Enbridge Pipelines Inc

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 Application Overview/Executive Summary

2.0 Project Description 2.1 Engineering Design Details 2.2 Engineering Design Philosophy and Onshore Pipeline Regulations 2.3 Quality Assurance Program 2.4 Alternatives

3.0 Environmental and Socio-Economic Assessment 3.1 Project Description 3.2 Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting 3.3 Regulatory Consultation 3.4 Effects Assessment 3.5 Cumulative Effects Assessment 3.6 Inspection, Monitoring and Follow Up

4.0 Economics 4.1 Supply 4.2 Transportation Matters 4.3 Markets 4.4 Financing

5.0 Public Interest/Consultation 5.1 Principles and Goals of the Public Consultation Program 5.2 Design of the Public Consultation Program 5.3 Implementing the Public Consultation Program

6.0 Appendices Appendix 1 Drawings Appendix 2 Public Notification Letter to Stakeholders Appendix 3 Enbridge Corporate Social Responsibility Policy Appendix 4 Environmental and Socio-Economic Assessment References Appendix 5 Filing Manual Checklists

1.0 APPLICATION OVERVIEW / EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Project Name: Access Pipeline Receipt Facilities at Enbridge’s Edmonton Terminal Project Cost: $5,700,000

In response to a request from Access Pipeline Inc. (“Access”), Enbridge Pipelines Inc. (“Enbridge”) is applying for approval to construct a custody transfer metering system and associated facilities at Enbridge’s existing Edmonton Terminal.

Access is planning to construct a new NPS 24 pipeline in a pipe rack across the Enbridge Edmonton Terminal with deliveries of commodities to Enbridge and Kinder Morgan, Inc. These facilities are required by Access in order to receive Devon Energy and MEG Energy heavy synbit blend production into the Enbridge system at Enbridge’s Edmonton Terminal. Project components consist of a meter manifold and prover skid, Quality Assurance building, belowground sump tank, and associated electrical and instrumentation components. Access has indicated that the initial maximum instantaneous flow rates will be 18,600 m3/d (117,000 barrels per day), with ultimate design flow rates of up to 127,186 m3/d (800,000 barrels per day). Enbridge understands that Access has received AEUB approval for their pipeline and pipe rack (AEUB Licence Number 46674).

Construction activities will take place from March 2007 (pending receipt of regulatory approval) until December 2007. The new metering facilities are expected to be in-service by December 31, 2007.

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.1 ENGINEERING DESIGN DETAILS

The transfer facility at the Enbridge Edmonton Terminal will include the installation of the following new components:

• a NPS 24, SCH 80, Gr 241, Cat 1, supply connection from Access to the new metering manifold; • automatic sampling and density measurement systems in a common building; • a custody transfer metering manifold with 3 – 12” PD meters, 24” input and output headers, and a NPS 16 connection to a common skid mounted NPS 30 bi-directional meter prover; • a NPS 24, SCH 80, Gr 241, Cat 1, discharge line from the metering manifold to Manifold 201; • a NPS 14, SCH 80, Gr 241, Cat 1, relief line from the metering manifold to Manifold 204; • a new electrical building complete with MCC for power and control for all pumps, valves, and instrumentation; • a custody transfer flow computer, PLC system, and SCADA connections to both Enbridge and Access facilities; • a 5000 USG sump tank and drainage system; and • components necessary for full cathodic protection of underground facilities.

The proposed transfer facility will require the modification of the following existing components:

• a new NPS 24 discharge connection to existing 34” TK 26 tank line; • a new NPS 24 discharge connection to existing 48” TK 27 tank line; • a new NPS 14, SCH 80, Gr 241, Cat 1, relief connection at Manifold 204; and • MCC and control system modifications. Enbridge will control the facilities from the Enbridge Pipeline Control Centre, located in the Enbridge Tower in Edmonton.

Together this work will comprise “the Project”.

2.2 ENGINEERING DESIGN PHILOSOPHY AND ONSHORE PIPELINE REGULATIONS

Enbridge has filed with the NEB its Operations and Maintenance Manuals and shall comply with all of the requirements of the Onshore Pipeline Regulations, 1999 (“OPR”), to the extent they are relevant to the Project. Further, Enbridge shall design and construct the Project in accordance with CSA Z662-03, and Enbridge’s Engineering Standards, as well as Enbridge's Environmental Guidelines for Construction (2003) (“EGC”).

The relevant Enbridge manual references are listed below:

Engineering Standards D02-101 Design Basis, Electrical Rev. Oct 22, 2002 D02-103 Design Basis, Station and Terminal Rev. Oct 30, 2003 D02-104 Hazardous Area Classification Rev. Sep 1, 1999 D02-105 Fire Protection, Extinguishment Rev. Jan 6, 2000 D02-106 Noise & Acoustic Dampening Rev. Sep 1, 1999 D03-104 Weld Inspection Rev. Sep 1, 1999 D03-105 Shop Inspection Rev. Sep 1, 1999 D04-101 Cathodic Protection Rev. Oct 30, 2003 D04-102 Painting, Coating & Lining Rev. Jul 14, 2000 D05-101 Berm, Containment Rev. Oct 30, 2003 D05-102 Site Preparation, Earthwork, Grading, Road & Pavement Rev. Sep 1, 1999 D05-103 Trenches, Underground Lines Rev. Sep 1, 1999 D05-202 Foundation, Station & Terminal Rev. Sep 1, 1999 D05-301 Buildings, Station & Terminal Rev. Sep 1, 1999 D05-302 Laboratory, Sample & Sample Storage Buildings Rev. Sep 1, 1999 D05-401 Platforms, Stairs & Ladders Rev. Apr 29, 2003 D06-102 Piping Design, Station and Terminal Rev. June 13, 2000 D06-103 Crossing Design, Mainline Rev. Nov 15, 1999 D06-104 Piping and Fittings, Steel Rev. Nov 15, 1999 D06-105 Valve, Steel Rev. June 15, 2000 D07-201 HVAC, Building, Station & Terminal Rev. Nov 15, 1999 D07-202 Heat Tracing Rev. Nov 15, 1999 D07-301 Sump System Design Rev. Nov 15, 1999 D09-101 Oil Measurement, Mechanical Rev. Nov 15, 1999 D09-102 Oil Measurement, Electrical Rev. Nov 15, 1999 D09-103 Sampler Rev. Nov 15, 1999

D10-101 Power System Design Rev. Oct 29, 2002 D10-103 Switchgear & Motor Control Center Rev. Oct 24, 2002 D10-104 Auxiliary Power Supplies Rev. Dec 1, 1999 D10-105 Power System Protective Relaying Rev. Nov 21, 2002 D10-106 Substation Grounding Rev. Dec 1, 1999 D10-107 Surge Protection & Insulation Coordination Rev. Dec 1, 1999 D10-201 Wiring Methods Rev. Dec 1, 1999 D10-202 Grounding Methods Rev. Dec 1, 1999 D11-201 Lighting, Indoor Rev. Dec 1, 1999 D11-202 Lighting, Outdoor Rev. Dec 1, 1999 D11-301 Valve Actuation and Control Rev. Dec 1, 1999 D12-101 Control, Pump Station Rev. Nov 08, 2002 D12-102 Control, Injection & Delivery Facility Rev. Dec 1, 1999 D12-104 Pressure Relief Rev. Oct 2, 2003 D12-201 Instrumentation, General Rev. Nov 26, 2002 D12-202 Gas Detection Rev. Dec 1, 1999 D12-203 Fire Detection Rev. Dec 1, 1999 D12-205 Programmable Logic Controllers Rev. Dec 1, 1999 D12-208 Pressure Control System Rev. Feb 21, 2006

Enbridge Environmental Guidelines for Construction December 2003

Enbridge Waste Management Plan October 2004

Operating and Maintenance Procedures April 2006 Book 7: Emergency Response

All of the above-referenced documents have been previously filed with the NEB.

2.3 QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM

During installation, on-site inspection personnel will monitor all construction activities to ensure all design measures are properly implemented throughout the construction process, and are in accordance with Enbridge and Industry standards. Non Destructive Testing (“NDT”) techniques will be used to check the integrity of welded components.

2.4 ALTERNATIVES

Access is proposing to construct a new pipeline in a pipe rack across the Enbridge Edmonton Terminal in order to receive Devon Energy and MEG Energy heavy synbit blend production into the Enbridge system at Enbridge’s Edmonton Terminal. Current metering facilities at the Edmonton Terminal will not be able to accommodate the volumes that will be transported on the new Access pipeline. A receipt meter manifold is required to accept the incremental volumes and to deliver to existing tankage at Enbridge’s Edmonton Terminal. Therefore, no other alternative was considered in the development of this project.

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT

This Environmental and Socio-Economic Assessment (“ESA”) has been undertaken in accordance with the NEB’s Filing Manual under section 58 of the NEB Act. Pursuant to Guide A.2.1 of the Filing Manual , the level of detail contained within this assessment corresponds to the nature and magnitude of the anticipated environmental impacts.

3.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Enbridge’s Edmonton Terminal is located at SE 5-53-23 W4M within Sherwood Park east of Edmonton, Alberta (Figure 1). Due to the industrial setting of the area, it is not considered to be environmentally sensitive. The Kinder Morgan Edmonton Terminal is located immediately to the west and the Petro- Canada refinery is located immediately north of the site. Baseline Road and Shell Canada property are located directly to the south and Highway 216 and Provincial Public Works and Services lands are located directly east of the Terminal.

Apart from NEB approval, no additional environmental permits, other than relevant notification, will be required to construct the Project at the Enbridge Edmonton Terminal. Notification under Alberta’s Water Act Code of Practice for withdrawal / release of hydrostatic test water will be required for the Project.

3.2 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC SETTING

A summary of the biophysical and socio-economic elements pertaining to the Project is provided in Table 1. Information collected was obtained from existing literature and Internet searches.

The study areas discussed in the assessment include: project footprint (area of disturbance) or a local study area (defined as approximately 400 m). The nearest residence is located approximately 1800 m southeast of the site.

Table 1 Summary of Biophysical and Socio-Economic Elements and Considerations

Biophysical and Socio- Economic Elements Summary of Considerations Physical Environment • The Project lies within the Lake Edmonton Plain Physiographic Division of the Eastern Alberta Plains Physiographic Region (Pettapiece 1986). • The Upper Cretaceous Horseshoe Canyon Formation underlies the Edmonton Terminal. The formation is characterized by grey, feldspathic, clayey sandstone; grey bentonitic mudstone and carbonaceous shale; concretionary ironstone beds, scattered coal and bentonite beds of variable thickness; minor limestone beds; mainly nonmarine (Hamilton et al. 1999). • There are no areas of permafrost within the area of the Edmonton Terminal (Natural Resources Canada 2006a). • There are no documented major earthquakes, landslides or avalanches in the vicinity of the site (Natural Resources Canada 2005b,c,d). • The topography in the area of the Edmonton Terminal is level. Elevation is approximately 700 m above sea level (asl). • Surficial deposits at the site are described as stagnation moraine with till of even thickness and local water-sorted material up to 30 m thick (Shetsen 1990). • The Project will be undertaken within an existing petroleum terminal. Possible sources of soil contamination include spot spills and leaks that may have occurred during onsite activities. • The climate in the Project area is characterized by short, warm summers and long, cold winters with continuous snow cover. The mean annual temperature is approximately 1.5 oC (Environment Canada 2004). Soil Capability • The Project will be undertaken within an existing fenced industrial site lacking topsoil and, therefore, detailed soil information is not deemed warranted as per Table A-3 of the Filing Manual . • See Physical Environment for potential for contaminated soil. Water Quality and • The surface waters in the vicinity of the Edmonton Terminal form part of the North Quantity Saskatchewan River sub-basin of the Saskatchewan River drainage basin (Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada 2006). • The nearest waterbody is a Class C watercourse located within 2 to 10 m of the Project. • Activities associated with the Project are not anticipated to have any effects on groundwater quantity or quality.

TABLE 1 Cont'd

Biophysical and Socio- Economic Elements Summary of Considerations • Hydrostatic testing is planned for the Project. Source water for hydrostatic testing will come from the onsite firewater pond, located approximately 200 m north/northwest of the Project Release water will be tested and released, at a controlled rate, to the Class C watercourse within the Terminal boundaries. If test water does not meet the relevant provincial guidelines for hydrostatic test water management, it will be hauled offside and properly disposed of (Alberta Environment (AENV) 1999a,b). Air Quality • Air quality in the area surrounding the Edmonton Terminal is primarily a function of anthropogenic sources or emissions such as those arising from vehicle and rail traffic on adjacent roads and railways, agricultural activity, and the surrounding industrial facilities ( e.g. , Kinder Morgan Terminal, other sites within the industrial area). • The nearest residents are located approximately 1800 m and 3000 m to the southeast and northwest, respectively. • An increase in dust and particulate emissions during construction is expected. • The Project will not result in an increase in measurable airborne emissions during operations or maintenance. Enbridge is part of the multi-stakeholder Strathcona Industrial Association which monitors and reports local air quality in the Strathcona area. Any abnormal situations in local air quality are immediately detected by local monitoring stations and subsequently investigated.

Acoustic Environment • Current sources of noise emissions in the area surrounding the Edmonton Terminal are from vehicle and rail traffic on adjacent roads, railways and the surrounding industrial facilities. • The nearest residents are located approximately 1800 m and 3000 m to the southeast and northwest respectively. • The Project will not result in an increase in noise levels over the existing level during operations. Fish and Fish Habitat • A Class C watercourse is located within 2 to 10 m of the Project. The activities associated with the Project, including hydrostatic testing, will not impact fish or fish habitat. Wetlands • The Project does not lie within 30 m of any wetlands. Vegetation • Edmonton Terminal is located within the Central Parkland Subregion of the Parkland Natural Region (Alberta Environmental Protection 1994) and the Aspen Parkland Ecoregion of the Prairies Ecozone (Environment Canada 2004). • The site is located within an existing disturbed and fenced industrial area devoid of vegetation and, therefore, detailed vegetation information is not deemed warranted as per Table A-3 of the Filing Manual . Wildlife and Wildlife • Edmonton Terminal is not located within or near any Critical National Wildlife Areas, Habitat Provincial Wildlife Management Areas, Wildlife Refuges, Migratory Bird Sanctuaries or Important Bird Areas, RAMSAR Wetlands or World Biosphere Reserves (Environment Canada 2006, Important Bird Areas of Canada 2006, Bureau of the Convention on Wetlands 2006, United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization 2006). • The Project will occur within an existing large, previously disturbed industrial site, which is not considered to be suitable wildlife habitat. No impacts to wildlife or wildlife habitat are expected to occur as a result of the Project. Species at Risk or • Edmonton Terminal is located within a highly disturbed industrial area that is not Species of Special considered suitable habitat for wildlife or plant species at risk. Species at risk and Status species of special concern are not expected to occur in the vicinity of the Edmonton Terminal. Project activities are not expected to impact any species of concern or their habitat.

TABLE 1 Cont'd

Biophysical and Socio- Economic Elements Summary of Considerations Human Occupancy and • Edmonton Terminal is situated on lands owned by Enbridge. Adjacent lands are Resource Use privately-owned by various industrial companies. The area is zoned as a Heavy Industrial Area (Strathcona County 1998). The Project is compatible with zoning at this site. • The nearest residents are located approximately 1800 m and 3000 m to the southeast and northwest respectively. • No hunting, trapping, recreation or other public use is permitted within the industrial park. • The Edmonton Terminal does not encounter: rural or residential areas, agricultural areas, Indian Reserves or Aboriginal communities; recreation and park areas; lands under Parks Canada jurisdiction or conservation areas; controlled or managed forest areas; water reserves and licenses or water intakes; or land and water-based transportation. The Edmonton Terminal is not adjacent to any Environmentally Significant Areas, proposed or existing provincial parks, Ecological Reserves, Provincial Recreation Areas, designated Wilderness Areas or Natural Areas (Alberta Community Development 2001, 2004). The International Biological Program is no longer active. • The Project will entail the installation of a meter manifold and prover skid, a QA building, and various piping within an industrial park. As such, the addition of these aboveground structures may be considered a minor aesthetic impact. Heritage Resources • Since the Edmonton Terminal is located within a highly disturbed industrial site, the potential for historical resources is considered negligible. Traditional Land and • No Indian Reserves or Metis Settlement lands will be traversed by the Project. The Resource Use Stony Plain Indian Reserve is the nearest reserve located approximately 25 km west of Edmonton Terminal. • Given that the Project will be undertaken in an industrial area on patented lands, traditional use of the lands in the vicinity of the Edmonton Terminal should not be affected by the Project. Social and Cultural Well- • Edmonton Terminal is located within an industrial area within the urban area of Being Sherwood Park, east of the City of Edmonton. In 2001, the total population of the Edmonton metropolitan area, which includes Sherwood Park, was reported as 937,845. Approximately 32% of the Edmonton population is between 25 and 44 years old, which represents the largest age demographic. The median age of the population is 35 years. The metropolitan area of Edmonton had a workforce of 526,780 people in 2001. The main industries include business services, health and education and wholesale and retail trade (Statistics Canada 2006). • The Project will entail a small workforce of approximately 2 to 15 people at any given time using the services of the surrounding communities over a short period. Consequently, no social and cultural well-being impacts on the local communities (i.e. , Sherwood Park and Edmonton) arising from the proposed activities are anticipated. Human Health • There will be nuisance air and noise emissions during Project activities which have been discussed under Air Quality and Acoustic Environment respectively. • Air emissions as well as noise levels are not expected to increase during operations.

TABLE 1 Cont'd

Biophysical and Socio- Economic Elements Summary of Considerations Infrastructure and • Access to Edmonton Terminal is via 17th Street. Major highways near the site Services include Highways 14/216, 16, and Baseline Road. The Canadian Pacific Railway line is located approximately 500 m northwest of the Edmonton Terminal. Power utilities currently service the site, and waste management facilities are available within both Sherwood Park and Edmonton. • Various services are provided in Sherwood Park and Edmonton including accommodation, restaurants, recreational facilities and emergency services ( i.e. , police, ambulance and fire). Hospitals are located in Edmonton. • Given the small anticipated workforce, the short duration of construction activities and proximity to Sherwood Park and Edmonton, the Project will generally have a negligible impact on local infrastructure ( i.e. , roads, power utilities, water, solid waste facilities), services ( i.e. , accommodation, recreation, emergency and health care services, waste disposal), and traffic. Employment and • The Edmonton metropolitan area in 2001 had a 70% participation rate in the labour Economy force with an employment rate of 66% and an unemployment rate of 6% (Statistics Canada 2006). • Given the scope of the Project, small workforce, short duration of activities and the limited capital costs, an assessment of Employment and Economy was not deemed warranted for the Project.

3.3 REGULATORY CONSULTATION

Alberta Environment ("AENV") (Adams pers. comm.) was contacted regarding Code of Practice classification of the drainage channel, as well as any general concerns about the project. No concerns were noted. No additional consultation was deemed necessary from an environmental perspective given the location and existing land use of the Enbridge Edmonton Terminal

3.4 EFFECTS ASSESSMENT

Method of Predicting Potential Effects The potential adverse biophysical and socio-economic issues resulting from the Project were identified through experience gained during previous Enbridge applications with similar conditions, other construction programs in the area, and the professional judgement of the assessment team.

Spatial Boundary Depending on the environment component in question, the Project's spatial boundary was considered to be the footprint area that is composed of the portion of the existing Enbridge Edmonton Terminal property to be disturbed, a variable local area, which is the area extending beyond the footprint up to the nearest community services, and a regional area which includes the air shed. The spatial boundaries are presented in Table 2.

Temporal Boundary The time frame used in this assessment includes, the planning, project construction and operations phases. Construction activities are expected to occur between March and December 2007, subject to regulatory approval. The operations phase was considered to extend an estimated 20+ years following construction.

Table 2 Evaluation of Identified Biophysical and Socio-Economic Elements for the Project Recommendatio Biophysical or ns / Mitigation Socio- Recommendations/ Measures for EGC/ economic Project Mitigation Measures for Operations Enbridge Manual Residual Element / Issue Boundary Activity Phase Phase Reference Effect PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT Soil Contamination Footprint • Identify hydrocarbon- Same as Activity Enbridge Operating & No residual effect impacted soils by odour or Phase Maintenance Procedures, identified visual inspection. Book 3: Contaminated Soil • If contaminated material is Management, section 04- encountered it will be 02-04 removed and managed in accordance with Enbridge’s policies and procedures or as otherwise agreed to by NEB staff. SOIL CAPABILITY Surface Gravel and Footprint • Keep surface gravels N/A EGC 02-5 No residual effect Subsoil Mixing separate from spoil material. identified • Store subsoil on a stripped or lined portion of the work site. • Replace surface gravels immediately following backfilling. WATER QUANTITY AND QUALITY Hydrostatic Testing. Footprint • Adhere to the requirements N/A EGC 02-18 No residual effect of the AENV COP related to identified the withdraw and discharge of hydrostatic test water (AENV 1999a,b) • Ensure hydrostatic test water is tested and released at a controlled rate to watercourse. If test water does not meet the relevant provincial guidelines for hydrostatic test water management, it will be hauled off-site and properly disposed of. Increase of Footprint • Ensure watercourse is N/A EGC 02-14 No residual effect sedimentation into flagged and that the area is identified drainage channel avoided to the extent possible during construction activities. • Erect silt fences at drainage channel to minimize the risk of siltation as a result of construction activities.

Recommendatio Biophysical or ns / Mitigation Socio- Recommendations/ Measures for EGC/ economic Project Mitigation Measures for Operations Enbridge Manual Residual Element / Issue Boundary Activity Phase Phase Reference Effect General Measures Footprint • Do not store hazardous N/A EGC 02-2 No residual effect materials, chemical, fuels or identified lubricating oils within 30 m of a watercourse. Do not wash equipment or machinery in or within 30 m of a watercourse. Service and refuel mobile construction equipment on company property, maintaining a minimum of 30 m from watercourse. Stationary equipment within this zone must have an impervious means of secondary containment in place. FISH HABITAT Potential Local • Ensure hydrostatic test N/A EGC 02-18 No residual effect Contamination of water is tested and released identified Fish Habitat by at a controlled rate to Hydrostatic Test watercourse. If test water Water Release does not meet the relevant provincial guidelines for hydrostatic test water management, it will be hauled off-site and properly disposed of. (AENV 1999a,b) AIR QUALITY Air born emissions Footprint to • Ensure that equipment used N/A EGC 02-2 Release of from equipment Region during construction is in exhaust during during construction good running order and construction equipped with exhaust activities mufflers. • The nearest residences are approximately 1800 m southeast and 3000 m northwest of the Project. Dust during Footprint to • The construction site will be Same as Activity EGC 02-2 Increase in dust construction Local watered down if traffic and Phase during wind conditions result in dust construction problems.

Recommendatio Biophysical or ns / Mitigation Socio- Recommendations/ Measures for EGC/ economic Project Mitigation Measures for Operations Enbridge Manual Residual Element / Issue Boundary Activity Phase Phase Reference Effect ACOUSTIC ENVIRONMENT Noise from Footprint to • Ensure that equipment used Same as Activity EGC 02-2 Noise arising from construction Local in construction of the Phase construction equipment pipeline is in good working activities order and will be equipped with mufflers to control noise levels. • Abide by County of Strathcona local noise bylaw. Confine work to between the hours of 7am to 9pm (Mon – Thurs), 7 am to 10 pm (Fri – Sat) and 10 am to 9 pm (Sun). • The nearest residences are approximately 1800 m southeast and 3000 m northwest of the Project. HUMAN OCCUPANCY AND RESOURCE USE Alteration of local Local • Installation of above ground N/A N/A Local viewshed viewshed structures include metering alteration due to manifold and piping. metering manifold • Project is located within an existing industrial site surrounded by tanks. • The nearest residences are approximately 1800 m southeast and 3000 m northwest of the Project. INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES Waste Management Local • Collect waste from work site Same as Activity EGC 02-2 / Enbridge Waste No residual effect on a daily basis. Phase Management Plan identified • Transport and dispose of wastes in accordance with provincial and federal regulatory requirements. ACCIDENTS AND MALFUNCTIONS Spills of hazardous Footprint • Report spills immediately to Same as Activity EGC 02-2 / Enbridge Contamination materials during the Enbridge Representative Phase Operating & Maintenance due to spilled construction and, if warranted appropriate Procedures, Book 7: material during government agencies. Emergency Response, construction. • Implement Enbridge’s section 03-02-02 Emergency Response Plan in the event of a spill or leak. Fire during Footprint • Follow the measures N/A EGC 02-2 / Given the construction identified within Enbridge's Enbridge Operating & contingency Emergency Response Plan Maintenance Procedures, measures coupled in the event of an accidental Book 2: Safety Section 05 with the unlikely fire. occurrence of a fire resulting in an effect of high magnitude, no residual effect of the project has been identified.

Biophysical and Socio-Economic Elements

Based on the Project description and the environmental and socio-economic settings, the biophysical and socio-economic elements potentially interacting with the Project are presented in Table 2 and include: • physical components such as physical environment, soil capability, water quality and quantity, air quality and acoustic environment; • biological components such as fish and fish habitat; and • socio-economic components such as human occupancy and resource use, and infrastructure and services.

Effects arising from accidents and malfunctions also may potentially interact with the Project.

Mitigation Measures and Environmental Protection Plan

The mitigative measures identified in Table 2 are proposed to handle soil contamination (if encountered), and minimize: • nuisance air emissions; • noise during construction; • socio-economic impacts; and • the impact of accidental hydrocarbon spill and fire.

In addition, Enbridge will, in constructing the Project, comply with its standard practices and procedures and the requirements outlined in the OPR including the requirement to have operations and maintenance manuals, copies of which are filed with the NEB. Enbridge will minimize any potential negative environmental impacts from the Project by implementing the procedures outlined in Enbridge’s Environmental Guidelines for Construction, filed with the NEB. An Enbridge representative will be available as required during construction. The project manager will ensure that the construction supervisor on site is aware of and follows all applicable regulatory and company practices, procedures and guidelines, and implements all project-specific mitigation measures as outlined in this document.

Residual Environmental Effects

Residual effects are the net environmental and socio-economic effects remaining following the implementation of mitigative measures. Residual effects associated with biophysical and socio-economic elements arising from Project activities are identified in Table 2 and presented below.

Air Quality The potential residual effect of the Project on air quality includes the release of exhaust and increase in dust during construction activities. These residual effects of the Project on air quality are reversible in the immediate to short-term and of low magnitude.

Acoustic Environment The potential residual effect of the Project on acoustic environment includes an increase in noise arising from construction activities. The residual effect of the Project on the acoustic environment is immediately reversible and of low magnitude.

Human Occupancy and Resource Use The installation of above ground structures associated with the Project will alter the local viewshed over the long-term. However, considering that the Project is located within an existing terminal and industrial park consisting of tanks and buildings, and that the viewshed at the nearest residences are not directly affected by the Project, the magnitude of the residual effect on human occupancy and resource use is low.

Accidents and Malfunctions An accidental spill arising from the activities associated with the Project could result in potential effects on the environment, depending on the location and volume of the spill. However, the likelihood of an accidental spill during construction activities is low.

Significance of Adverse Residual Environmental Effects

As a result of the mitigation measures to be employed by Enbridge in relation to the Project, as described in Table 2, the magnitude and/or likelihood of any adverse residual environmental effects that may arise from the Project are low and, therefore, in the submission of Enbridge, will be not significant.

3.5 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS

The cumulative effects analysis evaluates the adverse residual effects directly associated with the Project in combination with the adverse residual effects associated with other projects and activities that have been or will be carried out. The work associated with the Project may be undertaken concurrently with Enbridge's Tank 31 construction within the Edmonton Terminal.

Additional activities within the area surrounding the locations where the work is to be undertaken that have been or will likely be carried out include industrial activities ( i.e., normal operations of the Enbridge Terminal and adjacent industrial facilities), agricultural activities, and transportation activities (i.e., road upgrades, commercial and private vehicle traffic and railways).

Air Quality Project construction activities will act cumulatively with existing sources of air emissions in the vicinity of the Project including vehicle and equipment emissions from adjacent roads, highways and railways, as well as emissions from industrial facilities. The cumulative residual effect of nuisance air emissions is considered to be of short-term reversibility and of low magnitude. Consequently, it is concluded that the potential cumulative residual effects on air quality will be not significant.

Acoustic Environment The construction noise associated with the development of the Project will occur concurrently with ongoing sources of noise within the local study area arising from transportation activities ( e.g., vehicle and rail traffic), oil and gas development ( e.g., tank farms, refineries) and urban development in that it will result in an incremental increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the Project area. The adverse cumulative residual effects of the Project on the acoustic environment are immediately reversible and of low magnitude. Consequently, the cumulative residual effects on the acoustic environment associated with the Project are not anticipated to be significant.

Human Occupancy and Resource Use The installation of above ground structures associated with the Project act cumulatively with the existing infrastructure in that a minute alteration of the local viewshed will occur over the long-term. However, considering that the Project is located within an existing terminal and industrial park consisting of tanks and buildings, and that the viewshed at the nearest residences are not directly affected by the Project, the magnitude of the cumulative residual effect on human occupancy and resource use is low.

Accidents and Malfunctions There are no projects or activities that may act cumulatively with the residual effects of an accidental spill. Therefore, an evaluation of significance is not required.

3.6 INSPECTION, MONITORING AND FOLLOW UP

Enbridge will be responsible for ensuring mitigative measures identified in Table 2 are followed during the construction phase of the project. Monitoring will be carried out as part of operations at the Edmonton Terminal and mitigative measures identified in Table 2 will be adhered to during the operations phase of the project.

4.0 ECONOMICS

4.1 SUPPLY

Access is planning to construct a new pipeline to transport synthetic crude oil commodities owned by MEG Energy Corp. and Devon Canada Corporation from the Christina Lake / Jackfish area in north- eastern Alberta into the Edmonton area. This pipeline will be comprised of a NPS 30 pipeline segment from the Christina Lake / Jackfish area to the Transportation Utility Corridor (“TUC”) east of the Enbridge Edmonton Terminal, and a NPS 24 pipeline segment from the TUC to Enbridge and Kinder Morgan. Access has requested the ability to deliver to both the Enbridge and Kinder Morgan, Inc. Terminals at Edmonton, and access will be provided via a pipe rack across the Enbridge Edmonton Terminal. Access Pipeline has indicated that the initial maximum instantaneous flow rates will be 18,600 m3/d (117,000 barrels per day), with ultimate flow rates of up to 127,186 m3/d (800,000 barrels per day). The commodity will be a heavy synbit blend, designated as Access Western Blend (“AWB”). Enbridge understands that Access has received AEUB Licence 46676 in relation to its pipeline and pipe rack.

4.2 TRANSPORTATION MATTERS

Current metering facilities at the Edmonton Terminal cannot accommodate the new volumes that will be transported on the Access pipeline. A receipt meter manifold will be required to accept the incremental volumes and to deliver to existing tankage at Enbridge’s Edmonton Terminal. The new metering facilities are expected to be in-service by December 31, 2007.

The impact of construction activities should be minimal, given that the meter manifold and infrastructure will be located within the existing Enbridge Edmonton Terminal. The impact on operations of existing facilities within the Edmonton Terminal for tie-ins will be minimized through careful scheduling of any required outages.

4.3 MARKETS

The new commodity will be marketed to any existing markets for heavy synbit crude to which the Enbridge system currently has delivery access.

4.4 FINANCING

The estimated total reference capital cost of the Project is $5,700,000, with an uncertainty range of -30% / +50%, representing a potential cost range from $4,000,000 to $8,600,000. The Project will be financed through the use of internally generated funds. An estimated breakdown of the main elements of the capital cost of the Project is as follows:

Meter Manifold and Prover $2,400,000 Sump Pump $200,000 Sample Building $900,000 Electrical and Instrumentation $800,000 Piping $1,350,000 Other 0) $50,000 TOTAL $5,700,000

The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (“CAPP”) has given conditional support pending a Class 3 cost estimate for the proposed receipt meter manifold. Final CAPP approval is expected by the end of February, 2007. The Project will be treated as a Non-Routine Adjustment (“NRA”) within the meaning of Article 12 of the Incentive Tolling Settlement for the years 2005-2009 that was filed with the NEB on December 19, 2005. Therefore, Enbridge will, in its annual tariff filing in the appropriate year, apply to recover the annual costs of the proposed facilities through tolls on a rolled-in basis by adding those costs to the Net Revenue Requirement. The impact on Shipper tolls as a result of this project is expected to be less $0.01 /m 3. Enbridge will undertake to not commence construction of this Project without receipt of CAPP support for this Project and will advise the NEB once CAPP approval is obtained.

5.0 PUBLIC INTEREST/CONSULTATION

5.1 PRINCIPLES AND GOALS OF THE PUBLIC CONSULTATION PROGRAM

Public notification and consultation for the Project are founded on Enbridge’s Corporate Social Responsibility (“CSR”) Policy (Appendix 3). The Project consultation program has been guided by Enbridge’s public consultation principles:

• Stakeholders will be informed in a timely and accurate manner about Enbridge’s business activities, and Enbridge will seek stakeholder input on business decisions potentially affecting them and on associated environmental and social impact assessments;

• Enbridge will engage stakeholders early in the development planning process to learn about community goals and perspectives, and take those into account in decision-making;

• Stakeholder consultation processes will be transparent and open;

• Enbridge will endeavour to learn about and respect local, historical and traditional knowledge and economies; and

• Enbridge will develop and maintain ongoing dialogue with stakeholders to increase knowledge of the effects of its business activities, develop balanced standards and expectations, and seek solutions to problems.

5.2 DESIGN OF THE PUBLIC CONSULTATION PROGRAM

Objectives

The consultation program for the Project was designed to ensure that all parties that may be directly or adversely affected by the Project were provided with detailed and timely Project information, and had sufficient opportunity to respond with comments, questions or concerns. Other objectives included:

• identify all key stakeholder publics in accordance with regulatory requirements;

• provide the publics identified with advance notification and information about the Project and, as events require, updated information in the time leading up to the Application filing;

• identify stakeholders’ issues of interest, provide the means for comment and input and, where possible, resolve concerns raised;

• utilize personal consultations and public notification to effectively reach stakeholders and provide them sufficient opportunity to learn about the Project and, if desired, provide input to the project planning and environmental assessment process;

• document issues raised throughout the consultation program, and how they were considered and incorporated into Project planning; and,

• explore ways in which the Project may be able to contribute positively to surrounding communities.

Complement to Existing Public Awareness Program

The consultation program was also designed in the context of, and to complement, the existing public awareness communications and community relations of Enbridge Pipelines Inc. around its Edmonton terminal facility where the Project work is to occur. As a result, Enbridge is well known to most of those living and working in the Project area.

Stakeholder Identification

Potential impacts stemming from construction activity such as noise and equipment traffic were taken into account in determining potentially impacted stakeholders. The relatively small scale of the proposed work is not expected to create much additional vehicle / equipment traffic or dust at the work site. Based on these assessments, Enbridge identified stakeholders as those businesses, landowners and occupants within approximately 400 metres of the Project work site, and relevant local authorities including municipal, provincial and federal government officials and departments with a potential interest in the Project.

Methods of Consultation

Enbridge employed the consultation methods most appropriate in view of the Project scope, the environmental and socio-economic character of the Project area, and the information needs and consultation interests of each stakeholder. Since the Project work is to occur at Enbridge’s Edmonton Terminal, in an area zoned for heavy industry in the Edmonton / Strathcona County “Refinery Row” area, and involves a relatively small amount of construction activity, Enbridge determined that the nature, magnitude and potential impacts associated with the proposed Project are not likely to be extensive or long-lasting, with minimal environmental and socio-economic effects.

As a result of these considerations, it was Enbridge’s judgment that the notification and consultation program make use of a Project notice and information-sharing letter sent “signature required” mail (Canada Post Express Post).

Meetings, telephone conversations and in-person discussions would also be used for consultation with any stakeholder that responded to the mail out with questions or by asking for additional information.

Consultation Timing

Public consultation began December 22, 2006 with the Project notice mailing. To date there has been no calls to Enbridge as a consequence of Public Consultation. Consultation continues to date, and will include responses to and contacts with interested parties based on any inquiries received.

Stakeholders’ Information Needs

Enbridge’s assessment of stakeholders’ information needs indicated that information about the Project and its timing was required, including the reasons for the Project, environmental management information, and how stakeholders could obtain more information and become involved in the consultation and regulatory process.

Process for Responding to Issues and Concerns

Enbridge will typically respond to issues and concerns brought forward by stakeholders within a few days, through in-person discussions initiated and carried on via personal meetings and / or telephone calls. Written correspondence and information provision may be included as part of the process for these dialogues. Dialogues with stakeholders are aimed at resolving the concern(s) to their satisfaction.

Future Consultation

As indicated in the consultation principles previously outlined, Enbridge will continue its Project public consultation and stakeholder engagement activities throughout the Project.

5.3 IMPLEMENTING THE PUBLIC CONSULTATION PROGRAM

Stakeholders Contacted

Stakeholders contacted and engaged with to date:

• businesses, landowners and occupants within approximately 400 metres of the Project work site (address lists available upon request)

• relevant local authorities including municipal, provincial and federal government officials and departments with a potential interest in the Project, as detailed in the following table:

Information Disseminated to Stakeholders

Information provided to date during the consultation program, according to Enbridge’s assessment of stakeholders’ information needs:

• Project need • Project details • Project timeline • Project map • Environmental protection and environmental management policies followed during construction and operation • Project public notification and consultation, including how to become involved • How to obtain more information • NEB Brochure

Stakeholder Contact Outcomes

To date, the consultation program for the Project has accomplished the primary objectives Enbridge established for it. No potentially interested parties have responded to the mail out, and to this point, no issues or concerns have been raised.

Next Steps

As indicated, Enbridge will continue its consultation program throughout the Project. Pending regulatory approval, once the Access Pipeline Receipt Metering facilities are operational, any public communication about the facilities will be integrated into Enbridge’s existing Public Awareness Program.

APPENDIX 1

Proposed Edmonton Pipe Rack and Metering Area

APPENDIX 2

Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Dale Johnson 10201 Jasper Avenue Project Manager P.O. Box 398 Project Management and Engineering Department Edmonton, AB Canada T5J 2J9 www.enbridge.com

December 22, 2006

ACCESS Pipeline Receipt Metering Manifold Project (the “Project”)

On behalf of Enbridge Pipelines Inc., (“Enbridge”) I am writing to inform you of our plans to install a new receipt metering manifold and associated facilities and equipment at our Edmonton Terminal to connect the ACCESS Pipeline System (“ACCESS”). ACCESS is a new dual diluent/ blended crude pipeline system being built to serve heavy oil producers in northeast Alberta. Enbridge’s Edmonton Terminal is located at 17 th Street N.W. and Baseline Road in the “Refinery Row” area.

Facilities

The Project scope would include a meter manifold and prover skid, pumps, piping and electrical service, and instrumentation equipment.

Project timeline

Enbridge plans to begin project construction in January 2007, subject to obtaining regulatory approval. The work is expected to require 12 to 18 months through to the project in-service date.

Environmental management

Enbridge is committed to environmental protection. We strive to ensure that the administration, planning, construction and operation of projects are accomplished in a manner that minimizes potential environmental impacts and promotes the concept of sustainable development. In keeping with this goal, environmental management of this proposed facility will comply with all applicable environmental regulatory requirements.

Enbridge will take steps to minimize potential impacts associated with noise, traffic and dust during construction. Based on the work conducted to date, no significant adverse effects to the environment are anticipated during either the construction or operations phases of this project.

Public consultation program

Enbridge notifies and consults potentially affected publics about proposed projects to gather community and stakeholder input and answer questions. You are welcome to participate in the public consultation process for this project. Distributing this letter is one part of Enbridge’s notification and consultation program for this project. We are also making personal contacts with directly affected stakeholders as part of Project public consultation.

National Energy Board public information

The NEB is an independent federal agency that acts in the Canadian public interest to promote safety and security, environmental protection, and efficient energy infrastructure and markets. Enclosed for your information is a brochure about pipeline development. The NEB also publishes information of interest to the public, which can be obtained from the NEB website at www.neb-one.gc.ca or by contacting the NEB at 1 (403) 292-4800 or toll free at 1 (800) 899-1265. Inquiries can also be e-mailed to info@neb- one.gc.ca.

About Enbridge Pipelines Inc.

Enbridge Pipelines Inc. is a subsidiary of Enbridge Inc., a Canadian company leader in energy transportation and distribution in North America and internationally. As a transporter of energy, Enbridge operates, in Canada and the U.S., the world's longest crude oil and liquids transportation system. The Company also has international operations and a growing involvement in the natural gas transmission and midstream businesses. As a distributor of energy, Enbridge owns and operates Canada's largest natural gas distribution company, and provides distribution services in Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick and New York State.

Recently, Enbridge was named as one of only five Canadian companies ranked in the Global 100: Most Sustainable Corporations in the World at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. More information about Enbridge is available on the Company's website at www.enbridge.com.

For more information

Although this letter does not require any further action on your part, if you have any questions, concerns or if you require further information regarding this project or the public consultation process, please call 780-420-8756.

Sincerely,

Dale Johnson Project Manager

Attached: Drawing of project work site NEB Brochure “A Proposed Pipeline or Powerline Project: What You Need to Know”

APPENDIX 3

APPENDIX 4 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT REFERENCES

Personal Communication

Adams, D. Technologist, Water Approvals - Alberta Environment. Edmonton, Alberta.

Literature Cited

Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. 2006. PFRA Gross Watershed Boundaries for the Canadian Prairies. Website: http://www.agr.gc.ca/pfra/gis/gwshed_e.htm. Accessed: November 2006.

Alberta Community Development. 2001. Environmentally Significant Areas of Alberta. 1:1,000,000 map. Parks and Protected Areas Division.

Alberta Community Development. 2004. Parks and Protected Areas (Including Crown Reservations). 1:1,000,000 map. Parks and Protected Areas Division.

Alberta Environment. 1999a. Code of Practice for the Temporary Diversion of Water for Hydrostatic Testing of Pipelines.

Alberta Environment. 1999b. Code of Practice for the release of Hydrostatic Test from Hydrostatic Testing of Petroleum Liquids and Gas Pipelines.

Alberta Environmental Protection. 1994. Natural Regions, subregions and natural history themes of Alberta: A Classification for Protected Areas Management. 72 pp.

Bureau of the Convention on Wetlands. 2006. The Ramsar List: The List of Wetlands of International Importance. Website: http://ramsar.ord/. Accessed: November 2006.

Enbridge Pipelines Inc. 2003. Environmental Guidelines for Construction.

Environment Canada. 2004. Narrative Descriptions of Terrestrial Ecozones and Ecoregions of Canada. Website: http://www.ec.gc.ca/soerree/English/Framework/Nardesc/taipln_e.cfm. Accessed: November 2006.

Environment Canada. 2006. Environment Canada’s Protected Areas Network. Website: http://www.hww.ca/hww2.asp?pid=0&cid=4&id=231. Accessed: November 2006.

Hamilton, W.N., M.C. Price and C.W. Langenberg (compilers). 1999. Geological map of Alberta. Alberta Geological Survey, Alberta Energy and Utilities Board Map No. 236. 1:1,000,000 map.

Important Bird Areas of Canada. 2006. Canadian IBA On-Line Directory. Website: http://www.ibacanada.com/sites.html. Accessed: November 2006.

National Energy Board. 1999. Onshore Pipeline Regulations. Calgary, Alberta.

Natural Resources Canada. 2006a. Permafrost in Canada. Online map. The Atlas of Canada, 6th Edition. Website: http://atlas.nrcan.gc.ca/site/english/maps/environment/land/permafrost. Accessed: November 2006.

Natural Resources Canada. 2005b. Major Earthquakes in Canada. Online map. The Atlas of Canada, 6th Edition. Website: http://atlas.gc.ca/site/english/maps/environment/naturalhazards/ majorearthquakes. Accessed: November 2006.

Natural Resources Canada. 2005c. Major Avalanches in Canada. Online map. The Atlas of Canada, 6th Edition. Website: http://atlas.gc.ca/site/english/maps/environment/naturalhazards/ majoravalanches. Accessed: November 2006.

Natural Resources Canada. 2005d. Major Landslides in Canada. Online map. The Atlas of Canada, 6th Edition. Website: http://atlas.gc.ca/site/english/maps/environment/naturalhazards/ majorlandslides. Accessed: November 2006.

Pettapiece, W.W. 1986. Physiographic subdivisions of Alberta. Agriculture Canada. 1:1,500,000 map.

Shetsen, I. 1990. Quaternary geology, central Alberta. Alberta Research Council. 1:50,000 map.

Statistics Canada. 2006. Community Profile - Edmonton Metropolitan Area, Alberta for 2001. Website: http://www12.statcan.ca/english/profil01/CP01/Details/Page.cfm?Lang=E&Geo1=CSD&Code1=4 811061&Geo2=PR&Code2=48&Data=Count&SearchText=Edmonton&SearchType=Begins&Sear chPR=01&B1=All&Custom=. Accessed: November 2006.

Strathcona County. 1998. 1998 Strathcona County Municipal Development Plan Policy Areas Sherwood Park Urban Service Area Bylaw 38-98 Map 2 of 2. Website: http://www.strathcona.ab.ca/NR/rdonlyres/ebf5vpxsyjrrnobokhfhsnmshz7te43amceyf6vxf6ywfig4s 4aopnwelk3sdvevfnxh556choys475bbxebcc5zctc/Attachment-PDS-MDP-Urban-Map-Overall.pdf. Accessed: November 2006.

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. 2006. Man and the Biosphere Reserves Directory. Website: http://www.unesco.org/mab/BRs/EurBRlist.shtml. Accessed: November 2006.

APPENDIX 5 Chapter 3 – Common Information Requirements

Filing In Application? Not in Application? Filing Requirement # References Explanation

3.1 Action Sought by Applicant

1. Requirements of s. 15 of the Rules. Section 1.0 3.2 Application or Project Purpose 1. Purpose of the proposed project. Section 1.0 3.3 Consultation

3.3.1 Principles and Goals of Consultation Section 5.1; 1. The corporate policy or vision. Appendix 3 The principles and goals of consultation for the Section 5.1 2. project. A copy of the Aboriginal protocol and copies of N/A. No Indian Reserves or Metis Settlement lands 3. policies and principles for collecting traditional will be traversed by the project. use information, if available. 3.3.2 Design of Consultation Program The design of the consultation program and the Section 5.2 1. factors that influenced the design. 3.3.3 Implementing a Consultation Program The outcomes of the consultation program for Section 5.3 1. the project. 3.3.4 Justification of Consultation not Undertaken The application provides justification for why the N/A. Consultation has been conducted. 1. applicant has determined that a consultation program is not required for the project. 3.4 Notification of Commercial Third Parties

1. Confirm that third parties were notified. Section 1.0, 4.4 2. Details regarding the concerns of third parties. N/A. No concerns from third parties were raised. List the self-identified interested third parties and Current s.58 Interested Parties list. Confirmation in 3. confirm they have been notified. cover letter. If notification of third parties is considered N/A. Consultation has been conducted. 4. unnecessary, an explanation to this effect.

Chapter 4 – Sections 4.1 and 4.2: Common Requirements for Physical Projects

Filing In Application? Not in Application? Filing Requirement # References Explanation

4.1 Project Description

The project components, activities and related Section 2.0 1. undertakings. The project location and criteria used to Section 3.1 2. determine the route or site. 3. How and when the project will be carried out. Section 2.0 Description of any facilities, to be constructed by Section 2.1 4. others, required to accommodate the proposed facilities. An estimate of the total capital costs and Section 4.4 5. incremental operating costs. 6. The expected in-service date. Section 1.0 4.2 Economic Feasibility, Alternatives and Justification 4.2.1 Economic Feasibility Description of the economic feasibility of the Section 4.1, 4.4 1. project. 4.2.2 Alternatives Description of other alternatives that were Section 2.4 1. examined in the context of economic feasibility and rationale for selecting the applied-for project. Describe and justify the selection of the N/A. Receipt facilities needed at Edmonton 2. proposed route and site including a comparison Terminal. of the alternatives using the selection criteria. For projects for which ‘alternative to’ has been identified as a relevant factor to consider under N/A. ‘Alternative to’ not identified as a relevant 3. the CEA Act, a description of the alternatives to factor to consider under the CEA Act. the project. For a comprehensive study, panel review or projects for which alternative means has been N/A. Alternative means has not been identified as a 4. identified as a relevant factor under the CEA Act, relevant factor under the CEA Act; not subject to a a description of the alternative means for comprehensive study or panel review. carrying out the project. 4.2.3 Justification 1. Justification for the proposed project. Section 1.0, 4.1

Guide A – A.1 Engineering

Filing In Application? Not in Application? Filing Requirement # References Explanation

A.1.1 Engineering Design Details

1. Fluid type and composition. Section 1.0 2. Line pipe specifications. Section 2.1 3. Pigging facilities specifications. N/A. Project scope does not include these facilities. 4. Compressor or pump facilities specifications. Section 2.1 Pressure regulating or metering facilities Section 2.1 5. specifications. 6. Liquid tank specifications. Section 2.1 7. New control system facilities specifications. N/A. Project integrates into existing control system. Gas processing, sulphur or LNG plant facilities 8. N/A. Project scope does not include these facilities. specifications. Technical description of other facilities not Section 2.1 9. mentioned above. 10. Building dimensions and uses. Section 2.1 If project is a new system that is a critical source of energy supply, a description of the impact to 11. N/A. Project scope does not include these facilities. the new system capabilities following loss of critical component. A.1.2 Engineering Design Philosophy

Confirmation project activities will follow the Section 2.2 1. requirements of the latest version of CSA Z662. Statement confirming compliance with OPR or Section 2.2 2. PPR. Listing of all primary codes and standards, Section 2.2 3. including version and date of issue. Confirmation that the project will comply with Section 2.2 4. company manuals and confirm manuals comply with OPR/PPR and codes and standards. Any portion of the project a non-hydrocarbon commodity pipeline system? Provide a QA N/A. Hydrocarbon commodity designed to CSA 5. program to ensure the materials are appropriate Z662. for their intended service. If facility subject to conditions not addressed in CSA Z662: • Written statement by 6. qualified professional engineer N/A. Facility designed to CSA Z662. • Description of the designs and measures required to safeguard the pipeline If directional drilling involved: • Preliminary feasibility report 7. N/A. Project does not involve directional drilling. • Description of the contingency plan A.1.3 Onshore Pipeline Regulations

Filing In Application? Not in Application? Filing Requirement # References Explanation

Designs, specifications programs, manuals, Quality Statement 1. procedures, measures or plans for which no included in standard is set out in the OPR. Section 2.3 A quality assurance program if project non- 2. routine or incorporates unique challenges due to N/A. Project is routine in nature. geographical location. If welding performed on a liquid-filled pipeline that has a carbon equivalent of 0.50% or greater and is a permanent installation: 3. • Welding specifications and N/A. No such welding will take place. procedures • Results of procedure qualification tests

Guide A – A.2 Environment and Socio-Economic Assessment

Filing In Application? Not in Application? Filing Requirement # References Explanation

A.2.4 Description of the Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting

Identify and describe the current biophysical and Section 3.0 1. socio-economic setting.

• Describe and quantify the Section 3.2 biophysical and socio-economic elements in the study area which are of ecological, economic, or human importance Determine which biophysical 2. • or socio-economic elements require more detailed analysis • Detailed information related to biophysical or socioe-conomic elements from Tables A-4 and A-5 where applicable Provide supporting evidence for information and Appendix 4 data collected, analysis completed, conclusions 3. reached and for any professional judgment or experience provided in meeting these information requirements. Identify, describe and justify the methodology used for any surveys. Justification or plan for 4. N/A. No survey conducted. further surveys if season for a survey conducted was not optimal. A.2.5 Effects Assessment

Identification and Analysis of Effects Identify potential effects associated with the Section 3.4 1. proposed project. For those biophysical and socio-economic Section 3.4 elements that require further analysis, describe, quantify and justify: • spatial and temporal boundaries for the effects analysis of the biophysical or socio-economic element, or valued component, including how this element 2. could change from baseline over the life of the project • local and regional conditions of the biophysical or socio-economic element, or valued component • key receptors that could potentially be affected by the project and a change in the element of concern An effects analysis of the project for each Section 3.4 3. biophysical or socio-economic element, or valued component. Detailed information outlined in Tables A-4 and Section 3.2, 3.4 4. A-5 for elements identified in Table A-3. Mitigation Measures Describe the general and specific mitigation Section 3.4 1. measures and their effectiveness to address the project-specific effects, or clearly reference sections of company manuals that provide

Filing In Application? Not in Application? Filing Requirement # References Explanation mitigation measures Describe how commitments regarding mitigative Section 3.4 2. measures will be communicated to field staff for implementation. Describe any plans or program that may be used Section 3.4 3. to mitigate potential effects Evaluation of Significance Evaluate the likelihood and significance of Section 3.4 1. residual adverse effects. Define the “significant effect” for each Section 3.4 2. biophysical or socio-economic element, or valued component Describe the methodology for determining Section 3.4 3. whether the project is likely to cause significant adverse effects and justify conclusions A.2.6 Cumulative Effects Assessment

Scoping and Analysis of Cumulative Effects Identify potential effects for which residual Section 3.5 1. effects are also predicted in the ESA. For each biophysical or socio-economic element, Section 3.5 or valued component where residual effects have been identified, provide a description of the spatial and temporal boundaries used to assess the potential cumulative effects • Identify other projects and 2. activities that have occurred or are likely to occur within the boundaries • Identify whether those projects and activities will produce effects on the biophysical or socio-economic element, valued components within the identified boundaries Provide a cumulative effects analysis of the Section 3.5 proposed project in combination with other 3. projects and activities for each biophysical or socio-economic element, or valued component. Mitigation Measures for Cumulative Effects Describe the general and specific mitigation Section 3.4 1. measures that are technically and economically feasible to address the cumulative effects. Evaluation of Significance Evaluate the likelihood and significance of Section 3.5 1. adverse residual cumulative effects. Define “significant cumulative effect” for each Section 3.5 2. biophysical or socio-economic element, or valued component. Describe the methodology for determining Section 3.5 3. whether the project is likely to cause significant cumulative effects and justify any conclusions A.2.7 Inspection, Monitoring and Follow-up

Describe plans to ensure compliance with Section 3.6 1. biophysical and socio-economic commitments.

Filing In Application? Not in Application? Filing Requirement # References Explanation

Evaluate the need to monitor the elements Section 3.6 potentially affected by the project and if needed, 2. describe the environmental monitoring plan to be implemented during construction, reclamation, and operation of the project. Where a project triggers the CEA Act, evaluate the need for element-specific follow-up programs to verify the accuracy of the ESA and to 3. determine the effectiveness of any mitigation N/A. CEA Act not triggered. measures that were implemented, particularly those mitigation measures that are new or unproven. Table A-3 Circumstances Triggering the Need for Detailed Biophysical and Socio-Economic Information

Physical environment Section 3.2, 3.4 Soil and soil productivity Section 3.2, 3.4 Vegetation Section 3.2 Water quality and quantity Section 3.2, 3.4 Fish and fish habitat Section 3.2, 3.4 Wetlands Section 3.2 Wildlife and wildlife habitat Section 3.2 Species at Risk or Species of Special Status and related Section 3.2 habitat Air quality Section 3.2, 3.4 Acoustic environment Section 3.2, 3.4 Human occupancy and resource use Section 3.2, 3.4 Heritage resources Section 3.2 Traditional land and resource use Section 3.2 Social and cultural well-being Section 3.2 Human health and aesthetics Section 3.2 Infrastructure and services Section 3.2, 3.4 Employment and economy Section 3.2

Guide A – A.3 Economics

Filing In Application? Not in Application? Filing Requirement # References Explanation

A.3.1 Supply

1. A description of each commodity. Section 4.1 2. A discussion of all potential supply sources. Section 4.1 Forecast of productive capacity over the Section 4.1 3. economic life of the facility. For pipelines with contracted capacity, a Section 4.4 4. discussion of the contractual arrangements underpinning supply. A.3.2 Transportation Matters

Pipeline Capacity In the case of expansion provide: • Pipeline capacity before and 1. after and size of increment N/A. Not an expansion. • Justification that size of expansion is appropriate In case of new pipeline, justification that size of 2. Section 4.1 expansion is appropriate given available supply. Throughput For pipelines with contracted capacity, 1. N/A. Access is the only expected customer. information on contractual arrangements. For non-contract carrier pipelines, forecast of Section 4.1 annual throughput volumes by commodity type, 2. receipt location and delivery destination over facility life. If project results in an increase in throughput: • theoretical and sustainable capabilities of the existing and proposed facilities versus the forecasted requirements 3. N/A. Project does not result in increase throughput. • flow formulae and flow calculations used to determine the capabilities of the proposed facilities and the underlying assumptions and parameters If more than one type of commodity transported, a discussion pertaining to segregation of N/A. Only expected commodity type is a heavy 4. commodities including potential contamination synbit blend. issues or cost impacts. A.3.3 Markets

Provide an analysis of the market in which each Section 4.3 1. commodity is expected to be used or consumed. Provide a discussion of the physical capability of Section 4.3 2. downstream facilities to accept the incremental volumes that would be delivered. A.3.4 Financing

Evidence that the applicant has the ability to Section 4.4 1. finance the proposed facilities.

2. Estimated toll impact for the first full year that Section 4.4

Filing In Application? Not in Application? Filing Requirement # References Explanation facilities are expected to be in service. Confirmation that shippers have been apprised Section 4.4 3. of the project and toll impact, their concerns and plans to address them. Additional toll details for applications with 4. N/A. No significant toll impacts. significant toll impacts. A.3.5 Non-NEB Regulatory Approvals

Confirm that all non-NEB regulatory approvals, required to allow the applicant to meet the 1. construction schedule and planned in-service N/A. No such approvals required. date and to allow the facilities to be used and useful, are or will be in place. If any of the approvals referred to in 1. may be delayed, describe the status of those approval(s) 2. N/A. and provide an estimation of when the approval is anticipated.