May 2012 to July 31, 2013), the Consultation Update No. 1 (August 1 to December 31, 2013) or during this reporting period. This includes all comments from all engagement activities during the reporting period including, the Workshops and Open Houses, social media, stakeholder meetings, and inquiries to the Project phone line and email.

Page 73

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

Figure 1.6.1-1 Key Topics of Interest or Concern in Alberta

Table 1.6.1-1 provides information on the key topics of interest for Alberta and Trans Mountain’s response to the interest or concern.

Page 74

TABLE 1.6.1-1

KEY INTERESTS OR CONCERNS – ALBERTA

Location in NEB Filed Key Topic Interest or Concern Summary Response Materials NEB Filing ID Environment - Terrestrial The watercourses where we This information will not be Volume 5A, Sections 5.7, 7.2.7 A3S1L9 Page 26 of 67 are interested in seeing available until after detailed and 8.6 A3S1Q9 Page 117 of 403 trenchless crossings are the engineering design is Volume 5C, Fisheries A3S1R1 Page 61 of 66 North Saskatchewan River, complete, during the detailed (Alberta)Technical Report, A3S1W7 Page 63 of 116 Whitemud Creek and construction planning process. Fisheries (British Columbia) A3S2S3 Page 356 of 461, Blackmud Creek (and Crossing methods specific to Technical Report Table 1.1 Wedgewood Creek). What are each watercourse will be Volume 6B you considering at those determined in consultation with Volume 6C crossings? engineering and environmental specialists, as well as applicable regulatory authorities. Will you be able to use HDD for This information will not be Volume 5A, Sections 5.7, 7.2.7 A3S1L9 Page 26 of 67 the Pembina River crossing? available until after detailed and 8.6 A3S1Q9 Page 117 of 403 engineering design is Volume 5C, Fisheries A3S1R1 Page 61 of 66 complete, during the detailed (Alberta)Technical Report,

Page construction planning process. Fisheries (British Columbia) Technical Report

75 Volume 6B

Volume 6C Operations and Maintenance Where there will be two Trans Mountain will be using Volume 4A, Section 2.8.1 A3S0Y8 page 34 of 110 pipelines in your existing right- the criteria in Volume 4A, of-way, how far apart will they Section 2.8.1 of the be? Application. Why isn’t Corral Creek on the Trans Mountain already N/A N/A list of natural hazard sites? actively manages that site, therefore it’s not on the list. The list includes locations where mitigation is not in place yet.

TABLE 1.6.1-1 Cont'd

Location in NEB Filed Key Topic Interest or Concern Summary Response Materials NEB Filing ID Routing Does the pipeline go through the golf Trans Mountain’s existing pipeline already Volume 5B - ESA - A3S1SO Page 61 of 64 course? (i.e., Lewis Estates Golf goes through Lewis Estates. The new Socio-Economic Course, in Edmonton) pipeline as proposed does not go through the Section 5.3 Lewis Estates Golf Course. Trans Mountain will work with the golf course to minimize impacts to golf course operations Will top soil be put back? In general, topsoil will be salvaged to ensure Volume 5A - ESA – A3S1L2 Page 62 of 150 that the soil productivity is maintained in Biophysical A3S2K9 Page 56 of 79 agricultural and grassland areas and root Section 2.21 zone material will be salvaged where grading is necessary on treed lands. Trans Mountain Volume 5D Agricultural will accommodate topsoil salvage requests Assessment Technical where feasible and work with farmers to Report, Section 7.2.2 coordinate the timing of topsoil savage and replacement. How long are deviations from the Please refer to NEB_IR_No._1.12a, NEB_IR_No._1.12a, A3W9H8 Page 38 and 236 of corridor? NEB_IR_No._1.40a and NEB_IR_No._1.84a NEB_IR_No._1.40a and 421 NEB_IR_No._1.84a Page A3W9L7, A3W9L8, A3W9L9, A3W9Q0, 76

A3W9Q1, A3W9Q2, A3W9Q3, A3W9Q4, A3W9Q5, A3W9Q6, A3W9Q7, A3W9Q8

When will the valve and pipeline The exact location of the mainline block Langley_IR_No._1.05b A3X6U7 details be nailed down? valves (MLBVs) will be established by the end of the Detailed Engineering and Design Phase of the Project. It looks like there are areas where Stakeholders may contact Trans Mountain by Volume 3A A3S0R2 Page 40 of 74 valve placement could be improved in email to: [email protected], or by order to minimize those spill volumes. phone at: 1.866.514.6700. Opportunities for Can we send those suggestions to stakeholders to provide feedback, express you? concerns and submit suggestions will be available through the entire process until the proposed expanded pipeline operations begin, if the Project is approved.

TABLE 1.6.1-1 Cont'd

Location in NEB Filed Key Topic Interest or Concern Summary Response Materials NEB Filing ID What does it mean when you say you In addition to the mainline block valves Volume 4A, Section 3.5.2 A3S0Y9 Page 17 of 35 will co-locate valves? located at the new pump stations and at the A3S0Z5 Page 21 of 93 terminals, there will be approximately 72 remote mainline block valves RMLBVs and 21 check valves located along Line 2. Seventy-one of these RMLBVs will be automated. Some of the RMLBVs will be located at Line 1 pump station sites or deactivated pump station sites. Where possible, Line 2 RMLBVs that are not located at pump station sites will be co-located at existing Line 1 RMLBV sites to take advantage of common infrastructure. There will also be 1 RMLBV located on each of the Burnaby-Westridge pipelines.

Table 5.1.12 in Appendix D of Volume 4A of the Application gives a preliminary list of the RMLBVs. The numbers and locations will be

Page finalized during the detailed engineering and design phase.

77 What will be done to ensure that A Traffic and Access Control Management Volume 4B - Project Design A3S1K5 Page 32 of 55

construction along the highway Plan will be developed to address the and Execution – A3S1S4 Page 49 of 175 doesn’t impact traffic speeds? management of construction traffic during Construction A232S3 Page 243 of 461 pre-construction, construction and post- Section 2.5 construction phases of the Project. 5B, Sections 5.5 and 7.2.5, Sections 5.8 and 7.2.8

Volume 6B Volume 6C Appendix C, Section 7.0

TABLE 1.6.1-1 Cont'd

Location in NEB Filed Key Topic Interest or Concern Summary Response Materials NEB Filing ID Safety How would the Village of Wabamun KMC takes full responsibility for any Volume 7 – Risk A3S4V5 Page 60 and 64 of be evacuated in the event of a break emergency that results from the Trans Assessments and 84 along the line? The natural drainage Mountain Pipeline system and its facilities Management of Pipeline and of the area means that product would and prefers to jointly manage such an Facility Spills, Sections 3 and A3S4V6 Page 32 of 137 flow across the entry road and into incident with the local, provincial and federal 4 the community and potentially into the authorities in the jurisdiction of the lake. We would like to see emergency emergency using Unified Command. response equipment housed right here and emergency training for local As Trans Mountain has demonstrated in the responders (such as the fire past it would like to work with local department). responders with respect to the Project and current operations to ensure all resources and services are used efficiently.

The Application, Volume 7, Section 4.5.1 lists the equipment stored at specific locations and has been incorrectly interpreted to mean there is firefighting foam stored on the Oil Page Spill Containment and Response units (OSCAR). The OSCAR units do not have 78 foam stored on them. However, all foam stored at any site has been selected to be compatible with the liquids present on the facility site, and with other sites within the Trans Mountain system.

The Application, Volume 7, Section 4.8 outlines the process to enhance KMC’s existing emergency management programs as they relate to the Trans Mountain Pipeline system to address the needs of the Project. The final programs will be developed in a manner consistent with the NEB’s draft conditions 42, 52, 53 and 54.

TABLE 1.6.1-1 Cont'd

Location in NEB Filed Key Topic Interest or Concern Summary Response Materials NEB Filing ID There was a question about whether For low vapour pressure low vapour pressure Volume 4A Project Design A3S0Y8 Page 49 of 110 the metallurgical content of the two (LVP) pipelines, CSA Z662 specifies that and Execution, Section 3.2.7 pipes was similar, i.e., if the steel pipe, as a minimum, must comply with would be the same quality. requirements for Category I (Cat I). However, Trans Mountain will specify pipe that meets the stricter criteria of Category II (Cat II) in order to maximize fracture initiation resistance and ensure premium product quality. As such, all pipe material to be installed below grade for the proposed Trans Mountain pipeline will be Cat II pipe and all pipe material to be installed above grade will be Category III (Cat III) pipe. There are a lot of wilderness areas in Trans Mountain has developed and Volume 4C Section 7.1.5 and A3S1L1 Page 43 and 48 of the Park, where there aren’t a lot of implemented a systematic approach to leak Section 7.1.11.5 102 people going by to notice signs of a detection. A computational pipeline small leak. It can also be difficult to monitoring (CPM) system is used in see everything via aerial patrols, so combination with other monitoring methods, how do we protect those areas? such as surveillance patrols, regular in-line

Page inspections using smart pigs and smart ball tools (acoustical leak detection technology),

79 Control Centre Operator (CCO) monitoring

using the supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system, and scheduled line balance calculations.

Within the CPM system, the alarm thresholds are dynamic over time and location, constantly changing due to flow dynamics and various factors which affect the uncertainty of instrumentation readings. For this reason, there is no single defined threshold that will generate alarms identifying potential leaks.

As described in Section 7.1.11.2, Volume 4C of the Facilities Application, the existing CPM system will be extended to the proposed Line 1 and Line 2 and will be in accordance with Canadian Standards Association (CSA) Standard Z662, Oil and Gas Pipeline Systems, Annex E. The latest technological advancements will be used to reduce detection thresholds to the extent practical.

TABLE 1.6.1-1 Cont'd

Location in NEB Filed Key Topic Interest or Concern Summary Response Materials NEB Filing ID Continued from above The CPM system will not automatically Continued from above shutdown a pipeline but will generate an alarm that notifies the CCO of a possible leak. As described in Section 7.1.11.5, Volume 4C of the Facilities Application, the CCO will use prescribed procedures to determine the cause of the leak alarm. A Simulation Specialist will be on call 24 hours per day, 365 days per year to assist the CCO in the analysis of the leak alarm.

CCOs receive training in hydraulics, leak detection, and emergency procedures. CCOs are trained to immediately assess and respond to any type of emergency or abnormal operating condition.

A CCO has the authority and the responsibility to shut down a pipeline during Page an emergency or as a precaution when, in his or her judgment, further operation of the

80 pipeline is unsafe. The CCO will not be

faulted for shutting down a pipeline under these circumstances.

The shutdown protocol for leak alarms and other abnormal conditions is generally described in Section 7.1.5 and Section 7.1.11.5, Volume 4C of the Facilities Application. Notifications will also be made according to the applicable legislative requirements. The pipeline restart protocol is generally described in Section 7.1.11.6, Volume 4C of the Facilities Application.

TABLE 1.6.1-1 Cont'd

Location in NEB Filed Key Topic Interest or Concern Summary Response Materials NEB Filing ID Socio-Economic Training and employment Trans Mountain has a history of supporting Volume 5B - ESA - Socio- A3S1S4 Page 93 of 175 opportunities associated with the education and training. Trans Mountain is Economic Project. exploring opportunities to provide and support education and training initiatives along the pipeline route; and has begun dialogue with local training institutions. Education and training in areas such as trades, maintenance, operations and environmental management will enhance the capacity of the local labour force to participate in Project opportunities. This will also build transferrable skills that can be used across other industries, and enhance the overall community capacity. Remediation and/or offsetting With the Application submitted, work Volume 2 Project Overview A3S0Q8 Page 31 of 45 opportunities in the Athabasca continues to refine the Project design, to Section 1.2.1.8 watershed (preferably in the Hinton complete additional field studies and to and Edson areas) determine Project investments in local Page benefits. Trans Mountain also continues to engage with local communities and interest

81 groups about proposed activities in high

value areas such as: natural areas directly disturbed, rare and sensitive habitat, and/or other areas of value identified by stakeholders. Should the Project be approved, Trans Mountain would build on the best practices related to the benefits/gains and the many successes of the Anchor Loop project. More information about the proposed benefits to high value areas will be made available in Q3/Q4 of 2014.

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

1.6.2 Key Topics of Interest or Concern – Interior BC Figure 1.6.2-1 displays the key topics of interest or concern in the BC Interior raised since the filing of the Application (May 2012 to July 31, 2013), the Consultation Update No. 1 (August 1 to December 31, 2013) or during this reporting period. This includes all comments from all engagement activities during the reporting period including, the Workshops and Open Houses, social media, stakeholder meetings, and inquiries to the Project phone line and email.

Key Issues/Concerns, Interior, BC

Community Capacity Access Corporate Policy Socio-Economic Engagement Process

Safety Environment - Terrestrial

Environment - Marine Nuisance

Operations & Routing Regulatory Management

Figure 1.6.2-1 Key Topics of Interest or Concern in the BC Interior Region

Table 1.6.2-1 provides information on the key topics of interest for the BC Interior region and Trans Mountain’s response to the interest or concern.

Page 82

TABLE 1.6.2-1

KEY INTERESTS OR CONCERNS – BC INTERIOR,

Location in NEB Filed Key Topic Interest or Concern Summary Response Materials NEB Filing ID Corporate Policy Does the condition rating take into account Visual impact has not been considered N/A the parks status of land? Your offsets habitat previously in this model but there may be a multiplier is low. How do visual values work way to factor it in. “At risk” refers more to an into the model? Grasslands are rare imminent threat not a reference to species or shouldn’t they be considered at risk? land designation Grasslands take a long time to regenerate not 2.5 years. Environment - Terrestrial Soil contamination resulting from construction In Canada, clean-up criteria emphasize Volume 7, Risk A3S4V6 Page 19 of 137 or a spill. Recommend that a soil baseline is exposure pathways based on direct contact Assessment, recorded before and after either event. between contaminated soils and both plant Section 6.2.2.1 roots and soil invertebrates. This emphasis is based on the need to preserve the principal ecological functions performed by the soil and the low bioaccumulation rates of petroleum

Page hydrocarbons that would tend to limit exposure to birds and mammals. The Canada-Wide Standard for Petroleum 83 Hydrocarbons in Soil (Canadian Council of

Ministers of the Environment [CCME] 2008) provides benchmark values for the protection of plants and soil invertebrates exposed to hydrocarbons. Additional information on soil effects and response strategies is provided in the discussion of economic effects on agriculture and forestry in Section 6.3.1.

TABLE 1.6.2-1 Cont’d

Location in NEB Filed Key Topic Interest or Concern Summary Response Materials NEB Filing ID Impact on landscape of using herbicides for Application of herbicides to grassland Volume 5A ESA A3S1QP Page 197 of invasive species vegetation communities during all pipeline Biophysical, 403 construction phases (i.e., pre-construction Section 7.2.9.6 and construction) and operations phase (i.e., post-construction environmental monitoring) could cause an alteration in the composition of the vegetation community, depending on the area, quantity and specificity of herbicide applied. However, the use of best practices in weed control and vegetation management reduces the potential for herbicide drift or effects to unintended areas or species. Vegetation management conducted by mechanical means (i.e., cutting or mowing) will be favoured; if vegetation management by chemical means is the only feasible method it should be conducted with equipment that ensures the specificity of the application.

Page Impact on species at risk within the Trans Mountain is committed to environmental Volume 5A - ESA - A3S1QP Page 179 of Coquihalla Summit Recreation Area. stewardship. Detailed EPPs will be developed Biophysical 403

84 Spill impact to Coquihalla River of summer for the Project. Trans Mountain owns, Volume 7 – Risk

run, Steelhead habitat, Dolly Varden Char maintains and operates dedicated spill Assessments and and salmon spawning downstream response equipment at strategic points along Management of Pipeline the existing TMPL system. and Facility Spills Sedimentation and erosion of the valley As part of Trans Mountain’s commitment to Volume 5A - ESA - A3S1QP Page 15 of 403 where the alternate route being proposed environmental protection, Trans Mountain will Biophysical through Finn Creek Provincial Park. Soil minimize potential adverse impacts to erosion impacts can already be seen where wetlands by repairing any erosion control or the powerline was placed. restoration features until permanent revegetation is successful. Wildlife and vegetation in North Thompson Through the development of thousands of Volume 5A - ESA - A3S1QP Page 220 of Provincial Park – moose, deer and black bear kilometres of pipelines, there has been a Biophysical 403 North to South migration. Salamander, frogs number of mitigation strategies developed that and toads; squirrels; 5-6 species of berries. can be employed to minimize impacts to Volume 6B – A3S2S3 Page 432 of wildlife and wildlife habitat. These can range Environmental 461 from avoiding important wildlife periods Protection Plan (EPP) through the timing of construction to Appendix L conducting detailed surveys immediately prior to construction. A detailed EPP will be submitted to the NEB as part of the Application which will document every linear metre of the construction right-of-way and mitigation strategies to help avoid or minimize environmental impacts from construction.

TABLE 1.6.2-1 Cont’d

Location in NEB Filed Key Topic Interest or Concern Summary Response Materials NEB Filing ID Old growth forests on the east side of the A Weed and Vegetation Management Plan Volume 6B, Appendix C, A3S2S3 Page 205 of right-of-way in Finn Creek Provincial Park. (WVMP) has been prepared to meet the Weed and Vegetation 461 Weed introduction in Finn Creek Provincial requirements for NEB filing as part of the Management Plan Park especially knapweed. Project application and to address Trans Bull trout are common to Finn Creek in the Mountain’s short and long-term problem Park area. vegetation monitoring and management procedures, decision criteria, as well as accountability and responsibility for the construction and operational phases of the Project. Nuisance Scenic impact and visible construction from The Project may have visual impacts related Volume 5B – Socio- A3S1S7 Page 65 of 245 Trans Canada Trail and Kettle Valley Railway to the temporary presence of construction Economic, Table 7.2.4.2 activities. A summary of mitigation measures Volume 6B and 6C A3S2S3 Page 110 of provided in Table 7.2.4-2, Volume 5B was 461 principally developed in accordance with Trans Mountain standards and industry best A3S2S6 Page 80 of 305 practices. A full list of socio-economic

Page mitigation measures is found in the Socio Economic Management Plan (SEMP) of A3S2S4 Drawing 41

85 Volume 6B, as well as in the Pipeline EPP

and Facilities EPP of Volumes 6B and 6C.

TABLE 1.6.2-1 Cont’d

Location in NEB Filed Key Topic Interest or Concern Summary Response Materials NEB Filing ID Routing Have we talked seriously about considering The corridor selection process Trans Volume 2, Sections 4.2 A3S0R0 Page 17 of 43 the alternate route through Westsyde? What Mountain adopted for this Project is described and Volume 4A, is the period of disturbance to Westsyde in Sections 4.2 of Volume 2 and in Sections 2.8 A3S0Y8 Page 34 of 110 community members? Is there any way to Sections 2.8 of Volume 4A of the Application. replace the deactivated pipe with 36” for the During the consultation process, strong Volume 5B, A3S1R6 Page 12 of 39 Project? Was boring considered? community support was expressed by some Sections 4.2.3, 7.2.4, stakeholders for a corridor west of Westsyde 7.2.5 and 7.2.6 A3S1S7 Page 60, 118 through the protected area following a FOTS right-of-way (see Plate 3), while others raised and 151 of 245 Volume 5D Socio- concerns about effects of the Project on the Economic protected area. Both alternative corridors Technical Report were studied and evaluated from an environmental and socio-economic perspective. It was concluded that, assuming BC Parks approval, the West Alternative is preferred because it crosses slightly fewer watercourses, considerably fewer private

Page parcels and avoids the community of Westsyde. BC Parks recently approved Trans Mountain’s Stage 1 request to proceed to a 86 Stage 2 application in the BC Parks boundary

adjustment process. The Stage 2 application would also incorporate the 2013 additional lands described above On March 29, [2014] Vancouver Sun had a Buried pipelines are typical of pipeline N/A N/A photograph of fiber optics on pipelines. The installation and are proven to be the safest. image was of a pipeline over ground. This is An above ground pipeline would create a a fragile area where grasslands don’t significant disruption to the local landscape. recover. You need to do something very different and unique here. Can you stay above ground to avoid disturbing the ecosystem? We fought hard to protect this land and make it a protected area. Grasslands makes up approximately 1% of BC land area. Safety When expansion is completed will flyover Requirements for flyover frequency would be N/A N/A frequency increase? assessed once the new pipeline becomes operational and will be in accordance with regulatory requirements.

TABLE 1.6.2-1 Cont’d

Location in NEB Filed Key Topic Interest or Concern Summary Response Materials NEB Filing ID How do you deal with spills when combined Trans Mountain would first remove as much N/A N/A with a second event – like a long term power product from the segment by operating the outage? Down Stream pump stations. And shutting down the Up Stream Stations. Once complete Trans Mountain would shut down the complete pipeline as well as isolate the segment of pipeline where the spill event took place and follow our Emergency Response Plan to control, contain, and clean up at the site. As well as repair the pipeline. Trans Mountain’s pre 2005 pump stations have a backup Generators to maintain communications with our Control Center Operator (approximately 48 hours of fuel). Although the pumps could not be run, the station isolation valves can be closed. And the station can be monitored by our Control Centre Operations (CCO).

Page The newer stations have a UPS (uninterrupted power supply) battery system to maintain communication with the CCO. 87 They are also capable of a one-time closure

of the station isolation valves (Approximately 5 hrs. of life). The station would remain down and isolated until power was restored. Without main power no stations will be able to be operated. So the whole line will be shut down, and would remain down until the spill was contained and recovered, and the line permitted to safely restart. Under extreme long term power disruption conditions, back-up power generators would be mobilized, as needed. What if a wildfire impacts the pump station? Trans Mountain is prepared not only for oil Volume 7 – Risk A3S4V5 Page 46 of 84 releases, but a variety of emergencies, such Assessment & as fire, security breaches and natural Management disasters including earthquakes, floods, 7 of Pipeline & Facility lightning strikes and avalanches. Teams Spills prepare for these worst-case scenarios using Section 3.2.2 the Trans Mountain ERP and the ICS. From alert to isolation, this procedure takes about 15 minutes or less.

TABLE 1.6.2-1 Cont’d

Location in NEB Filed Key Topic Interest or Concern Summary Response Materials NEB Filing ID Socio-Economic Blocking trail access to Kettle Valley Railway. During construction Trans Mountain will Volume 5B, A3S1S0 Page 64 of 64 Blocking Coquihalla Summit Recreation Area provide advanced and ongoing notification to Sections 5.4, 5.6, 7.2.4 access points could negatively impact the users of the area to ensure they are fully and 7.2.6 A3S1S4 Page 3 of 175 District of Hope’s tourism especially ski aware of the activities that will occur and are touring and snowshoeing. The Recreation occurring. Should the Project affect Volume 5D, Socio- A3S2I9 Page 34 of 75 Area is the single biggest expansion recreational users’ infrastructure during Economic Technical opportunity for Hope tourism. Clearing of construction, mitigation processes will ensure Report vegetation may result in avalanche hazard on the infrastructure is left in the same, if not steep slopes if the route traverses popular ski better condition after construction. Actual routes. Adjustments to routes and signage as methods will be discussed with landowners required. and or permit holders. Trans Mountain is open to discussing opportunities to leave infrastructure post-construction to benefit recreational users.

As with all of its construction Projects, Trans Mountain will reclaim any areas affected by

Page the proposed pipeline including the pipeline right-of-way and surrounding areas following

88 construction.

TABLE 1.6.2-1 Cont’d

Location in NEB Filed Key Topic Interest or Concern Summary Response Materials NEB Filing ID Birdwatchers frequent the ridge by Westsyde Trans Mountain will work with Environment Volume 5A - ESA - A3S1L5 Page 1 and 2 of for bird viewing. There is a burrowing owl Canada and comply with the Migratory Birds Biophysical 74 area where birds return to naturally north of Convention Act and Migratory Birds Sanctuary KP 814. Studies have been compiled by Regulations, as well as any provincial and Volume 6B EPP A3S 2S3 Table L-2 Ducks Unlimited for bird use of wetlands territorial wildlife agencies related to the Page 439 of 461 along Duck Lake Road in Lac du Bois Project components and impacts. Clearing Protected Area. and preconstruction activities will be conducted outside minimum migratory bird Sharp Tail Grouse Leks and Swifts nesting RAP of May 1 to July 31, where practical. In areas on the face of the ridge along Lac du the event the schedule changes and clearing Bois Protected Area. activities are planned during the migratory bird RAP, a migratory bird nest sweep will be conducted. In the event an active nest is found, a protective buffer will be established around the nest. The size of the buffer will be influenced by the status of the bird. Typically a 30 m buffer is applied to a songbird nest and a 100 m buffer around waterfowl or raptor nests. Page

Every effort is made to minimize impact to 89 wildlife, watercourses and key wildlife

biodiversity zones. Volume 6B documents every linear metre of the construction right-of- way and mitigation strategies to help avoid or minimize environmental impacts from construction.

TABLE 1.6.2-1 Cont’d

Location in NEB Filed Key Topic Interest or Concern Summary Response Materials NEB Filing ID Othello Road (RK 1036 – 1RK 1038) resident The NEB has produced a very comprehensive Volume 3C – A3S0V2 concerns about construction - residents guide for landowners and the public that Landowner already have the existing right-of-way in their includes details about the regulatory process Relations backyards and will have additional impacts governing pipeline Projects. This information from TMEP. is available at www.neb-one.gc.ca. Over and above legal rights landowners have, Trans Mountain greatly values and works to protect the good relationships developed with landowners over the past 60 years since the pipeline was first put into service.

Page amicable agreements with each landowner. In cases where Trans Mountain is unable to reach a mutually agreeable settlement with a 90 landowner, the NEB will provide a multi-step

process to resolve differences as part of the routing review and approval process.

TABLE 1.6.2-1 Cont’d

Location in NEB Filed Key Topic Interest or Concern Summary Response Materials NEB Filing ID Hunting of deer and mountain sheep in park. Trans Mountain will employ an “early in/early Volume 6B A3S2S3 Page 432 of Collection of stinging nettles, devils club and out” approach by initiating construction Environmental 461 ice cream berries for medicinal purposes. activities as early as possible in the winter and Protection Plan (EPP), Medicinal plants are found most commonly in working expeditiously to limit late winter Appendix L gullies. activities. Additionally, Trans Mountain will discuss the timing of their activity with Alberta Energy Regulator (AER) and maintain contact with AER during the construction period to advise them of the construction progress and anticipated completion date within Key Wildlife Biodiversity Zones. Construction, routine maintenance and operation activities will be scheduled outside the spring period for caribou (generally mid-March to mid-July), unless otherwise approved by AER.

Every effort is made to minimize impact to wildlife, watercourses and key wildlife

Page biodiversity zones. Volume 6B documents every linear metre of the construction right-of- way and mitigation strategies to help avoid or 91 minimize environmental impacts from

construction.

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

1.6.3 Key Topics of Interest or Concern – Lower Mainland/Fraser Valley, BC Figure 1.6.3-1 displays the key topics of interest or concern in the Lower Mainland/Fraser Valley, BC raised since the filing of the Application (May 2012 to July 31, 2013), the Consultation Update No. 1 (August 1 to December 31, 2013) or during this reporting period. This includes all comments from all engagement activities during the reporting period including, the Workshops and Open Houses, social media, stakeholder meetings, and inquiries to the Project phone line and email.

Key Interests/Concerns, Lower Mainland/Fraser Valley, BC Community Capacity Corporate Policy Socio- Access Economic

Safety Engagement Process

Environment - Terrestrial

Routing Environment - Marine

Regulatory Nuisance Operations & Management

Figure 1.6.3-1 Key Topics of Interest or Concern in the Lower Mainland/Fraser Valley, BC

Table 1.6.3-1 provides information on the key topics of interest for Lower Mainland/Fraser Valley, BC and Trans Mountain’s response to the interest or concern.

Page 92

TABLE 1.6.3-1

KEY INTERESTS OR CONCERNS – LOWER MAINLAND/FRASER VALLEY, BC

Key Location in NEB Topic Interest or Concern Summary Response Filed Materials NEB Filing ID Access Tunnel alignment across the The need for construction of tunnels will be determined during the detailed Volume 4a Project A3S0Y8 Page 43 Fraser River and potential conflict engineering and design phase and the type, and extent of the tunnel support Design & of 110 with their exit point. systems required will be determined during detailed design and construction. Execution – Engineering Section 2.10.5 Engagement Process Concern that the February 12, Trans Mountain is committed to meaningful engagement. Trans Mountain is Volume 3A – A3S0R2 - All 2014 deadline (participation in encouraging participation and discussion, because we believe your questions, Consultation NEB process) is only window of concerns and comments can help us to develop and build a better pipeline and Engagement, opportunity to have a voice foster responsible marine shipping of petroleum products. Opportunities for Consultation Update stakeholders to provide feedback, express concerns and submit suggestions No. 1 will be available through the entire process until the proposed expanded pipeline operations begin, if the Project is approved. Concern for new deviation A proposed pipeline corridor to provide an alternate connection between the Trans Mountain A3W9H8 Page through Redwoods Golf Course, existing TMPL right-of-way and the Redwoods Golf Course. The proposed Response to NEB 93 of 421 and the potential construction of pipeline corridor leaves the TMPL right-of-way at 224 Street heading north. IR No. 1.12a Page the pipeline in the ROW of 88th After crossing 88 Avenue the corridor turns west and rejoins the revised Avenue. If KMC were willing to proposed pipeline corridor. 93 route the Project east of the golf course, the Township of Langley Trans Mountain’s intention is to propose a route that minimizes impact to would consider allowing the residences and communities (Volume 5A, Section 4). This proposed construction of the pipeline within alternative pipeline corridor is no longer being considered as it does not the ROW of 88th Street. currently meet Trans Mountain’s routing objectives and criteria (Volume 4A, Section 2.8). In Q3 2014, Trans Mountain will file Consultation Update No. 2 which will report on the outcomes of our ongoing engagement activities, including routing, with Aboriginal groups, landowners and stakeholders for the period of January 1, 2014 to April 30, 2014. Environment - Marine Concern for marine sediment Marine field surveys were completed in summer/fall 2012 and will continue on Volume 8A – Marine A3S4X6 Page 9 contaminants, eel grass recovery, a more limited basis through the winter and into spring/summer 2013. Marine Transportation of 11 ballast water impacts from environmental studies will focus on the area surrounding the Burnaby introduction of invasive species Westridge Marine Terminal. These studies will include, but are not limited to, and artificial reef creation. marine sediments, invertebrates, vegetation, mammals, birds and fish species. An environmental assessment of the marine transportation and the incremental effects of the increased tanker traffic will be completed.

TABLE 1.6.3-1 Cont’d

Key Location in NEB Topic Interest or Concern Summary Response Filed Materials NEB Filing ID What thought has been given to The Trans Mountain Expansion Project (the Project) is a proposal to expand Assessment of A3Y2E6 Page 1 locating the terminus at either the existing Trans Mountain Pipeline System, including the existing terminal Alternatives – of 754 Roberts Bank (or thereabouts) or facilities. Paralleling and expanding existing facilities reduces new disturbance, Pipeline and Termini at Cherry Point in Washington uses existing infrastructure and minimizes environmental effects. This is IR Reference: City State. If Westridge is still the consistent with good Project planning and best environmental practices. of Burnaby IR No. preferred terminus, what factors While good planning and best practices favour using existing facilities, this 1.01.01a led Kinder Morgan Canada Inc. does not reduce the rigour of conducting an assessment of the potential (KMC) to rule out alternatives? impacts associated with the expansion. Early in Project planning Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC (Trans Mountain) tested the basic premise that expanding existing facilities is the most responsible approach to the development. Potential alternative marine terminal locations were considered based on the feasibility of coincident marine and pipeline access and screened based on technical, economic and environmental considerations. These alternative locations included Kitimat, BC and Roberts Bank in Delta, BC. Trans Mountain ultimately concluded that constructing and operating a new marine terminal and new supporting infrastructure would result in significantly greater cost, larger footprint and additional environmental effects, as compared to expanding existing facilities. Accordingly, Trans Mountain did not continue with a further assessment of alternative termini for the Project. Page Concerns about an increase in As part of our Facilities Application a Marine Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Volume 8B - Marine A3S4J7, emissions from the major Marine Transportation Technical Report was completed by RWDI Consulting Air Quality and A3S4J8, 94 increase in oil tankers, anchored Engineers and Scientists, the complete report can be found Greenhouse Gas

in Burrard Inlet, awaiting access http://transmountain.s3.amazonaws.com/application/V8B_1_of_6_TR_8B1_TO Marine A3S4J9, to the Westridge loading facility. _TR_8B4-MAR_TRANS_TECH_RPT.pdf. Transportation A3S4K0, How do the emissions from Technical Report tankers compares to the A3S4K1 emissions from cruise ships?

How would Trans Mountain take Oiled wildlife response will be included as part of our review and improvements Volume 7 – Risk A3S4V5 Page 64 care of any oiled waterfowl in the outlined in Volume 7, Section 4.8, Assessment & of 84 event of a spill in Burrard Inlet? http://transmountain.s3.amazonaws.com/application14/V7_RISK_ASSESS_M Management GMT_SPILLS/064.html?sidebar=outlines of the Facilities Application. 7 of Pipeline & Facility Spills Section 4.8

TABLE 1.6.3-1 Cont’d

Key Location in NEB Topic Interest or Concern Summary Response Filed Materials NEB Filing ID What are the mitigation measures All Project-related tankers are required to adhere to federal standards that may Volume A3S4Y3 Page 19 related to the marine operations reduce air emissions, including standards for bunker fuel. 8A,Technical of 294 at Westridge Terminal which has If Metro Vancouver is interested, the air quality assessment is Volume 8A, Reports the potential of increasing CACs, Section 4.3.3. Section 4.3.3. A3S1R0 Page 9 VOC and Ozone? There are also some measures in Volume 8A accidents and malfunctions of 260 (Section 4.3.13), relating to an over pressurized tanker situation. For example: Volume 5A - ESA – • Each tanker must be outfitted with pressure relief valves on each cargo Biophysical tank as a safety measure. Section 7.6.4 • Tankers generally reduce the risk of emissions building in tanks by keeping (Table 7.6.4-1). a record of varying tank pressure, cooling the decks during daytime, cooling the cargo by taking water in the surrounding ballast tanks if possible, and loading the tanks that are used to as full as possible instead of leaving empty space in some tanks. • KMC will screen the tankers nominated to call on the Westridge Marine Terminal to check that they are implementing a VOC management plan. Continued from above While tankers are docked at Westridge Marine Terminal, there are measures Continued from Continued from being taken to ensure emissions are reduced. These can be found in Volume above above 5A, Section 7.6.4 (Table 7.6.4-1). For example:

Page • Install vapour recovery units to capture vapours from tankers during product loading.

95 • Complete engineering design to find suitable vapour destruction systems

for VOCs and reduced sulphurs is currently being updated. The preliminary design considered an absorption vessel for removing sulphur compounds and activated carbon adsorption for removing hydrocarbons. Design of vapour recovery system will be completed during detailed engineering design. A backup combustion unit is being used to assist with the destruction of vapours when a third tanker is berthed and being loaded. The following is a new measure not previously listed: • All empty tanker holds are pressurized with inert gas from boiler exhaust before they enter the emissions control area (ECA) to maintain a non- flammable atmosphere and suppress VOC emissions during loading. Environment - Terrestrial Concern expressed for long term The Government of BC has in place several provincial land use management Volume 5B - ESA - A3S1S0 Page 64 and short term impacts the plans for parks and protected areas along the existing TMPL system. Socio-Economic of 64 Project would have on Colony Farm Regional Park and Brunette A3S1S4 Page 3 River corridor. of 175 Migration of salamanders and To protect riparian habitat and watersheds, crossings of wetlands and Volume 5A – A3S1L3 Page 84 frogs in the wet areas in the Park watercourses will be planned during suitable ground and weather conditions, Biophysical and 108 of 150 with the consideration for sensitive fish and wildlife timing windows. Section 3.1.5.6

TABLE 1.6.3-1 Cont’d

Key Location in NEB Topic Interest or Concern Summary Response Filed Materials NEB Filing ID Post breeding season (outside Appropriate mitigation (e.g., scheduling to avoid periods when birds Volume 5A, A3S1Q9 Page protected bird nesting window) congregate, protective buffers) will be implemented to reduce the potential Section 7.2.10 220 of 403 behavior of migratory birds at Project effects on migratory birds. Volume 5C, Wildlife Colony Farm Regional Park is a Technical Report, A3S2R5 Page 53 very important time. The birds eat Wildlife Modelling of 162 and stay longer to gain strength and Species for migration. Accounts Technical A3S2S3 Table L- Report 2 Page 439 of Volume 6B 461

Vedder Aquifer water source is Vedder Aquifer will be assessed as a high consequence area. N/A N/A non-replaceable “high consequence area” and needs to be protected Abbotsford – Sumas Aquifer Abbotsford – Sumas Aquifer will be assessed as a high consequence area. N/A N/A should be considered “high consequence” as it has high

Page usage for green houses, dairy and poultry as well as feeds the

96 City of Abbotsford wells

Important salmon in bearing Fish and fish habitat assessments (Fisheries [British Columbia] Technical Volume 5C ESA - A3S2C1, creeks in Abbotsford (e.g., Report of Volume 5C) were conducted in order to document existing fish and Biophysical A3S2C2 - All Nathan, west, near Ledgeview, fish habitat conditions at proposed watercourse crossings with fish and fish Technical Reports near Fraser) habitat. Information will be provided to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) to assist with any case-specific reviews of water crossings they may need to conduct. Impact to land (environment) in Volume 7 provides a comprehensive overview of the measures to prevent oil Volume 7, A3S4V5 Page 30 event of oil spill spills, risks related to oil spills, emergency response in the event of a spill, fate Section 2.0, 5.0 and and 75 of 84 and behaviour of spills in both fresh and brackish water, the ecological and 6.0 human health risks associated with a spill; both terrestrial and marine, and a A3S4V6 Page 16 detailed assessment of KMC’s financial capacity to respond to a spill. of 137 Concern about tree removal: In general, Trans Mountain’s practice is to first minimize any potential impacts Township of Langley A3Z2A9 Page 22 West side of golf course is treed, or damages to the extent practical by using and adapting responsive IR No. 1.11 of 44 but pipeline requires no trees on construction and operations practices; and second, provide mitigation to ROW. Trees take a long time to reverse or treat any remaining impacts. Trans Mountain believes that through grow. Langley bylaw for cutting these measures, most impacts will be managed. trees. Trenchless = no need to remove trees

TABLE 1.6.3-1 Cont’d

Key Location in NEB Topic Interest or Concern Summary Response Filed Materials NEB Filing ID Negative impacts to Stoney Impacts from a potential oil spill on water quality, sediment quality, aquatic Volume 7, A3S4V6 Page 21 Creek – fish, riparian habitat, lots invertebrates, aquatic vegetation, shoreline and riparian vegetation and Section 6.2.3 of 137 of work done to restore creek wetlands, fish and wildlife are drawn from a review of freshwater spill incidents protect shoreline in event of a (Qualitative Ecological Risk Assessment of Pipeline Spills Technical Report spill [TR 7-1]). Soil contamination during In Canada, clean-up criteria emphasize exposure pathways based on direct Volume 7, Risk A3S4V6 Page 19 construction and operation contact between contaminated soils and both plant roots and soil invertebrates. Assessment and 29 of 137 This emphasis is based on the need to preserve the principal ecological Section 6.2.2.1 and functions performed by the soil and the low bioaccumulation rates of petroleum 6.3.1.1 A3S1L5 Page 34 hydrocarbons that would tend to limit exposure to birds and mammals. The of 74 Canada-Wide Standard for Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Soil (Canadian Council Volume 5 – ESA – of Ministers of the Environment [CCME] 2008) provides benchmark values for Biophysical the protection of plants and soil invertebrates exposed to hydrocarbons. Section 5.2.4 Additional information on soil effects and response strategies is provided in the discussion of economic effects on agriculture and forestry in Volume 7 of the Application. Movement of sediments and During construction, disturbance to riparian vegetation will be kept to a Volume 5A ESA A3S1Q9 Page erosion of banks of Bridal Creek. minimum, leaving as much existing riparian vegetation intact as practical and Biophysical, 140 of 403 efforts to control sedimentation and erosion in disturbed areas will be Section 7.2.7.6 Page implemented. Alteration to riparian vegetation will also be reduced during frozen ground conditions. Revegetation mitigation measures are presented in

97 the Pipeline EPP (Volume 6B). Regulatory Five year monitoring for Trans Mountain is committed to best practices in reclamation, always striving Volume 6A- A3S2S1 Page 9 restoration seems short. for opportunities leading to advancement. As with all of its construction Environmental of 42 projects, Trans Mountain will reclaim any areas that are affected by the Project. Compliance Trans Mountain is committed to full reclamation of the pipeline right-of-way and A3S2S3 Page surrounding areas following construction. Post-construction environmental Volume 6B – 396 of 461 monitoring is discussed in Volume 6A. Mitigation measures for vegetation are Environmental outlined in the Pipeline EPP (Volume 6B). Protection Plan Will information gathered from the As the Project progresses, Trans Mountain will continue its consultation, and Volume 5D -Socio- A3S2I9 Page 14 Parks Permit be provided to the parallel assessment and permitting process, with BC Parks and other Economic Technical of 175 NEB? I do not want any pipelines regulatory authorities pertaining to proposed works in provincial parks and Report Section 7.1 through Parks and am very protected areas. unhappy with Bill 4 that was Information on protected or conservation areas with an environmental or passed to allow more industry biological protection purpose is found in the Wildlife Technical Report, research to be completed in Fisheries (Alberta) Technical Report, Fisheries (British Columbia) Technical Parks. Report, Vegetation Technical Report and Wetland Evaluation Technical Report in Volume 5C. Refer to Section 7.1 of the Socio-Economic Technical Report in Volume 5D for a full discussion of parks and protected areas by socio- economic region.

TABLE 1.6.3-1 Cont’d

Key Location in NEB Topic Interest or Concern Summary Response Filed Materials NEB Filing ID Can KMC advise on who is the The NEB has the authority to review and make recommendations to approve N/A N/A approving authority for the new the proposed pipeline. The purpose of the NEB is to regulate pipelines, energy pipelines? development and trade in the Canadian public interest. Final approval for federally regulated pipelines is through the Governor in Council. Can the City of Coquitlam refuse The NEB has produced a very comprehensive guide for landowners and the Volume 3C – A3S0V2 Page 97 to have the pipeline on the street, public that includes details about the regulatory process governing pipeline Landowner and 100 of 103 on private property or are they Projects. This information is available at www.neb-one.gc.ca. Over and above Relations obligated to approve with legal rights landowners have, Trans Mountain greatly values and works to reasonable conditions? protect the good relationships developed with landowners over the past 60 years since the pipeline was first put into service.

A key objective for Trans Mountain continues to be to treat each landowner fairly and equitably. For those who may be directly affected by the proposed expansion Project, Trans Mountain will identify and work to address landowners’ concerns and questions about the Project. Our goal will be to reach amicable agreements with each landowner. In cases where Trans Mountain is unable to reach a mutually agreeable settlement with a landowner, the NEB will provide a multi-step process to address differences of opinions as part of the routing review and approval process. Page Routing Agricultural considerations for An Agricultural Management Plan has been developed to particularly reduce Volume 5D-TR-6 A3S2K9 – All 98 construction and operations of effects on agriculture, which includes measures related to weed management, ESA

the pipeline. Disruption to current re-seeding, soil compaction, livestock access, drainage and irrigation lines, agricultural land uses – stressing management of crop disruption, and crop and productivity loss. animals, ground or storage pits and recommendation to place the pipeline in a deeper trench. MOTI is concerned that a pipeline Trans Mountain is fully committed to environmental management, protection Volume 6 – A3S2S3 Page 25 corridor will sterilize their ROW. and stewardship of the land during the construction and operation of all its Environmental of 461 They see a high level of risk with facilities. Protection Plan the pipeline being the second priority to the pipeline in case of emergency repairs (e.g.; in case of flood.) Routing through Colony Farms As described in the Application, Section 4.0 of Volume 2A, protection of the City_of_Coquitlam_I A3X5Z4 Page 3 Regional Park environment is essential to the success of the Project and is a key R_No._1 of 32 performance objective of Trans Mountain. Examples of Trans Mountain’s commitment to preserving and protecting the environment can be found in the Application, Section 1.2.1.7 Environmental Stewardship, and Section 1.2.1.8 Award-winning Projects the Anchor Loop Expansion of Volume 2A. Protection of the environment, including Colony Farms, through avoidance will always remain the first priority where practical.

TABLE 1.6.3-1 Cont’d

Key Location in NEB Topic Interest or Concern Summary Response Filed Materials NEB Filing ID The route corridor is on the Trans Mountain Geohazard Management Program is one of the key tools for Volume 5A - ESA – A3S1C6 Page 1 shadow side of the mountain and managing the risk to our pipeline infrastructure. The Program includes regular Biophysical of 18 there is potential for a landslide. site inspections, detailed site studies, monitoring, and mitigation, and involves Volume 4B - Project In the winter the park is closed close work with specialized professional geoscience, engineering, and Design and because of landslide risk. Is there environmental consultants, who are experts in geohazards such as river Execution – more terrain risk in the road vs. erosion, landslides and earthquakes. Construction the Park? Our legend says the river used to flow along the base and a massive landslide over the ancient village pushed the river. It is unstable terrain and some times in the year activities are restricted because of it. Found it interesting your reports don’t find it to be a risk. Safety Stability and seismic concerns in Through its experience with managing pipelines in the varied terrain of North Volume 7, A3S4V5 Page 35 Colony Farm Regional Park due America, Trans Mountain is very aware of the effect of the geologic Section 3.0 – Oil of 84 to low lands near Fraser River environment on its pipeline infrastructure. Our Geohazard Management Spill Risk Page Program is one of the key tools for managing the risks associated with natural Assessment hazards to pipeline infrastructure. Details about our seismic safety measures

99 and plans to ensure the proposed pipeline anticipates and mitigates effects of an earthquake can be found here: http://www.transmountain.com/seismicsafety-measures Socio-Economic Reduce restrictions to agricultural Trans Mountain will work with local landowners to determine agricultural N/A N/A use by burying the pipeline practices, including deep sub soiling, to determine depth of cover deeper requirements. Property devaluation of Homeowners who are directly affected property owners with a right-of-way on Volume 2, A3S0R0 Page 30 residential properties (Surrey) their property will receive compensation for land rights, damages and Section 5.0 – Land - 43 inconvenience in accordance with requirements under Sections 86, 87 and 97 Relations, Rights of the NEB Act. Please see the NEB Guide Pipeline Regulation in Canada: A and Acquisitions Guide for Landowners and the Public for more information on these requirements. This Guide can be obtained at the following website: http://www.neb-one.gc.ca/clf-nsi/rthnb/pblcprtcptn/pplnrgltncnd/pplnrgltncnd- eng.pdf. Large wetland (environmental Where possible, wetlands will be restored to their original configurations and Volume 5A - ESA - A3S1L5 - All concern) north of CN and west of contours. Trans Mountain will comply with the applicable permit conditions Biophysical 216 large wetland; stay to issued by federal, provincial and local permitting agencies to restore baseline existing ROW to Burnaby. Need wetland function. to maintain natural habitat of the area

TABLE 1.6.3-1 Cont’d

Key Location in NEB Topic Interest or Concern Summary Response Filed Materials NEB Filing ID Impact to Highland Creek and From the commencement of staking to final cleanup, a particular parcel of land Volume 4B - A3S1K6 Page 24 Madison Park (96 and 217) on could be disrupted for one to two months. This timing is affected by many Construction of 28 west side of golf course – noise, variables; however, every effort is made to minimize impact to landowners. In dust, fumes, exhaust areas where there may be a concern regarding the safety of the public, A3S1T7 Page 43 restricted areas are established. Noise, dust and other disturbances are to 179 mitigated to avoid the impact on people near the construction. The potential effects on human receptors are not anticipated to extend beyond the Acoustic Environment local study area. Trans Mountain will use well maintained equipment to reduce air pollution and unnecessary noise and restrict the duration that vehicles and equipment are allowed to sit and idle to less than one hour unless air temperatures are less than 0°C. Revisit Salmon River routing In accordance with routing objectives, including alignment with existing utility or Volume 2, Section A3S0R0 Page 23 option – reduced environmental transportation corridors, Trans Mountain assessed the existing CN Railway 4.2.3.3 and 24 of 43 issues? (Compare Redwoods Company right-of-way and new South Fraser Perimeter Road corridor on the Nature Park to Salmon River south side of the Fraser River. Accordingly, the proposed pipeline corridor flood plain) leaves the existing TMPL right-of-way near a golf course and heads north on new corridor a short distance across farmland in the Salmon River valley before reaching the CN right-of-way. Minor deviations in the Salmon River area are being considered to minimize impacts to a local natural area further north if Page possible before joining the CN right-of-way. The routing selection process is described in Section 2.8 of Volume 4A. 100

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

1.6.4 Key Topics of Interest or Concern – Mainland Coastal, BC Figure 1.6.4-1 displays the key topics of interest or concern in the Mainland Coastal, BC region raised since the filing of the Application (May 2012 to July 31, 2013), the Consultation Update No. 1 (August 1 to December 31, 2013) or during this reporting period. This includes all comments from all engagement activities during the reporting period including, the Workshops and Open Houses, social media, stakeholder meetings, and inquiries to the Project phone line and email.

Figure 1.6.4-1 Key Topics of Interest or Concern for the Mainland Coastal, BC Region

Table 1.6.4-1 provides information on the key topics of interest for Mainland Coastal, BC and Trans Mountain’s response to the interest or concern.

Page 101

TABLE 1.6.4-1

KEY INTERESTS OR CONCERNS – MAINLAND COASTAL, BC

Location in NEB Filed Key Topic Interest or Concern Summary Response Materials NEB Filing ID Access Recreational boater access to Burrard Inlet See Volume 8A, Section 2.2 - Project- Volume 8A, Section 2.2 A3S4X4 Page 17 of 40 with increase in tanker traffic Related Changes to Marine Transportation - Project-Related and Traffic Volumes Changes to Marine Transportation and Traffic Volumes Community Capacity Building Emergency Response – ICS training for first EMSW consultation has been initiated and Volume 7, Section 4.7 – A3S4V5 Page 63 of 84 responders and emergency managers in feedback will be considered in developing Community Awareness municipalities and regional districts, the next phase of engagement on and Emergency participation in KMC exercises, involvement in emergency preparedness and response for Preparedness verification of control point locations for TMEP. expanded system Environment - Marine Offset the threat of marine oil spills with Anticipated Project effects on fish and fish Volume 8A, A3S4Y3 Page 237 and Page environmental investments. Do not impeded habitat and marine mammals can be found in Section 4.4.4 – Marine 240 of 294 but rather enhance the return of herring Volume 8A. Fish and Fish Habitat 102 fishery, marine mammals and the commercial A3S0Q8 Page 30 and salmon fishery that have been slowly Examples of Trans Mountain’s commitment Volume 8A, 31 of 45 recovering in the Salish Sea to preserving and protecting the environment Section 4.4.5 – Marine with investments in local environmental Mammals initiatives can be found in Section 1.2.1.7 A3S0R2 Page 40 of 74 Environmental Stewardship, and Volume 2, Section 1.2.1.8 Award-winning Projects the Section 1.2.1.7 – Anchor Loop Expansion of Volume 2a). Environmental Stewardship Trans Mountain has been is regularly involved in initiatives aiming to enhance the Volume 2, fish and wildlife habitat within the company’s Section 1.2.1.8 – Award- operating areas. winning Project, the Anchor Loop Expansion Engagement with local stakeholders to understand local concerns and priorities for Volume 3, Consultation environmental protection and enhancement Update No. 1 is ongoing.

TABLE 1.6.4-1 Cont'd

Location in NEB Filed Key Topic Interest or Concern Summary Response Materials NEB Filing ID Underwater noise – Is there an acceptable Trans Mountain is investigating potential Volume 8A, A3S4X9 Page 9 of 33 noise level? mitigation options such as acting as an Section 4.0 – ESA active participant in a joint industry- government advisory group that would be charged with determining and/or developing effective mitigation measures to reduce potential effects of underwater noise on marine mammals in the region. Information pertaining to underwater noise is discussed in Section 4.2.7, Marine Mammals. Shipping effects on marine mammals is an The increase in Project-related marine Volume 8A marine A3S4Y3 Page 66 of 294 international issue with local significance vessel traffic, and associated underwater transportation noise from tankers and tugs, may cause Section 4.3.7 sensory disturbance for marine mammals and the potential effects of the increase in Project-related marine vessel traffic on marine mammals is discussed in

Page Section 4.3.7 of Volume 8A. Environment - Terrestrial

103 Removal of invasive species near Westridge A weed and vegetation management plan Volume 6B, A3S2S3 Page 291 of Terminal while preparing for terminal (WVMP) has been prepared to meet the Section 14.0 – Weed 461

construction requirements for NEB filing as part of the and Vegetation Project application and to address Trans Management Plan A3S0R2 Page 40 of 74 Mountain’s short and long-term problem vegetation monitoring and management Volume 3, Consultation procedures, decision criteria, as well as Update No. 1 accountability and responsibility for the construction and operational phases of the Project.

Engagement with local stakeholders to understand local concerns and priorities for environmental protection and enhancement in Burrard Inlet near Westridge Terminal is ongoing.

TABLE 1.6.4-1 Cont'd

Location in NEB Filed Key Topic Interest or Concern Summary Response Materials NEB Filing ID Improve shoreline habitat for marine birds near Trans Mountain is willing to work Volume 8A: Marine A3S4X5 Page 5 of 9 Westridge terminal collaboratively with industry and government Transportation to understand and minimize the effects on Sections 4.2. 4.3, 4.4, A3S4Y3 Page 6 and marine wildlife and is supportive of a regional 5.6 and 5.7 214 of 294 and collaborative industry- government Volume 8B: Technical approach. Reports A3S5Q3 Page 4 of 29 Marine Resources – Marine Transportation A3S4Y9 Page 25 of 28 Technical Report Marine Birds – Marine A3S4J5 – All Page 1- Transportation Technical 173 Report

A3S4J6 – All Page 1-90 Operations and Maintenance What happens to pipe at end of its life? A comprehensive Abandonment Plan will be Volume 4C Project A3S1L1 Page 73 of 102 provided as part of Trans Mountain’s Design and Execution -

Page application for abandonment at the time of Operations and abandonment, as currently required under Maintenance

104 Section 74 of the Section 12.1 NEB Act, and Section 50 of the NEB OPR.

Regulatory Concern over number of interveners who were The regulatory process is under the purview N/A N/A not approved to participate in the NEB of the NEB. process. Routing Terminal location – other options such as Westridge Marine Terminal is a safe location Assessment of A3Y2E6 Page 330 of Roberts Bank and Cherry Point with access to spill response resources and Alternatives – Pipeline 754 it poses the least environmental impact by and Termini locating the expansion within the existing IR Reference: City of site. While Trans Mountain has considered Burnaby IR No. 1.01.01a alternatives to the proposed expansion of the existing marine terminal at Westridge, there is no compelling reason to justify a deviation from what is an existing corridor for petroleum transportation.

TABLE 1.6.4-1 Cont'd

Location in NEB Filed Key Topic Interest or Concern Summary Response Materials NEB Filing ID Continued from above The Trans Mountain Expansion Project (the Continued from above Project) is a proposal to expand the existing Trans Mountain Pipeline System, including the existing terminal facilities. Paralleling and expanding existing facilities reduces new disturbance, uses existing infrastructure and minimizes environmental effects. This is consistent with good project planning and best environmental practices. While good planning and best practices favour using existing facilities, this does not reduce the rigour of conducting an assessment of the potential impacts associated with the expansion. Early in Project planning Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC (Trans Mountain) tested the basic premise that expanding existing facilities is

Page the most responsible approach to the development. Potential alternative marine terminal locations were considered based on 105 the feasibility of coincident marine and

pipeline access and screened based on technical, economic and environmental considerations. These alternative locations included Kitimat, BC and Roberts Bank in Delta, BC. Trans Mountain ultimately concluded that constructing and operating a new marine terminal and new supporting infrastructure would result in significantly greater cost, larger footprint and additional environmental effects, as compared to expanding existing facilities. Accordingly, Trans Mountain did not continue with a further assessment of alternative termini for the Project.

TABLE 1.6.4-1 Cont'd

Location in NEB Filed Key Topic Interest or Concern Summary Response Materials NEB Filing ID Safety Human Health Risk to first responders Volume 7 of the Application provides a Volume 7, Section 4.7 – A3S4V5 Page 63 of 84 comprehensive overview of the measures to Community Awareness prevent oil spills, risks related to oil spills, and Emergency emergency response in the event of a spill, Preparedness fate and behaviour of spills in both fresh and brackish water, the ecological and human health risks associated with a spill for both terrestrial and a Westridge marine spill, and a detailed assessment of KMC’s financial capacity to respond to a spill. Human Health Risk of marine oil spills near Volume 7 provides a comprehensive Volume 8 - Marine A3S4Y3 Page 277 of urban environments overview of the measures to prevent oil Transportation 294 spills, risks related to oil spills, emergency Section 4.4.10 - response in the event of a spill, fate and behaviour of spills in both fresh and brackish water, the ecological and human health risks

Page associated with a spill for both terrestrial and a Westridge marine spill, and a detailed

106 assessment of KMC’s financial capacity to respond to a spill.

Concern regarding the clearance from bottom There is no proposed dredging of First or Volume 8A - Marine A3S4X4 Page 39 0f 40 of hull to ocean floor? Will dredging occur to Second Narrows by Trans Mountain for the Transportation ensure that there is always a specific proposed expansion Project. Limited Section 4.0 clearance? dredging will only be required for the expansion of Westridge Marine Terminal in Burnaby. Maintenance and dredging concerns to First Narrows fall within the stringent regulations and requirements of PMV (PMV). Socio-Economic There’s a bit of a social media furor over your No spill is acceptable to Trans Mountain and N/A N/A NEB submission, which talks about the while we are required by the NEB to explore positive economic benefits of oil spills. Can both the positive and negative socio- you explain why your report delves into that? economic effects of a spill, it in no way means we accept the inevitability of a spill, nor justify one. It's important to remember that this statement is part of a section of the Application that outlines the environmental and economic impacts of a hypothetical spill.

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

1.6.5 Key Topics of Interest or Concern – Island Coastal, BC Figure 1.6.5-1 displays the key topics of interest or concern in the Island Coastal, BC region raised since the filing of the Application (May 2012 to July 31, 2013), the Consultation Update No. 1 (August 1 to December 31, 2013) or during this reporting period. This includes all comments from all engagement activities during the reporting period including, the Workshops and Open Houses, social media, stakeholder meetings, and inquiries to the Project phone line and email.

Key Interests/Concerns, Island Coastal Community Capacity Access Corporate Policy

Socio-Economic

Engagement Process Safety

Environment - Routing Terrestrial

Regulatory Environment - Marine

Operations & Management Nuisance

Figure 1.6.5-1 Key Topics of Interest or Concern for the Island Coastal, BC Region

Table 1.6.5-1 provides information on the key topics of interest for Island Coastal and Trans Mountain’s response to the interest or concern.

Page 107

TABLE 1.6.5-1

KEY INTERESTS OR CONCERNS – ISLAND COASTAL, BC

Location in NEB Filed Key Topic Interest or Concern Summary Response Materials NEB Filing ID Corporate Policy Does Trans Mountain have an ecological offset Trans Mountain will develop habitat N/A N/A philosophy? What is TM’s strategy for habitat compensation/ offsetting plans for the compensation and offsetting? elimination, reduction or control of the adverse environmental effects of the Project. These plans will be developed in consultation with Provincial and Federal regulatory jurisdictions including Environment Canada. Environment - Marine Tanker tethering through Boundary Pass and Trans Mountain has loaded marine vessels Volume 7 - Risk A3S4K7 Page 26 of 116 Haro Pass (should have 2 tugs rather than just since 1956 without a single spill from tanker Assessment and 1) operations. Management of Pipeline Trans Mountain is an active participant in the and Facility Spills maritime community and has a long history of facilitating improvements to regional marine safety. Close collaboration with organizations Page such as the various Pilotage Authorities, Government organizations (Transport Canada 108 and CCG) and PMV ensure that tankers

navigate our local waters safely and are guided in and out of the port by highly-trained and qualified Pilots. Unlike any other ships, all tankers must adhere to highly-regulated safety protocols when entering BC waters, two experienced pilots on board when tankers are loaded and transiting between Westridge and Victoria, tug escort (tankers are tethered to 3 escort tugs capable of controlling the ship in the event of systems failure), double hulls and segregated tanks. In addition to the stringent regulations and requirements of these organizations, Trans Mountain has developed additional safety standards for vessels coming in to Westridge Marine Terminal and can be found here: http://www.transmountain.com/safe-marine- operations>here.

TABLE 1.6.5-1 Cont'd

Location in NEB Filed Key Topic Interest or Concern Summary Response Materials NEB Filing ID Ocean acidification (If low PH waters are killing Water quality guidelines for protection of Volume 6D Westridge A3S2S9 Page 45 of 165 off shellfish) aquatic life (freshwater and marine) provide Marine Terminal the monitoring benchmarks for construction Environmental Protection projects. The (Canadian Council of Ministers Plan of Environment [CCME], 2007) guidelines Section 8.0 apply to short term activities (duration of 24 hours or less) and longer term activities (24 hours to 30 days). There are guidelines for clear water (25 mg/L TSS and 8 NTU turbidity or less) and for turbid conditions (greater than 25 mg/L and 8 NTU), are provided in Table C.5-1. For Westridge Marine Terminal construction, the clear water conditions are likely most applicable. These guidelines typically apply at a defined distance from the construction activity (i.e., they allow for a dilution zone). Potential mitigation measures to address impacts to water quality and Page marine life from marine construction activities are discussed in the Westridge Marine

109 Terminal EPP.

Environment - Terrestrial What are you doing to support salmon habitat Based on historical data and field studies Volume 5C – ESA A3S2C2 Page 84 of 175 as a first step? Adams River, now been bought. conducted for the Project (see Fisheries Biophysical Technical A3S2C3 Page 1 of 12 The value that DFO have set is a problem. [British Columbia] Reports Technical Report of Volume 5C), 39 of the proposed crossings were identified as fish- bearing. Table 5.7-13 provides a list of fish- bearing water crossings, their location along the proposed pipeline corridor, watershed, sensitivity rating, instream work windows, least risk biological windows and the presence of indicator species. Additional information about these crossings, including known fish species presence, recommended crossing methods, water quality parameters, watercourse characteristics, and fish habitat ratings is provided in the Fisheries (British Columbia) Technical Report of Volume 5C, particularly the Watercourse Crossing Summary Table (Appendix A) and the Fish- Bearing Atlas (Appendix B).

TABLE 1.6.5-1 Cont'd

Location in NEB Filed Key Topic Interest or Concern Summary Response Materials NEB Filing ID Routing Why not build the dock in Delta? Westridge Marine Terminal is a safe location Assessment of A3Y2E6 Page 2 of 754 with access to spill response resources and it Alternatives – Pipeline poses the least environmental impact by and Termini locating the expansion within the existing site. IR Reference: City of While Trans Mountain has considered Burnaby IR No. 1.01.01a alternatives to the proposed expansion of the existing marine terminal at Westridge, there is no compelling reason to justify a deviation from what is an existing corridor for petroleum transportation.

The Trans Mountain Expansion Project (the Project) is a proposal to expand the existing Trans Mountain Pipeline System, including the existing terminal facilities. Paralleling and expanding existing facilities reduces new disturbance, uses existing infrastructure and Page minimizes environmental effects. This is consistent with good Project planning and 110 best environmental practices.

TABLE 1.6.5-1 Cont'd

Location in NEB Filed Key Topic Interest or Concern Summary Response Materials NEB Filing ID Continued from above While good planning and best practices favour Continued from above using existing facilities, this does not reduce the rigour of conducting an assessment of the potential impacts associated with the expansion. Early in Project planning Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC (Trans Mountain) tested the basic premise that expanding existing facilities is the most responsible approach to the development. Potential alternative marine terminal locations were considered based on the feasibility of coincident marine and pipeline access and screened based on technical, economic and environmental considerations. These alternative locations included Kitimat, BC and Roberts Bank in Delta, BC. Trans Mountain ultimately concluded that constructing and operating a new marine terminal and new Page supporting infrastructure would result in significantly greater cost, larger footprint and

111 additional environmental effects, as compared to expanding existing facilities. Accordingly, Trans Mountain did not continue with a further assessment of alternative termini for the Project.

TABLE 1.6.5-1 Cont'd

Location in NEB Filed Key Topic Interest or Concern Summary Response Materials NEB Filing ID Safety Efficacy of the oil containment booms proposed Trans Mountain’s current emergency N/A N/A for the expanded WMT tanker loading facility. response capacity related to oil spills in Burrard Inlet meets or exceeds all regulatory requirements established by Transport Canada, the National Energy Board and other agencies.

As part of securing a tanker at Westridge, it is enclosed within a boom which remains in place throughout the loading operation and until the vessel is cast-off for departure. As a further precaution, a secondary boom is kept in the water ready for deployment to double the containment around the terminal in the event of a spill. In an emergency, this secondary boom will be deployed by boat or by the WCMRC skimming vessel; both are Page kept nearby at the Westridge utility dock. In addition to these precautions, additional 112 WCMRC resources are staged nearby in the

harbour ready for deployment.

WCMRC maintains equipment caches of containment booms, skimmers and vessels. Incident Command team members, supervisors, vessel skippers and crew, technical assistance personnel, advisors and others, are pooled both from within WCMRC and from its network of partners across Canada, the US and around the world. Emergency response plans (ERPs) for Central Westridge Marine Terminal is an established Volume 8C – Termpol A3S4R6 Page 18 of 39 Burrard Inlet need to include strategies for both operating oil handling facility and already has Reports rapid response and containment of an oil spill, a well-tested and comprehensive Emergency Section 2.0 and concurrent habitat protection measures. Response Plan (ERP) available for the current operations. This ERP is a flexible document that provides the operators of Westridge Marine Terminal to address various types of hazards. The ERP is therefore complementary to the Westridge Operators Handbook. Both documents, i.e., Westridge operator’s Handbook and the ERP, will be updated in keeping with the needs of the future dock complex and scale of operations.

TABLE 1.6.5-1 Cont'd

Location in NEB Filed Key Topic Interest or Concern Summary Response Materials NEB Filing ID Petroleum transporters response resources While Trans Mountain’s strict obligation for Volume 8A – Marine A3S4Y6 Page 26 of 34 along the main transportation corridors tanker safety ends once the tankers leave the Transportation, Westridge Marine Terminal, Trans Mountain is very concerned that this aspect of the transportation chain is well managed. As such, we continue to work with agencies in the maritime community to advance opportunities to improve the safety and efficiency of tanker traffic. In this regard, Trans Mountain had the opportunity to review and comment on the submissions to the Tanker Safety Expert Panel from the British Columbia Chamber of Shipping and the Western Canada Marine Response Corporation (WCMRC). Rather than repeat the information provided to the panel by these organizations, we wish to provide our general endorsement of the Page WCMRC positions. Does the planning for WCMRC moorage space Preliminary discussions indicate that in order Volume 8C – Termpol A3S4Y3 Page 287 of 294 113 at WMT also include road access from the to address current and future spill risks from Reports

neighbouring Shell Oil property to facilitate tankers and other large vessel traffic, four Section 5.2 vehicle access between the dock and WCMRC additional response bases will be needed to warehouse facilities? meet the time and equipment standards proposed. 24/7 operations would need to be located in the Port Metro Vancouver zone, as well as somewhere on the Saanich Peninsula. Socio-Economic How did you determine size and scope of your After receiving strong commitments from its Volume 2 Project A3S0Q8 Page 27 and 38 project is serving current and future market customers, KMC, in April 2012, announced a Overview of 45 needs? proposed expansion of the existing TMPL Section 1.1 and 2.0 system between Edmonton, AB and Burnaby, BC. The expansion has been developed in response to requests for service from Western Canadian oil producers and West Coast refiners for increased pipeline capacity in support of growing oil production and access to growing West Coast and offshore markets. NEB decision RH-001-2012 reinforces market support for the expansion and provides Trans Mountain the necessary economic conditions to proceed with design, consultation, and regulatory applications.

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Consultation Update No. 2 Trans Mountain Expansion Project July 2014

2.0 REFERENCES Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment. 2008. Canada-Wide Standard for Petroleum Hydrocarbons (PHC) in Soil: Scientific Rationale. Supporting Technical Document.

Page 114